'Incredibly talented' police officer killed after being hit by motorist while cycling

brooksby wrote:

Very quick to arrest and question the van driver, instead of diving into the usual 'where was he riding? what was he wearing? did he have a helmet?' guff...

 

Nothing to do with the cyclist being a police officer, I'm sure...

A) Hardly the appropriate time to be grinding axes;

B) Drivers in fatal incidents are routinely arrested so they can be interviewed under caution and with lawyers present, as much for their own protection as anything else.

So should I wait a few weeks after this event to raise my (valid, if inappropriately timed) comment?

(TBH by the time I'd considered this my comment had ten likes and it would not have made sense as an empty comment)

brooksby wrote:

So should I wait a few weeks after this event to raise my (valid, if inappropriately timed) comment?

And until more facts are known, yes. For all we know the van driver could have been driving with no MOT and defective brakes or 30mph over the speed limit and that was why s/he was so quickly arrested. I'm no great fan of the police and especially not of some of their attitudes towards cyclists, but I do think that implying that they've only acted promptly in this case because it's one of their own isn't really fair or approriate until further information is available. If it's then shown that they did give the case special treatment I'll gladly join you in criticizing them.

Rather surprised comments are enabled here in the first place - seems like an error of judgement on road.cc's part.

Yes, why not censor discussion as though theres something to hide.

This is tragically sad for all who knew her, and not a time for censoring comment or discussion which may lead to averting similar occurrences in the future.

Because there is an upcoming trial.

If you have a look at other stories on this site you will see Comments on this are closed, when there is an upcoming or ongoing trial.

Sub judice applies when someone is arrested nothing to do with censorship.

All the article is reporting is that someone died. What more is there to say, beyond ktache's first comment? Even then, although it's the appropriate reaction, I  doubt that it really does anything to help those affected. How can what can only be baseless speculation at this point help to avert similar occurrences?

So at best comments will be pretty meaningless; at worst they're liable to be offensive or harmful.

mdavidford wrote:

Rather surprised comments are enabled here in the first place - seems like an error of judgement on road.cc's part.

Twitter has no issues on comments being made on this fatal collision, so why NOT here on Road.cc?

Projectcyclingfitness wrote:

mdavidford wrote:

Rather surprised comments are enabled here in the first place - seems like an error of judgement on road.cc's part.

Twitter has no issues on comments being made on this fatal collision, so why NOT here on Road.cc?

"But it happens on Twitter!" is a very low bar, ethically speaking. 

Road CC's has a morale compass maybe. Terribly sad news for all involved, thoughts are with them.

Rendel Harris wrote:

brooksby wrote:

Very quick to arrest and question the van driver, instead of diving into the usual 'where was he riding? what was he wearing? did he have a helmet?' guff...

 

Nothing to do with the cyclist being a police officer, I'm sure...

A) Hardly the appropriate time to be grinding axes;

B) Drivers in fatal incidents are routinely arrested so they can be interviewed under caution and with lawyers present, as much for their own protection as anything else.

Considering that vast numbers of cyclist victims are willfully let down by cops, despite compelling evidence against dangerous drivers, it's understandable any criticism towards cops treating cops more favourably than a civilian, when a cop becomes a victim.
I suppose you have NOT been a victim of a dangerous driver crashing into you, and who could have killed you...
>and then having to experience cops playing underhanded tactics, including lying about eyewitnesses and ignoring their submitted evidence, and then being evasive when you attempt to contact...
>in the end, you realise they've been playing you for time, as after 6 months period, cops know they can wash their hands and nothing you do about it.

Ive seen first hand many times that the Police are prepared to push harder for justice when it's one of their own.  The rest of us might be forgiven for feeling when we report a crime that we're "just a cyclist", whereas this chap was a policeman on a bike - totally different.

FWVLIW I've reported three crimes - a sexual assault, a collision and threats to kill; in all three cases, the driver wasn't traced.  Quite what efforts were tried when cars are all registered is an unknown to me.

 in all three cases, the driver wasn't traced

Trying to separate this quotation from the original topic of the tragic death of the cyclist: I have experienced this suspicious police dodge myself. The specific words were: the driver was not traced. Not 'the driver could not be traced'- there was no doubt about the registration plate or the correct appropriate vehicle. This is not a large crime-ridden urban area where all the vehicles have dodgy plates, so I think these careful words mean 'we, the police, did not want to identify this driver'. We then have to speculate on the possible reasons for the reluctance.

What a ridiculous comment. Firstly if you had read the article properly you would have seen it was a female officer. Secondly she was riding on a road and was hit by a vehicle. It doesn't matter what she was wearing, she was hit and killed by a motorist. What did you expect the police to do, arrest the killed cyclist? This is typical of non-cycling motorists who have no clue how vulnerable cyclists are. I am a cyclist AND police trained driver.

greenthing wrote:

What a ridiculous comment.

I think you missed the point the OP was making - which is that in an awful lot of such stories, someone (sometimes the journalist, sometimes the police themselves) will mention the presence of a helmet or hi-viz, despite the fact that it clearly has absolutely nothing to do with the incident.  We've become so conditioned to this inbuilt victim-blaming when a motor vehicle is involved that - to make the point - the OP thought that it needed adding here.

 lot of such stories, someone (sometimes the journalist, sometimes the police themselves) will mention the presence of a helmet or hi-viz

Even though I am frequently castigated on these pages for being a helmet enthusiast, I certainly don't support this implicit victim blaming which is essentially an attempted justification of 'I didn't see him and I didn't mean to do it, all these cyclists are invisible as they pass red traffic lights, the sun was in my eyes so I had to go faster' etc. etc.

Agreed. An appropriate comment to make in view of the extremely sad outcome of this crash.

I agree, it is an extremely sad time for her family, friends and colleagues. I believe her colleagues would have acted in the same way upon seeing this tragedy irrespective of her being a police officer. I only wish that changes are made to the road network so that it is made safer for people to cycle in the future.

Disagree; the police only take notice when it's one of their own. Anyone else go get f*cked. Experience is a strong learning tool. Hampshire constabulary take note.

You can't generalise about every police officer, just as you can't generalise about indivual cyclists.  Your comment is not very appropriate given the topic.

rct wrote:

You can't generalise about every police officer, just as you can't generalise about indivual cyclists.  Your comment is not very appropriate given the topic.

You certainly can't generalise about every officer, when some forces have a much better record for taking motoring offences seriously.