Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Cyclist wrongly told by police that close pass driver couldn’t be prosecuted – because rider swore following near miss (+ video – includes swearing)

Rider took issue up directly with Crown Prosecution Service and was told his own language wouldn’t affect decision of whether to proceed against motorist

A cyclist who says he was told by a Gwent Police officer that drivers he filmed making close passes could not be prosecuted because the rider swore in the videos decided to check the situation with the Crown Prosecution Service – and was told that his language presented no barrier to taking such cases to court.

Nick Thompson, the road.cc reader who took it upon himself to clarify the CPS’s stance on the issue, provided the above video, filmed near Abercynon in Rhondda Cynon Taf, South Wales, as an example of the type of footage that had prompted him to take to Twitter last week to share his experience.

He told us that he created the thread “after a telephone conversation with a police officer who advised me that the CPS would not be willing to prosecute drivers who are recorded on video close passing cyclists if the cyclist swears in response. I was utterly shocked by this attitude as it came across as victim blaming.

“I think this is an important subject to cover at a time when many cyclists are the victims of extremely poor instances of driving and if a police force or the CPS opts to avoid a prosecution as someone might be offended with the language of the victim, then that sends a terrible message out to vulnerable road users.”

Nick underlined that some of the replies highlighted instances where prosecutions had been brought following submission of videos including the cyclist swearing, which he said “made me doubt whether the officer was advising on actual CPS policy or whether it is down to the personal preference of the officer’s reviewing the footage via Operation Snap.

“Whatever the reason, I have experienced some extremely dangerous close passes since I started submitting footage and it seems that the drivers involved may have been punished with just a written letter instead of prosecution as a result of me swearing in response to my life being threatened,” he continued.

“More to the point, the drivers involved are less likely to change their behaviour after reading a letter than they might be after having points and/or a fine and/or a ban. So, in the meantime, they may just be one close pass away from killing a cyclist.”

Nick wondered whether other readers had experienced similar treatment, and in the past we have reported on a Bristol cyclist who submitted video to police of a close pass, which included him swearing in response to the near miss, and after lodging a complaint when he’d heard nothing back six months later was contacted by an officer who told the rider that he would not face prosecution for his language. Avon & Somerset Police also said that there had been insufficient evidence to prosecute the motorist involved.

> Bristol cyclist who submitted near-miss video to police told he won’t be prosecuted for swearing

Yesterday, Nick received a response by email from the CPS, and said “their advice pretty much confirmed my pre-existing thoughts.

“All they’re concerned about is whether cases sent to them by the police satisfy the Code for Crown Prosecutors which has two stages. The first one determines the likelihood of getting a conviction and the second stage concerns whether the prosecution is in the public interest.

“They also went on to say the following,” he added:

"Each case will be considered on its own facts. I can confirm that there is no general rule against prosecuting cases where victims or witnesses can be shown to have used bad language. Provided that the case meets the test under the Code, the CPS will prosecute it."

So there we have it. Officially, if a cyclist on the receiving end of a close pass or other near miss on the road swears in reaction to the incident (often, a not unreasonable reaction when their life has been put in danger), that should not affect the decision of whether or not to prosecute the driver.

That assumes, however, that the investigating officer of the force in question has referred it to the CPS in the first place – but at least if you encounter resistance in them doing so, you can point the officer towards what the CPS has said here.

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

34 comments

Avatar
Nick1020 | 3 years ago
3 likes

I am the cyclist in the video and would just like to express my gratitude to Simon and road.cc for publishing the story.

I'm currently waiting to hear back from South Wales Police after asking for an explanation. The motivation isn't about getting the officer punished, although the advice he gave me was absolutely shocking, I just want the police to take these extremely poor examples of driving seriously before I, or other vulnerable road users become statistics.

I noticed a comment by sparrowlegs suggesting that this should be easy pickings for the police. I completely agree with that. I think all close passes should be prosecuted. In some cases, the driver may see the footage and realise how bad it was and they may learn from it. Other drivers may never get the message and in those cases, they should lose their license for a fixed period. The third time, how about a permanent ban? Cyclists are not the only victims of the selfish tw@ts who drive like this all the time, but the police and the courts seem to have too much tolerance for dangerous driving. The sentences that some people get for seriously injuring or killing others on the roads is laughable and is an insult to the victims as well as their families.

