Police let down

[benb]

Warning - contains some swearing.
Ignore the shouting and swearing. What I'm interested in is how the investigating officer came to the conclusion that the case didn't pass the "evidential test"



(Copied from video description)

I was cycling centrally through the pinch points, which is necessary to discourage overtakes where there isn't room to do so safely. This is quite normal and uncontroversial cycling practice.

This driver decided they didn't like my road positioning, so deliberately overtook too closely. They then shouted some nonsense along the lines of "How much room do you need?" out of the window.

Unfortunately I didn't manage to keep my temper, having just been endangered by his driving, so I called him a dickhead and gave him the coffee beans. That was a mistake, as we shall see.

We exchanged further words, and I was trying to explain why I was central in the lane through the pinchpoints, but he wasn't interested in any actual reasons.

He pulled over ahead, accosted me at the lights and was extremely verbally and physically abusive and threatening. By this point I had calmed down and didn't respond in kind. Again I tried to explain my road positioning to him.

I made a formal complaint to Surrey Police on 2 counts: the dangerous overtake and the abusive threatening behaviour.

They declined to take either further. The former because it didn't pass the "evidential test". That is, in the view of the investigating officer the CPS would not proceed with a prosecution as the evidence of careless driving was not sufficient. My estimate at the time that the vehicle was no more than 30-50cm away from me, and the stills of the pass corroborate that. If this does not pass the "evidential test" I don't really know what would.

They also declined to progress the abusive and threatening behaviour, as I called him a dickhead first, and therefore antagonised him. As if an alarmed response due to having your life endangered is equivalent to his behaviour.

So there you have it. Thanks guys.

 

[Deleted member 35268]

What goes around comes around, the guy will end up in a bad situation one day and not get away with it. You are right to move over at pinch points, I have two on the way to work, a single car width road and a hump back bridge. Sometimes I get abuse, mostly not. I hope you can put this one in archive and move on. Keep riding

 

[Joffey]

You called him a dickhead and then said 'f&ck you"....

He was close, I agree, and I hate close passes but to me on the video alone it doesn't seem 'that' close. Usually I would ride in a prominent road position so it is impossible for a car to overtake, not so they can overtake closely.

It is hard to keep ones temper when closely passed his reaction isn't really aggressive considering you called him what you did. The driver is just uneducated and we have to allow for these numpties unfortunately.

Hope you aren't too shook up and please don't take my comments the wrong way. I'm just been impartial. I can see why the Police wouldn't take that further. But it was a close pass. Shame we all know that sometimes that isn't enough for the Police to do anything.

 

[Drago]

Careless/dangerous has such a woolly, subjective definition that one CPS lawyer would gleefully run something like that, the next wouldn't countenance it. A minimum overtaking distance written into law would knock that dead.

As for the gobbyness, you committed a S4a public order offence first by likening his head to a Willy, so they would have to be even handed and finger you as well as him. Strictly speaking they've evidence of a recordable crime and should progress it, so they're doing you a favour by telling you to leave it. This is why I'm forever telling people not to get involved in verbal jousting - you could at least have had him for the public order offence if you'd not indulged in a spot of it yourself, but your gob undid any chance of that happening. Your gob, not the Coppers.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

It was a close enough pass to warrant police action and you were justified in being alarmed by it.

Your problem isn't that it failed the evidential test but that it passed the can't be arsed test. You're just a cyclist.

 

[benb]

You called him a dickhead and then said 'f&ck you"....

He was close, I agree, and I hate close passes but to me on the video alone it doesn't seem 'that' close. Usually I would ride in a prominent road position so it is impossible for a car to overtake, not so they can overtake closely.

It is hard to keep ones temper when closely passed his reaction isn't really aggressive considering you called him what you did. The driver is just uneducated and we have to allow for these numpties unfortunately.

Hope you aren't too shook up and please don't take my comments the wrong way. I'm just been impartial. I can see why the Police wouldn't take that further. But it was a close pass. Shame we all know that sometimes that isn't enough for the Police to do anything.

Actually I said "thank you" if you're talking about the bit where he said "You're not a car" and then I said "I know I'm not a car, thank you". Like I said, I don't care much about the lack of progress on the public order offence, but I'd point out there is a big difference between an angry response at being endangered and what he did.

But "not that close" really? Have another look at the stills at the end of the video. He was less than 50cm away.

 

[benb]

Careless/dangerous has such a woolly, subjective definition that one CPS lawyer would gleefully run something like that, the next wouldn't countenance it. A minimum overtaking distance written into law would knock that dead.

As for the gobbyness, you committed a S4a public order offence first by likening his head to a Willy, so they would have to be even handed and finger you as well as him. Strictly speaking they've evidence of a recordable crime and should progress it, so they're doing you a favour by telling you to leave it. This is why I'm forever telling people not to get involved in verbal jousting - you could at least have had him for the public order offence if you'd not indulged in a spot of it yourself, but your gob undid any chance of that happening. Your gob, not the Coppers.

As said, I'm more interested in the lack of response on the dangerous overtake than the public order.
Yes, I did call him a dickhead, but funnily enough I was quite angry at having just having had my life put in danger.
I don't think it's reasonable to expect people to not react angrily to driving like that.

 

[Origamist]

You could point Surrey Police in the direction of another constabulary who seem to take close passes much more seriously:

https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/latest-news/news.aspx?id=4942

Obviously, it won't help in your situation, but it would be good to flag up a different approach to theirs that is more progressive and enlightened.

 

[Andrew_P]

I god I hate self-gratification artists like that, they are getting more and more common. So difficult not to engage with them both during the pass and then their need to further it, but they seem to see it as a bit of sport both in how close they can get and how far they can improve their macho ego later on.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

so they would have to be even handed and finger you as well as him

How come that applies here and not in Russ Will's thread about Criminal Damage Investigation - Need your help! where they're doing F all against the driver but giving the cyclist a criminal record?
(Rhetorical question)

 

[benb]

(Rhetorical question)

Where would we be without rhetorical questions?

 

[JtB]

Where would we be without rhetorical questions?

I don't know, where would we be?

 

[steveindenmark]

I think this ended up being six of one and half a dozen of the other.

He passed close, you had your say, he had his and he moved on. But then you gave him the @Anker sign or the finger as he moved on. Are you surprised he got a bit anti. His complaint was that you were too far away from the kerb. By that time the chat had escalated and I didnt hear you telling him why you were riding there. Its not a great surprise that he wasn't interested by then.

You could have handled this a lot differently and I'm not surprised the police were not interested. You gave as good as you got.

This is only my opinion and others may see it differently. But now you have watched the clip, wouldn't you do it differently next time.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I'm not surprised the police were not interested. You gave as good as you got.

Why should bad language by either party cancel out the separate offence of the close pass?

 

[User33236]

......But now you have watched the clip, wouldn't you do it differently next time.

^^^

Precisely the reason I use a camera on my bike, mainly my commuter. On the rare occasion I encounter an issue I review the footage to see what I may be able to learn from it and, consequently, what I could do different next time.