RLJing cyclist outsmarts copper

[Bicycle]

The cyclist is a pretentious knob, he ran a red light, which he decided not to show in the video, then used his lawyer training to get out of it. I would not expect any copper to know word for word every law.

+1 to that.

The cyclist was using a super-smug 'I'm recording myself' voice.

It's a little puerile that he used this method to escape a modest penalty, but it's not a hanging offence to have done so.

In years to come, his behaviour will cause him to wake, sweating in the middle of the night in embarrassment.

What's really, really odd is that he recorded and publicised the thing.

The good bit for viewers? We only have to watch, laugh and comment. Some poor souls have to share a lift with him and listen to his smalltalk at dinner parties.

 

[tbtb]

Surprising amount of Jeremy Clarkson-like vitriol here. I have no idea who the video guy is but if he wants to run red lights and deal with the police, that's not, in my book, a matter deserving of being tazered or called names on our polite and friendly forum.

He's no doubt an advocate of cyclists proceeding with caution at red lights, and is doing - as he sees it - his bit to make it so. I believe there's a tradition in the UK of such civil disobedience, running back to votes for women and such like. People get arrested, draw attention, and before you know it women get votes, cyclists get their traffic light, they remove the poll tax, the vietnam war ends (not a uk one that, of course). If people are willing to be arrested for a disobedience, they are quite within their rights to be arrested and the rest of us do well to think less about the terrible inconvenience of it, of having someone do something we don't understand, and a little more about why they do it. You may end up thinking them fools but you'll sound less like Jeremy Clarkson if you stop to understand the fool first.

In this case, when stopped, he's entitled to ask questions but if he refuses to provide name / address, he gets arrested to allow them to deal with it in the station or in the court. No drama, no excitement, no need for tasers, killing cyclists, people calling people ar$e, whatever.

Also, I notice over on the police (?) forum, one policeman says

What I'd do? Knock him off his bike if I was in my car. "Sorry, I didn't see you ride through that red light, failing to give way to myself and my 2.5t Land Rover. You just shot out."

Cyclists skipping red lights is my biggest peev on the road.

As I say, I know nothing of this video guy. I'm more concerned by the police guy I quote here tbh.

 

[slowmotion]

Surprising amount of Jeremy Clarkson-like vitriol here. I have no idea who the video guy is but if he wants to run red lights and deal with the police, that's not, in my book, a matter deserving of being tazered or called names on our polite and friendly forum.

He's no doubt an advocate of cyclists proceeding with caution at red lights, and is doing - as he sees it - his bit to make it so. I believe there's a tradition in the UK of such civil disobedience, running back to votes for women and such like. People get arrested, draw attention, and before you know it women get votes, cyclists get their traffic light, they remove the poll tax, the vietnam war ends (not a uk one that, of course). If people are willing to be arrested for a disobedience, they are quite within their rights to be arrested and the rest of us do well to think less about the terrible inconvenience of it, of having someone do something we don't understand, and a little more about why they do it. You may end up thinking them fools but you'll sound less like Jeremy Clarkson if you stop to understand the fool first.

In this case, when stopped, he's entitled to ask questions but if he refuses to provide name / address, he gets arrested to allow them to deal with it in the station or in the court. No drama, no excitement, no need for tasers, killing cyclists, people calling people ar$e, whatever.

Also, I notice over on the police (?) forum, one policeman saysAs I say, I know nothing of this video guy. I'm more concerned by the police guy I quote here tbh.

Maybe. I just object to him being a total " look at my video" prick, that's all.

 

[tbtb]

You're right MrPaul, there clearly is some doubt, if you feel it. It's a conversational turn of phrase, as in "no doubt, he thinks it's wise" but I'll retract it if we too are all to be pedantic and lawyerly, not just the video guy.

 

[tbtb]

Although, to be fair, MrPaul, it is true, he might just have been running a red and his reason for getting all lawyerly with the pc is just that he has some other issue with police or authority or something. The thrust of my point is that he can do this if he pleases, there's no need for drama elsewhere (here and the police forum) about it. Maybe he has good reason, we do not know. We should slow down in hauling out the tasers, the name-calling book, and the 2.5 ton killer range rover. imho

 

[fossyant]

Anyone happy to undo the rider's QR wheels when giving verbal.... I would....