Avatar
Rendel Harris | 3 years ago
2 likes

I've a court date in July to give evidence against this guy; my, ahem, somewhat robust language certainly hasn't been mention by the police!

https://road.cc/content/news/cyclist-almost-run-down-impatient-peugeot-d...

Avatar
eburtthebike replied to Rendel Harris | 3 years ago
1 like
Rendel Harris wrote:

I've a court date in July to give evidence against this guy; my, ahem, somewhat robust language certainly hasn't been mention by the police!

https://road.cc/content/news/cyclist-almost-run-down-impatient-peugeot-d...

I thought you were remarkably restrained in the circumstances.  Congratulations on getting it to court, and please let us know the result.

Avatar
Seagull2 replied to Rendel Harris | 3 years ago
0 likes

I sincerely hope that driver gets an appropriate punishment, they obviously do not deserve to have permission to drive on public roads 

Avatar
Eton Rifle | 3 years ago
1 like

Good on him for persisting with this. Of course it's ridiculous to suggest that someone endangering another's life should escape prosecution because of the victim's entirely understandable reaction.

I had a nasty close pass at night (no. 194 on here if you're interested) where I called the driver a c*nt purely out of fear and anger at nearly being killed. Police went ahead with a warning letter. Frankly, I think she got off lightly, given the brake check and aggressive reversing towards me after the close pass but hey ho.

Avatar
Hirsute replied to Eton Rifle | 3 years ago
2 likes

'Extreme swearing' no less !

Avatar
Captain Badger replied to Hirsute | 3 years ago
1 like
hirsute wrote:

'Extreme swearing' no less !

Is that like "extreme Ironing"? How do you swear whilst scuba diving?

Avatar
Hirsute replied to Captain Badger | 3 years ago
1 like

You'll have to ask the editors !

Avatar
mdavidford replied to Captain Badger | 3 years ago
0 likes
Captain Badger wrote:
hirsute wrote:

'Extreme swearing' no less !

Is that like "extreme Ironing"? How do you swear whilst scuba diving?

Carefully.

Avatar
Captain Badger replied to mdavidford | 3 years ago
0 likes
mdavidford wrote:
Captain Badger wrote:
hirsute wrote:

'Extreme swearing' no less !

Is that like "extreme Ironing"? How do you swear whilst scuba diving?

Carefully.

Yes, there'd certainly be some words that you wouldn't be able to use - anything with a "B" or an "M" for starters... 

Avatar
Eton Rifle replied to Hirsute | 3 years ago
1 like
hirsute wrote:

'Extreme swearing' no less !

Yes, I'm quite proud of that. 👍

Avatar
hawkinspeter | 3 years ago
12 likes

I wonder if they treat knife stabbing victims with the same logic: We would prosecute, but you were caught littering the pavement with your blood.

Avatar
Cycloid | 3 years ago
10 likes

As the commentaery says this comes accross as victim blaming.

If the cyclist swore at the driver BEFORE the close pass then the police could say the driver was provoked.

If the cyclist swore AFTER the close pass then the driver provoked the cyclist and although the swearing is regrettable it is understandable. Being sworn at is not a common cause of death.

 

Avatar
Awavey replied to Cycloid | 3 years ago
5 likes

It's not victim blaming, if I'm being charitable its the police simply following their rules for prosecution to the letter, ie they count the video as a neutral witness of evidence to all possible charges. But they are meant to use their noggin to determine what are and arent reasonable charges to pursue and its perfectly reasonable and I'm sure there is tonnes of case evidence to back this up, to utter expletives in response to being a victim of a crime.

So if I'm being cynical its actually just a way to delay/get out of processing these submissions.

Avatar
eburtthebike | 3 years ago
3 likes

There could be only one possible response to the police; Bolox.

Avatar
Aidanwills | 3 years ago
5 likes

Having submitted over 100 close pass clips to South Wales police, a lot without any bad language, I fully understand why you're angry that they fail to do anything. I was sure their "Operation Snap" video submission system was just going straight to a recycle bin as I never heard anything back, however, the last 3 submissions I've made (2 within 5 mins on the same road) I've received the following response:

The digital recording submitted by you has been reviewed and we are satisfied that one of the following actions is necessary to proceed with this matter

1- Warning
2- Conditional offer of a diversionary course
3- Conditional offer of fixed penalty
4- Proceed to court (if you are required to attend court you will be notified nearer to the time, by our witness care team)

Hopefully they aren't just fobbing me off, but they won't inform me of what the outcome is unless I'm required to go to court. Only time will tell

Avatar
Bungle_52 replied to Aidanwills | 3 years ago
7 likes

Well done that man, you are an example to us all.

