yet again, driver gets away with it.

[Angelfishsolo]

On the little info available, I'm not so quick to jump to that conclusion. The fact hes 'gone no-comment' means an arrest has been made (ok, it could be a voluntary interview - but why agree to a voluntary interview then go no-comment, you'd just decline the interview!).

If the arrest has been made and the circs given, then this can only have been dealt with an assault which means its been given a crime number. This means the standard of the investigation will have been monitored and audited.

The problem is the burden of proof needed by a court. Yes its unlikely that the driver had no knowledge of what his passengers were going to do. You know they all worked as a group. We know they all worked as a group. The driver knows they all worked as a group - however because hes allowed to say nothing, its absolutely impossible to prove what was in his head, and as a result the burden of proof for a conviction isn't reached.

If he had been the one doing the actual assault, the fact that he admitted driving, plus the complaint, plus the no-comment may then have been enough. As it is the window is open at court for him to say "I witnessed the assault, I was angry with my friends and I told them off. No I refuse to name who they are." He has a complete legal right to say this in court and theres nothing anyone can do about it.

Or he knows the law. Turned up voluntarily, gave a no comment interview and nothing else was done.

 

[CopperCyclist]

Over here on this side of the pond, the LEOs will also try the "if you have nothing to hide you won't mind if I search your car" tactic. Hmm, if one has nothing to hide why do they need to prove it to a LEO who probably knows less about the law then the person that they're trying to "trick?"

Also why is it that they can lie to us all they want and get away with it, but if we lie to them that's another charge?

Yeah I've seen that on reality cop shows. That tactic isn't used here - in fact most forces ban us from doing voluntary searches (note, voluntary searchs are legal, but most forces dislike them so make them against internal policy). However, having said that, from the little I know of American law, our powers in the UK seem to be more far reaching, giving us powers to search when in America, they wouldn't have the required 'probable cause' and so we don't really need tactics such as that.

 

[CopperCyclist]

That is absolutely disgusting. I've read about the grief women from neanderthals daily on the road but this extreme level of harassment coupled with completely inneffective response from the police is shocking.

I'd look into the following:

1. Demand to know exactly why they weren't charged with anything.
2. Write to the most senior police officer in your area with a complaint.
3. Make a complaint to the IPCC.
4. Is your MP female? If so write a letter to her detailing these instances and lack of police interest. Easy way to find out who they are and contact them here: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/
5. Write to your local paper detailing the situation, especially if you can find a journalist who is sympathetic towards cyclists, or if they have a women's section or suchlike.

1. They should have explained to you anyway...
2. Unless you disagreed with with the explanation given in 1. theres not a great deal of point
3. They won't touch it. They'll pass it to the force PSD, who will pass it to the Chief Supt of your area, who is the officer referred to in 2.
4. Not a bad idea, go for it.
5. Another good idea.

and I'll still reccomend going for the 'injury RTC' if you have anything that can be considered an injury as per my previous post. Hit him with a large increase in his insurance. Also, heres the best bit - if he uses the above excuse of "It wasn't my fault it was my friends" in a CIVIL court, if he refuses to name them they he will be held completely liable. If he does name them, get them arrested

 

[Angelfishsolo]

1. They should have explained to you anyway...
2. Unless you disagreed with with the explanation given in 1. theres not a great deal of point
3. They won't touch it. They'll pass it to the force PSD, who will pass it to the Chief Supt of your area, who is the officer referred to in 2.
4. Not a bad idea, go for it.
5. Another good idea.

and I'll still reccomend going for the 'injury RTC' if you have anything that can be considered an injury as per my previous post. Hit him with a large increase in his insurance. Also, heres the best bit - if he uses the above excuse of "It wasn't my fault it was my friends" in a CIVIL court, if he refuses to name them they he will be held completely liable. If he does name them, get them arrested

That last paragraph is very interesting to know. I was unaware that civil court was different in that respect.

 

[Jezston]

3. They won't touch it. They'll pass it to the force PSD, who will pass it to the Chief Supt of your area, who is the officer referred to in 2.

What does PSD stand for?

How serious does something need to be for the IPCC to take real action?

and I'll still reccomend going for the 'injury RTC' if you have anything that can be considered an injury as per my previous post. Hit him with a large increase in his insurance. Also, heres the best bit - if he uses the above excuse of "It wasn't my fault it was my friends" in a CIVIL court, if he refuses to name them they he will be held completely liable. If he does name them, get them arrested

Now that's more like it! But if OP was able to stay in control and no injuries occurred, do they still have a civil case?

