Police take no action against moped rider caught on camera kicking out at cyclist's bike

Whatever the "difficulties" proffered by the Police, what we should be doing is funding not just civil action, but "paid for" social media campaigns that target the likely peers of the individuals concerned, the effectiveness of which is something that even the Police are starting to recognise.

Aggressive drivers often have lifestyles that reveal all sorts of naughtiness, so they tend to fear publicity; and that is the key to reducing this sort of antisocial behaviour.

And of course, each successful civil claim also helps to illuminate the decidedly curious reluctance shown by the Police and the CPS to secure a proscecution for the common good.

Can I just say I've watched the video, and therefore consider myself an independent witness.

"It was the bloke on the moped wot dun it Officer."

"lack of independent witness"... remember that for when the police try to prosecute you, which if you're a cyclist they'll be more than happy to.

surely a complaint to the Met at their lack of action would be an idea, although i would assume that only the victim could do that.

Wow, just wow.

I have just started a forum topic that looks at this and other news stories lately. I'd be grateful for any comments about what you think needs to be done about the current state of affairs. It cannot continue.

http://road.cc/content/forum/110081-meet-jury

It's a boilerplate letter. I've seen exactly the same wording before in other threads about video footage of bad drivers and actually been in receipt of the same letter after I and another cyclist were "hustled" out of the way at traffic lights in Balham by a four wheel drive that made contact with both of us.
The driver turned into a petrol station to make a U-turn, so there was a set of CCTV coverage and our witness accounts, but not enough "independent" evidence to proceed apparently...

If you watch any of the motorway cop shows, this is actually as good as any of the footage they show.

Sadly, I'm not surprised at all.

I'm pretty ignorant about such matters, but is there nothing we can do beyond declare our disappointment on web forums? Is there someone we can bombard with emails each and every time the care of a cyclist is ignored or trivialised? It would be laughable if it wasn't so bloody depressing.

Ooh that's too difficult for the old bill to deal with and not have a definite prosecution. Speeding far easier as they are not having to make a judgement, it's black n white.
Pretty much anything that someone could defend generally doesn't go to court.

To this end, one has to question why the police are going wear and use video cameras themselves, apart from being in the name of openess......

This. Is. F-ing. Disgusting.

The police response seems to be that they can't be bothered to investigate, because they don't think they can win.

AFAIK they're under a legal obligation to investigate a reported crime.

Malfeasance in public office complaint against the officer making this decision?

methinks that the police have had that standard letter template since Victorian times. They look to see if the box that indicates witnesses has been ticked. If it hasn't they send the standard letter.

The form does not have a box for "helmet camera footage in full HD".

One of the reasons that the police are so seriously narked with the government is that they are the last un-reformed public service in the UK. I have a few friends in the Surrey force and even they think some of it is beyond silly.

I'll give you an example. Way back in the day I was in a nightclub in Bournemouth. A bouncer tried to chat up my girlfriend so we just decided to leave. On my way out of the club I was hit in the back of the head and then kicked while on the floor. I then heard the "leave it Carl" and on rolling over saw it was the fellah that had tried it on with my girlfriend. So I called the police. They eventually came. Spoke to the bouncers, then took me and my girlfriend to the police station and took a statement. Then a week or two later they said they couldn't do anything as they didn't have enough evidence.

Now my current Police friends drawing on their police training tell me that I went about it all wrong. Instead of calling the police to report an assault. I should have stayed down and got someone to call for an ambulance because I was injured after an assault. This approach I am told would have put the reported assault on a higher footing.

This is basically the equivalent of diving in football. So Chi. What you probably should have done is taken a dive (slow down a bit first, fake it if necessary.) but go down. That's how you get witnesses. Now you have a collision, an RTC with injuries and a motorist that fails to stop.

As refs go the police aren't giving any penalties for a manly attempts to stay upright. They are impressed by spectacular dives.

How can video footage not be independent???

This is disappointing, but given Martin Porter's experiance not entirely surprising.
I think that there is a number of people who commute whom having tired of near misses have brought helmet cams to capture this in the hope that should the worse happen, there would be some recompense, some more reliable independent evidence that is better than their word versus yours.
Some of the new cameras picture quality is fantastic, better than some CCTV recordings, which could be on ancient kit, recording on tapes that had been re-recorded over hundreds of times previously. Yet crystal clear sharp evidence from the victim's point of view is not acceptable.
Because you know cyclists have this special ability, if they wish something really really hard then they can alter video evidence just with the power of their mind.

Crowd funding on this one? If cycling websites keep raising this type of injustice then they should be suggesting a course of action. Most of our bone idle lazy institutions want an easy life; unless you are prepared to kick them in to action things will never change. They rely on apathy!

Another entirely predictable outcome from the civil servants with warrant cards masquerading as law enforcers

At least he got a response.

I had a Range Rover driver twice try to knock me off and then swerve in front of me and stop dead causing me to collide with the back of the car.

I called 999 straight away and although I was on a busy A road I was told the response car couldn't find me!

I then had a PC visit and take a statement. I had the car reg and full description which I gave. My word against his but he still left the scene of an accident without giving details.

This was last October and I've heard nothing from the Met police.

The response here does not surprise me in the least.

As a serving Police officer i find this embarassing to say the least.

the comment "I would advise you that it is the policy of the Metropolitan Police Service to investigate cases that have a realistic prospect of achieving a successful prosecution at court."

Why ?

We investigate everything in my force, if there's not enough evidence fair enough, but at least we've tried. I would be happy to investigate this with the cctv evidence.

I've got to agree with a number of other people - both surprised and disappointed and annoyed. How much more f*ing independent than an inanimate object can you get ?????

I'd be appealing any conviction I got based on CCTV that's for sure. Apparently they are extremely biased - the official description is 'criminalist' apparently, and we cant have that.

Aaaargh!

Does this mean that any person convicted based on CCTV evidence can appeal due to lack of independent witnesses?

Perhaps Martin porter might be interested, this is becoming a pattern.
Why is headcam footage not acceptable? Just today the Met have released "the best images they have" of three guys accused of throwing coins at Theo Walcott, they look like they were taken on a potato. http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-26014757
There is no rational explanation for this other than a total lack of care for cyclists' lives; it's like they're scared that if juries are presented with video footage of motorist actions they might actually convict on sensible charges and judges might have to award proportional sentences.
Is there no way of funding a judicial review of the police approach to headcam footage? Some way of forcing them to consider it as valuable, in fact, better than any eyewitness.

Actually, yes! I am surprised. And I am appalled that there is no action been taken!

I know for a fact that you can appeal against a decision like that and I would speak to an independent lawyer to have this driver tried! Mr Goodwin is a very good address for this sort of thing (as previously mentioned!)

There is a major public interest in having this case reviewed and even though there might not be a jail sentence or such at the end of it, it would set a precedence, which is what is really needed!

Not enough that there are dangerous psychopaths on the road, what makes it so much worse are the work-shy twits in the police force covering for them. No time to do our jobs and protect people, there are donuts to eat!

Just one of the many things that are wrong with this society.