I for one would like to express my gratitude for what you have done in moving towards making cycling safer for us all. It must have taken a great deal of effort and perseverance.

 

Avatar
sparrowlegs | 3 years ago
6 likes

Surely stuff like this is easy pickings for the police? Video evidence of the driver putting people at risk means 100% chance of a successful conviction? I mean, they could be knocking hundreds of these out a day and making a mint.

But no. The lazy feckless wastes of tax payer money still find an excuse not to prosecute.

The footage was probably reviewed by some glass-backed sick note who was only going to be there another few weeks unless the doctor signs them off for another few months.

For me, get rid of more of the lazy fuckers. The streets are awash with drugs and crimes such as street robbery, car crime and burglary are now classed as virtually victimless and not worth investigating. 

Avatar
jh2727 replied to sparrowlegs | 3 years ago
0 likes
sparrowlegs wrote:

Surely stuff like this is easy pickings for the police? Video evidence of the driver putting people at risk means 100% chance of a successful conviction? I mean, they could be knocking hundreds of these out a day and making a mint.

But no. The lazy feckless wastes of tax payer money still find an excuse not to prosecute.

A £100 fixed penalty for careless driving might be pretty close to 100% pure profit - but if they were to successfully prosecute for dangerous driving (which this clearly is), the fine would barely make an impact on the cost of prosecution.  I'm not saying income from fines should be a motivation for prosecutions, but just mentioning that the fines are far to low.

Avatar
Rik Mayals unde... | 3 years ago
4 likes

Not in the least bit surprised. Mant police officers are lazy, and cannot be arsed to do their job, to uphold the Law. I have given up reporting near misses to them, there is always an excuse as to why they will not prosecute, too busy, not in the public interest, not close enough, blah, blah, blah. Lancashire Police are the pits, if other forces are as bad, then God help us.

Avatar
keirik | 3 years ago
2 likes

The most rabidly anti cyclist person I know is a North Wales Police Officer. Has often said cyclists shouldn't be on the road and he'd knock them off if they get in his way.

What hope is there with these sorts of attitudes?

Avatar
Tired of the tr... | 3 years ago
7 likes

Presumably in many, many crime cases the victim uses "bad language" after becoming the victim of the crime, so if that was a valid criteria, then few crimes could ever be prosecuted...

Avatar
Inspector Kevin... | 3 years ago
11 likes

The interesting thing about this story:

CPS do not make charging decisions for careless driving, police do. only dangerous driving offences require CPS approval - and most cases of close passes are unlikely to meet the CPS charging threshold for "dangerous" for a number of reasons. 

In other words the CPS are irrelevant for the vast majority of driving offences which are summary only and police chargable. 

You're unlikely to need to speak to the CPS about their decision not to prosecute (victim's right of review) but you can ask to speak to the officer's sergeant to request their rationale for not prosecuting. 
 

 

Avatar
gonzothegreat replied to Inspector Kevin Smith SYP | 3 years ago
2 likes

Almost. Police can authorise a charge under the DPPs 5th guidance for dangerous driving if its an anticipated guilty plea where the Magistrates Court have sufficient sentencing powers.

Avatar
Hirsute | 3 years ago
7 likes

You couldn't make this shit up.

I hope the officer faces disciplinary action for his attitude of 'I can't be arsed to do my job'.

Avatar
notwelshyet | 3 years ago
10 likes

That twat has done similar to me when out riding - I remember the number plate very well vn05 cpv. Shame I didn't have a camera for that incident - but I guess it would have been rejected because I used similar language nick. Sometimes I despair at the pit of absolute excrement this country and its inhabitants have willingly sunk into. I have ridden all over the world and the UK, closely followed by the US, are without doubt the most selfish and disrespectful drivers...

Avatar
andystow replied to notwelshyet | 3 years ago
5 likes

Australia says "hold my beer, mate."

Avatar
notwelshyet replied to andystow | 3 years ago
0 likes

Apologies not cycled in Australia, but if they are friendly enough to share their beer.....

Avatar
Sriracha replied to notwelshyet | 3 years ago
8 likes

And this is why it should be prosecuted. Drivers who do it once are likely to do it again. Why wait until they injure or kill someone?

Avatar
CXR94Di2 | 3 years ago
2 likes

Police are f***ing ar*******

Pages

Latest Comments