Causing death by dangerous driving....

UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUMS THE UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUM (INTERACTIVE)
21

Before I could drive, I cycled everywhere, including Blackpool - I lived at the end of Woodhead at the time, so quite a ride even when I was fit.

I can’t remember if I was a complete ■■■ or not, but I think I probably was to be honest, I remember on 1 December day that I was riding down a hill, bus and a transit pick up in front of me, bus pulls in at bus stop, tipper stops behind him, so I has a quick look and decides to go round, next thing tipper dives out infront of me, so I swings left to avoid him, aiming for back of bus so I hit my brakes and slide it on it’s side and end up lay under the bus, clothes ripped to shreds, left leg missing half it’s skin.
Bus driver cleaned my wound up and gave me a lift to college with my bike, I still had to cycle home with a bent pedal though :neutral_face:
I have been pulled by the police “are you aware you’re exceeding the speed limit?” “No officer, I don’t have a speedo” “I suggest you get 1 before you get in trouble, and until then slow down!”
I’ve decided on a beautiful January morning to cycle over Woodhead to Sheffield, starts getting cold around Flouch so turns around and starts heading back, just as a snow blizzard hits. Freezing, hungry and knackered…

Anyway, since passing my car test, my bike was parked up until around 2003 when I decided I was a fat git and dug it back out, so I cycle regularly now but always look after myself knowing how vulnerable I am, so when passing a pushbike I always give plenty of space, rushing past will save me seconds to minutes at most, but may cost them their lives, but I will tell them they’re a ■■■■ if I’ve struggled to get past and they go back past me at the 1st oppertunity, so I have to struggle again :imp:

I’ve been told that there used to be cycling proficiency courses at schools, this didn’t exist when I went school but the parents of the generation of my parents weren’t all Jeremy Kyle candidates, so we were tought to ride a bike off our parents, and if we did anything stupid we got a smack - especially if it was really stupid and parents panic’d.
Now, the parents don’t give a ■■■■ about the kids (generalisation), they just see them as a meal ticket so they don’t have to get a job, so maybe the cycling proficiency needs to come back. It’s not the schools responsibility in my opinion, but if the parents don’t take responsibility then it’d be better if the schools did.

22

Roymondo:
I think you are confusing the terms “arrested”, “charged” and “convicted”. In the old pre-PACE Act days, when there was no general power of arrest, formal interviews with drivers suspected of quite serious offences had to take place at the scene, usually in the back of a patrol car. Nowadays it is SOP to arrest and take them back to the police station where they can be interviewed at length in a proper interview room, with solicitors etc present if requested.

Well I don’t think I’m confused by the three terms you’ve used. I understand them all. What I can’t understand is WHY an arrest must be made, either at the scene of an accident, or in a police station, AS A MATTER OF COURSE, or as you put it SOP.

An arrest should surely only be made with sufficient evidence that a crime has been committed. Without any evidence, an arrest would appear to me to be at the very least, a assumption of guilt on the part of the arresting force, even though there may well be no subsequent charge or conviction.

I think that most members of the law abiding public, on hearing that someone has been arrested, regardless of the alleged crime, would presume that the police would not arrest someone unless they had evidence that person had actually committed a crime. And that presumption might well prove prejudicial in both personal and professional situations. And surely, there is the potential for bringing a charge for false arrest if ultimately, there is no charge brought?

As is obvious, I have no knowledge of police SOP, or perhaps more pertinently, the law regarding grounds for arrest, but it does seem to fly in the face of what I had always considered to be British justice… whatever that may mean in today’s society.

23

I think that the police are treating accident scences as murder scences.

24

alamcculloch:
I think that the police are treating accident scences as murder scences.

Then surely they would be arresting people for murder? Either it’s an accident, (which I’m told now implies there is no one to blame,) or a murder scene.

In a multi vehicle pile up, where someone has died, do the police arrest multiple drivers? Or is it a case of an educated guess? Or a suspicion? Or evidence? Or which way the wind is blowing?

I realise someone will come along and say, “It depends on the “accident”…” But it does seem as if drivers are being arrested “…on suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving,” as a matter of course, at every RTA… ooops, RTC!

25

waynedl:
I have been pulled by the police “are you aware you’re exceeding the speed limit?” “No officer, I don’t have a speedo” “I suggest you get 1 before you get in trouble, and until then slow down!”