A civil case will garner interest from the press at least.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

What does PSD stand for?

Professional Standards Department

 

[benb]

As for comments about police 'fitting people up' - yes, in the 1970's this went on. Thats over forty years ago. It simply doesn't happen as often now.

FTFY. I'm sure that corruption is much lower than it used to be, but it does still happen occasionally. The Jill Dando case springs to mind.

 

[benb]

I have never actually done a section 59 notice, but considered doing one the other day when I had someone think it was funny to try and scare me off on the way home, by pulling alongside and 'flinching' their car towards me so I looked into it. I decided against it purely because I was the injured party, and would also be the officer reporting, so thought it was a bit of a conflict of interest.

Couldn't you report it to a colleague, who would then be the officer reporting?

 

[CopperCyclist]

I won't quote an absolute 'no' to a civil case if she remained in control with no injuries... but I doubt it. Would need to ask a civil law solicitor.

Civil courts are different. Their burden of proof is 'on the balance of probabilities' rather than 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

IPCC will look at absolutely any complaint, but they only spend money investigating the serious ones, otherwise they deem it suitable to be dealt with by the forces own Professional Standards Department (apologies for the acronym). They'd certainly pass this one down as Buggi wasn't seriously injured, and her complaint wasn't ignored. If they thought she hadn't received a good service they would see it as a quality of service issue which = buck passed.

 

[CopperCyclist]

Couldn't you report it to a colleague, who would then be the officer reporting?

Yes I could, but decided not to in the end. As a police officer I'm not allowed to be the victim of minor public order offences anyway, so this could cause issues later anyway. I settled for going round and having a word of advice myself. And by the way, I'm not suggesting police corruption doesn't exist - in some forms it does. I've known three officers who've been fired for various reasons which would amount to corruption. Additionally all three officers were shopped by their colleagues when what they were doing was noticed. However, 'fitting people up' is something I've never seenor heard of. The bad eggs - and there will always be some - tend to misuse the office for their own personal gain. Contrary to public opinion, theres no personal gain in even a high level charge for the investigating officer.

 

[benb]

Yes I could, but decided not to in the end. As a police officer I'm not allowed to be the victim of minor public order offences anyway, so this could cause issues later anyway. I settled for going round and having a word of advice myself. And by the way, I'm not suggesting police corruption doesn't exist - in some forms it does. I've known three officers who've been fired for various reasons which would amount to corruption. Additionally all three officers were shopped by their colleagues when what they were doing was noticed. However, 'fitting people up' is something I've never seenor heard of. The bad eggs - and there will always be some - tend to misuse the office for their own personal gain. Contrary to public opinion, theres no personal gain in even a high level charge for the investigating officer.

Thanks for that, most illuminating.
If there is a high profile case, with a lot of political pressure for a swift conviction, I could imagine that resulting in, well not a "fitting up" as such, but perhaps a case of cutting corners leading to the wrong person being convicted.

 

[buggi]

i didn't get injured coz i stayed in control of my bike, although i did tell the police that i hit the kerb but it was noted no injuries resulted, so i prob couldn't go for injury claim... unless... i'm pretty sure you can claim for mental damages??? i've hardly ridden my bike to work since because it really shook me up, and i felt the need to buy a helmet cam (and didn't ride at all until i had it)! i know when i had a car crash the claims company i went through kept asking me if it had any psychological effect because they could claim for it.

i might give the CTC a call and see what they say.

 

[buggi]

ps, thanks for all your it does help to have a rant with people who fully understand the seriousness of it.

 

[abo]

Nitromors works really well! or so ive heard! Big believer in what goes around comes around.

A can of thermite on the bonnet will play havoc with a car's engine block

*disclaimer: please don't do this, post is intended as humour and I am in no way involved with nor condone thermite-related car destruction

Sorry to hear this Buggi

 

[SlowCoach]

i've hardly ridden my bike to work since because it really shook me up

That one statement alone suggests to me that you have suffered psychological trauma as a result of the incident. I think you should be discussing this with your GP to ask about counselling at the very least. There could possibly be long term effects.

This indicates to me that you have suffered an injury and therefore a civil claim could be considered. Remember that this is civil, not criminal law. I would suggest that when you told the police about being uninjured you were referring to your physical, not mental state.