 

[Svendo]

The cyclist says at one point he's a law student, or at least studying the law. I suspect the ruses he uses to fluster the PC, not accepting paperwork, insisting on the wording of the law and so on, are actually valid , but are often 'short circuited' for the sake of expediency, with the unknowing complicity of the public. Whether these things are abtuse technicalities for getting rich people off speeding tickets and law students off RLJing tickets, or important safeguards built into the Law to protect law abiding people from abuse by those in a position of power is a question that depends on your perspective and opinion and the situation itself.

Bearing in mind we don't know if the cyclist actually RLJ'd or not, I think the Policeman did his best, but did lose his professionalism when he failed to switch from his 'right laddo, I'm giving you a ticket my son' attitude to a more cooperative attitude, 'look, we both know you jumped the light,and we both know it'd be unfair if I didn't give you a ticket like I do with anyone else, so lets just get on with it eh?' and then got the advice he needed if he wanted to.

His other mistake (other than losing it and going for the camera) was to threaten to arrest the bloke and then not just getting on with it. Thinking about it the cyclist was a fool as if the PC had known the wording he'd have just talked himself into being arrested and wasting everyones time not least his childs, to prove some completely unneccesary legalistic point, that law students know more law than PCs.

 

[tbtb]

Thinking about it the cyclist was a fool as if the PC had known the wording he'd have just talked himself into being arrested and wasting everyones time not least his childs, to prove some completely unneccesary legalistic point, that law students know more law than PCs.

Reading the police forum, it seems the arrest is "de-arrested" if the guy gives his name and address before reaching the station, as the arrest is for the purpose of ascertaining details. Any would-be Emily Pankhursts are better to give name and address and reject the fixed Penalty Notice, opting for summons instead. The odds of the summons going ahead may be low, and there's a great opportunity to debate why rlj is the safer thing, if that's the opinion held.

 

[nightoff]

In the end the cyclist never got out of receiving the ticket through slick talk, he simply gave it legs and scarpered.

He appeared to me he was running out of clever dick things to say and could sense he was on the verge of being arrested. The police lunge gave him the opportunity to make a break for it.

I felt sorry for the bobby. I bet if faced with a similar situation again he wouldn't be so hesitant.

 

[gaz]

Note that this guy is not a video camera cyclist, he likes to put the police in awkward positions and ask them lots of probing questions.

 

[Sam Kennedy]

That cyclist needs a slap, "under what law" "am I obliged" bla BLA BLA!! Stop trying to be clever, pay your damn fine and shut up. Green means go, red mean stop, amber means speed up and get through before it changes to red

 

[Nigeyy]

I viewed the video. I have a bit of a different take on this from most people who have posted.

First, unless I'm mistaken at no point was "Danny" abusive. Irritating, (perhaps attention seeking) but honestly, I thought he was fairly polite. No swearing, no shouting -at least until the end part, when one could say he was provoked. While I think he was asking questions out of a self centered desire to avoid a ticket, I do not see -in a civilized country where law and civil rights are respected -why he can't ask those questions. I'd certainly argue it can be a good thing when there is a higher moral principle involved (admittedly it does not seem to be the case here, but I really think it is a good thing he was able to ask those questions without fear of what might happen).

Secondly I thought the police officer showed remarkable self control until the last seconds of this video. And I mean remarkable self control. However, even though it pains me to say it as "Danny" does sound a little too full of himself, I do think the PC needs more training -training to control the situation, and education in the various laws and ordnances, etc.

Yes, I know it's easier to say this when you're not the one out there (as I said he showed remarkable self control) but I have to wonder:

i. so "Danny" wanted to know the law. He also mentioned he had to pick his kid up. Guess what? I'd have said fine, I'll get you the law word for word and but I'll have to radio in for it -by the way, this may take a time...... or pretty much delayed him in some other way for some other technicality (though the onus is for the PC to know what kind of technicalities he can use).

ii. at worst, the PC could have said: "I saw you run a red. That's illegal. I haven't got the precise wording of the law, nor the precise wording for why I can ask for your details to send you a ticket if you choose not to accept a ticket. You can argue that at court. If you don't give me your details I will call for back up to provide you with the precise wording...."

iii. why not carry a little pocket book with the most common laws etc outlined so it can be quoted for just such occasions?

Maybe the PC was having an off day, goodness knows we all do. Aside from the last few seconds of the video, I know where my sympathies lie.

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

aawww, the video's locked. i wanna see it!

 

[gb155]

vid is listed as private

 

[kishin]

aawww, the video's locked. i wanna see it!

it's also here http://www.youtube.c...player_embedded