Off thread, but, how could the police actually do you on a bike, as you don’t need a licence :question:

26

LandyLad:
On the question of cyclists being hurt by lorries turning left, unless the lorry overtakes the cyclist on the approach to the left turn, how on earth does the cyclist manage to actually put themselves into a position where a large (or any other) vehicle can hit them? Do they not see the vehicle? even if it’s not turning left, do they think that if they wobble and fall under the wheels that they will be able to re-spawn just like in the computer games?

As long as we dont slide a truck past cyclists without a lot of space for them, they must put themselves there. Should they be allowed on the road if they do this?

can anybody explain this behaviour by cyclists to me please?
thank you.

There seemed to be a lot of women on bikes being killed by left-turning HGVs at traffic lights in London a while back, at least: I believe, but have no evidence, it was being unaware, somehow, (on the part of the cyclists) that putting yourself next to a large stationary object might be unsafe once it started moving that was the main problem, combined with the usual impatience that we all suffer from from time to time, in this instance sidling up the side of an HGV to try and gain a few seconds off your journey. In other words, I believe that the need to be “getting a move on” (even at cycling speeds) and its associated risks overrule the need for absolute safety in many instances, and the cyclists assume that the lorry driver will know they are there and cater for them, so to speak. I am a keen cyclist but can’t recall ever trying to do this sort of thing any time recently. The thing is, you need to learn and remember, as a cyclist, that this sort of thing is unnecessarily dangerous. If you survive such an experience then I hope the lesson would stay with you for life. Otherwise, a simple bit of training always comes in useful. If the general public only knew some of the hazards involved with driving an HGV (e.g. manoeuvrability and blind spots, which do exist) then they would be more inclined to give themselves that safety bubble. All we can do as drivers is keep observing and being alert to this sort of thing and try to make allowances for such foolishness.

27

bazza123:

waynedl:
I have been pulled by the police “are you aware you’re exceeding the speed limit?” “No officer, I don’t have a speedo” “I suggest you get 1 before you get in trouble, and until then slow down!”

Off thread, but, how could the police actually do you on a bike, as you don’t need a licence :question:

Absence of licence (whether you are required to have one or not) is no bar to prosecution. But having said that, they could not prosecute you for exceeding the speed limit as the law regarding speed limits only applies to motor vehicles. But they could still prosecute for the old Highways Act offence of “furious driving”.

28

Of all the bad words being said about cyclists on this thread, there’s an equal amount of bad feeling on the cycling forum towards truck drivers

29

I did hear from the police a couple of years ago, after an incident had killed a trucker on the M6 near Carlisle, that all road deaths are treated as murder until proven that it’s not. The incident took over 30 hours to clear. As for cycling, it’s got to be the easiest way to kill someone and get away with it. When did you last hear of someone killing a cyclist and getting a jail sentence? Any of the usual excuses/ reasons can be used. I didn’t see them, the sun was in my eyes etc. Yes cyclists get on your nerves sometimes, even mine, but is it worth killing someone for the chance of getting somewhere 5 seconds earlier.
I think the left turning thing highlights the fact that , in general, people have no idea how much room it takes to turn a large vehicles. Lets face it you see it every day with road users of all sizes.

30

More often than not in RTA’s if an arrest i made it is either ‘under caution’ or ‘under suspicion’,
At the scene efforts are made to find out what happened, who was where etc and evidence taken from that, this generally means a carriageway or road closure, that then causes issues of its own.
All the Police want to do is find out is what happened, is there human error or not, remember, they cannot interview a corpse, dont take it to heart, they are only against you if you did something wrong.

31

Have just finished a week of nights in the New Cross,Peckham,Camberwell area was shocked & appaled at the number of cyclists on the road at night with no lights or high -viz clothing we really need to educate these idiots to be more proactive with regard to their own safety
& duty of care towards other road users, I am not anti cyclist,but I must say that some of these morons seem to have a death wish ,martyrs of the cycling fraternity a bit like suicide bombers :open_mouth:

32

Roymondo:

bazza123:

waynedl:
I have been pulled by the police “are you aware you’re exceeding the speed limit?” “No officer, I don’t have a speedo” “I suggest you get 1 before you get in trouble, and until then slow down!”

Off thread, but, how could the police actually do you on a bike, as you don’t need a licence :question:

Absence of licence (whether you are required to have one or not) is no bar to prosecution. But having said that, they could not prosecute you for exceeding the speed limit as the law regarding speed limits only applies to motor vehicles. But they could still prosecute for the old Highways Act offence of “furious driving”.

