legal advice for running a so called red light

[buggi]

pale rider is correct you only have to prove reasonable doubt for a not guilty verdict.

 

[Cycling Dan]

Reading the statements I reckon you jumped the lights. You can't say that you didn't jump the lights and the officers pulled two of you over for jumping the lights. Sounds like you were an amber gambler and it didn't pay off.
The driver was able to get what you were wearing rather well so that makes me think he watched you until you past the lights.
You say you are an aware cyclist but you cant say if it was red or not. This screams amber gambler to me.

 

[ComedyPilot]

Is taking responsibility for your actions such a bad thing for people to do nowadays?

 

[Profpointy]

Whilst it's probably a lot less hassle to 'fess up and pay the fine, especially if they've actually got you"bang to rights guv," and to be honest, also if you're innocent .


..... but one angle, if pc plod had to brake because you cut in, surely he was also running a red light as well, or intending to. And as one of London's finest wouldn't do that their story could be unpicked and you might get off - but your brief's fees are likely to far exceed any fine.

 

[Cycling Dan]

Whilst it's probably a lot less hassle to 'fess up and pay the fine, especially if they've actually got you"bang to rights guv," and to be honest, also if you're innocent .


..... but one angle, if pc plod had to brake because you cut in, surely he was also running a red light as well, or intending to. And as one of London's finest wouldn't do that their story could be unpicked and you might get off - but your brief's fees are likely to far exceed any fine.

That's rather wild. The PC says he wasn't going more than 10mph so its more than possible he was rolling to the bumper of the car in front. Of which the OP seen as a gap to filter through, he cut it too close and the PC grabbed the brake. There were 2 cars in front of them also so the likely hood is the PC driving would have to expect the two in front to pass on red for him to pass on red which is illogical.

 

[downfader]

To dissect part of the Officer's statement:

Fortunately, the vehicle behind mine was not travelling close: otherwise this sharp braking would have caused a road traffic collision

Er no. Had the vehicle behind been too close then THAT driver would have caused any collision with the rear of said police vehicle. Its an irrelevant statement imo.

DO YOU HAVE A DRIVING LICENCE?” To which he replied “YES” and produced a full UK photocard driving license.

Are I thought they were more general than that and simply ask for ID?

YOU WOULDN’T DO THIS IN A CAR WOULD YOU?

Curiously.. If setting the standard by the motorist then this question is pretty dismal. Its a bit like holding Saville up as a childrens' ambassador despite us all knowing the ugly truth. Though that probably wont help you in court if you mentioned how many drivers bust through the lights - in the words of comedian Josh Widdecombe "...if I go at this fast enough it's essentially green.."

To get off this you would in reality need - an independent witness, or some video evidence (CCTV, helmet camera, police in-car video if there is any for that vehicle), or for a massive cock-up on the Police's part. If you're absolutely certain you did not run a red (or even amble-gamble) then you need to layout your case very carefully

 

[ComedyPilot]

Why would the OP be 'darting across the front' of a car in lane 2 - offside to nearside?

To me that indicates a filtering move which would mean the police car wasn't at the front of the queue?

And if that was the case, then the police car would more than likely be stopping anyway if the car(s) in that lane in front of them were stopping too? A convoy of bikes to me means 3+ moving in a uniformal straight line, and filtering like in the statement isn't something convoys do, it's something individuals do.

What was the OP's position?

Kerbside or between lane 1 + 2?

.

 

[PeteXXX]

By asking if you have a driving licence, are they intending to give you 3 points for a TS10?
If you accept a fixed penalty, it is £60 plus 3 points. If you take it to Court, and lose, it can be up to £1,000 plus 3 points.

 

[Pale Rider]

Unless it is possible to demonstrate out and out lying in the statement

That is the last thing the OP should try - or needs - to do.

Calling coppers liars does not go down well with magistrates.

The OP accepts the statement is the officer's honestly held belief, but suggests he may be mistaken.

 

[Cycling Dan]

Have you been summoned for dangerous cycling’ or the red light jump. From the sounds of the driver hes lining you up for dangerous cycling. However Im unsure as if someone needs to be seriously hurt or damage to propriety done for this charge to be made.

 

[Cycling Dan]

By asking if you have a driving licence, are they intending to give you 3 points for a TS10?
If you accept a fixed penalty, it is £60 plus 3 points. If you take it to Court, and lose, it can be up to £1,000 plus 3 points.

Cycling offences can not be applied to a driving license unless on a E bike or the charge is furious cycling of which they can disqualify you.

 

[stowie]

What have you been summoned for? The red light jump or reckless cycling?

I was wondering this. Isn't a RLJ a fixed penalty notice? Seems a lot of effort to go to court for something that can be resolved with a FPN.

Do LCC/CTC offer legal advise (I should know I belong to the LCC!)? They would be the first people I would call if I had this happen to me.

Careless cycling carries a fine of up to £1000 against a £30 FPN.

I know this doesn't help but when you get drivers admitting careless driving and killing cyclists getting a fine of a fraction of the above it seems completely vindictive to take this to court when the incident seemed to involve the police driver only having to brake a bit harder - he says he was travelling in slow moving traffic?

 

[Pale Rider]

The charge will be on the summons which the OP says he has.

 

[Archie_tect]

I was wondering this. Isn't a RLJ a fixed penalty notice? Seems a lot of effort to go to court for something that can be resolved with a FPN.

Do LCC/CTC offer legal advise (I should know I belong to the LCC!)? They would be the first people I would call if I had this happen to me.

Careless cycling carries a fine of up to £1000 against a £30 FPN.

I know this doesn't help but when you get drivers admitting careless driving and killing cyclists getting a fine of a fraction of the above it seems completely vindictive to take this to court when the incident seemed to involve the police driver only having to brake a bit harder - he says he was travelling in slow moving traffic?

The police driver states he was in slow moving traffic travelling at 10mph... but had to brake sharply... sounds like both policemen had nothing better to do, so bad luck, you've been nicked by bored officers who have copied each others statements... and it sounds like you did what they said however aggravating that may be for you... but what a waste of money and resources this is. Multiply this by the number of other unnecessary court proceedings and you start to see why the real criminals manage to evade punishment.

 

[downfader]

The police driver states he was in slow moving traffic travelling at 10mph... but had to brake sharply... sounds like both policemen had nothing better to do, so bad luck, you've been nicked by bored officers who have copied each others statements... and it sounds like you did what they said however aggravating that may be for you... but what a waste of money and resources this is. Multiply this by the number of other unnecessary court proceedings and you start to see why the real criminals manage to evade punishment.

I'm pretty sure you can still brake sharply at 10mph - it all depends upon proximity's of parties involved