As a user of the road you are still expected to obey rules of the road and follow the guidance of the highway code. I’ve no idea what he would / could have done me for or how, it was just 1 of those warnings off a copper - possibly a little embarrassed and maybe even startled by a pushbike overtaking him.

I’d give a false name anyway and have no id :laughing:

I’ve also heard that you can get done if you’re drunk on a cycle, but the thing is, if I’m going my mates for a drink, I take the cycle because I don’t want to drive my car drunk, but I can still get done? That’s bloody madness :open_mouth:

33

Giving false details (or even correct details, if they cannot be verified) is grounds for arrest for any offence, no matter how trivial…

And yes, you can be done for riding (or attempting to ride) a bicycle while unfit through drink or drugs. It is a separate, specific offence. Fortunately it does not result in endorsement/points/disqualification (you only get those with a mechanically propelled vehicle - which includes mobility scooters etc!)

34

Roymondo:
Giving false details (or even correct details, if they cannot be verified) is grounds for arrest for any offence, no matter how trivial…

And yes, you can be done for riding (or attempting to ride) a bicycle while unfit through drink or drugs. It is a separate, specific offence. Fortunately it does not result in endorsement/points/disqualification (you only get those with a mechanically propelled vehicle - which includes mobility scooters etc!)

I obviously don’t ride when I’m bladdered, or walk, luckily the local pub is 2 doors from my house and the landlord just leans me against the door, knocks on and buggers off, so when the missus opens the door I fall through it :laughing:
I ride after a few drinks, when I’m still aware and safe (in my opinion) and not weaving all over the road likely to get myself killed or cause someone else to take evasive action which could result in an accident, but I’d be well over the limit (which is about a shandy now I believe)

35

Slackbladder:
When did you last hear of someone killing a cyclist and getting a jail sentence?

Yesterday…

preview.tinyurl.com/d34oxj6

Two weeks ago

preview.tinyurl.com/c3sv6mv

Three months ago

preview.tinyurl.com/czyrujq

Seven months ago (although in this one the cyclist didn’t die)

preview.tinyurl.com/7tvp7qv

36

Not too shabby is it? Of the four incidents listed 1 got 4 months! The longest 4 years, but then again he was four times over the drink limit. Like I said its the best way I know to get away with killing someone.

37

In my part of the world, the authorities spent an awful lot of time and (public) money putting in cycle paths at the side of all major urban routes.

There is nothing more infuriating than having to follow a cyclist for hundreds of yards unable to safely overtaking him/her.

Whats with these people - a safe environment has been created for them which they refuse to make use of.

They would rather put themselves at potential risk and hold up the trafffic as well.

Somebody told me once that cyclists won’t use their lanes because it’s not cool and they have a right to travel where they want.

And of course, they are single handedly saving the planet!

Dix.

Any comments, pedddlars?

38

Some cycle lanes are marked as ADVISORY. If they were made Mandatory then the cyclists could be prosecuted for causing an obstruction.They dont help the Planet by forcing motor users to use low gear for no good reason.I cycle as well as drive.

39

Unusual use of the phrase “getting away with” something - in all but one of those cases there was no suggestion that the driver concerned intended to do any harm at all. I wouldn’t call being sent to prison for a few months or years for something you didn’t intend to do “getting away with it”. When there is a suggestion of a deliberate act (such as the young man killed in Luton the other week) the suspects are arrested (and hopefully dealt with) for Murder.

No, the best way to get away with killing someone is to give him a uniform and send him to some foreign country to fight your “war on terror”.

40

Nothing unusual about it. Do you really think four months jail, of which they may do two, is really enough for killing someone, intended or not? If sentences were to reflect the seriousness of the crime then drivers may take more notice of other road users.
I have held my licence since 1980 and not once, in any vehicle, have I come close to hitting a cyclist. Is that just luck or watching the road? These days I cycle to work, a 56km round trip taking in a busy town centre around 1700hrs. If I get through a week without a vehicle coming so close as to brush my arm it’s a victory. Why the need to get so close? It’s not as if I’m in the middle of the road. You can tell by the look on some drivers faces they have not even seen me.
In all of that ride in I have about 2 km of cycle lane, most of which is full of cars and vans parked so that’s a waste of time. Make it an offence to park in them and you may get them used a little more.
As for the other old chestnut, make cyclists take a test! What like a driving test? Because all drivers take a test and they follow all the rules all the time.
I don’t think any driver starts a journey with the intention of killing a cyclist, but a little more care and attention, yes even with the odd nutter on a bike, would go a long way.