Near Miss of the Day 457: Bristol rider gets punishment pass (video includes swearing)

STiG911 wrote:

People need to stop tacking 'Mate' onto sentences. They're not your mate now, and I certainly don't want them to be later if they're going to drive like psychopaths.

I just want a mate!

You're not mating with me, sunshine!

A mate! I want a mate!

Well, just as well, cos I'm not having any of that nonsense! You're just a long streak of nothing! You know... Alien nothing!

- Doctor Who, 'Partners in Crime'

.

Personally, I'm inclined to think that the intent of some of these Police reporting systems is to catch-and-kill footage of driver violations.

Three days ago, I uploaded footage of a close pass to my local force's portal. The rules stipulated that the footage should not be uploaded to social media (so it can't be publicized and contribute to social pressure) while also notifying me that no response would be provided to indicate what, if any, action was taken (unless more information was required from me), and when such action would be taken, so that the footage could be publicized without affecting any potential proceedings. So now I have to blindly trust that the Police will even look at the footage, let alone act on it, and can't upload it elsewhere.

It would be trivial for the system to fire off an automated email to the address provided with the footage, to indicate the action taken, at the time that the submitted case were closed. That this is not the case means that it was a deliberate decision not to implement that basic, expected feature.

Call me suspicious if you want, but that stinks.

I suspect they believe someone would call 999 or report in a police station, not submit via dashcam portal.

I suspect it is an automated system where the bored Copper views the video, decides that there was something done wrong and clicks a button to mark it for further action. But the system then fires a standardised email out stating witness.

roadrunner23 wrote:

Someone with more legal training than me might be able to explain why further updates from the police can't be made. Afterall I have always believed that part of the justice system was that public knowledge of how justice was dispensed was a major part of the whole idea of policing by consent.

Indeed; justice must be seen to be done, otherwise cyclists might start taking matters into their own hands, as has happened a few times recently, and I've just read of another.

eburtthebike wrote:

roadrunner23 wrote:

Someone with more legal training than me might be able to explain why further updates from the police can't be made. Afterall I have always believed that part of the justice system was that public knowledge of how justice was dispensed was a major part of the whole idea of policing by consent.

Indeed; justice must be seen to be done, otherwise cyclists might start taking matters into their own hands, as has happened a few times recently, and I've just read of another.

I bet that the system doesn't afford the cyclists half the leniency it demonstrates towards drivers

I'm intrigued by the idea that the victim is in fact only a witness to the offence. That is like saying you have submitted a video of a car running a red light - nothing was done to/against you, you are merely a 3rd party to the infraction, observing what happened. Bizarre.

roadrunner23 wrote:

Someone with more legal training than me might be able to explain why further updates from the police can't be made. Afterall I have always believed that part of the justice system was that public knowledge of how justice was dispensed was a major part of the whole idea of policing by consent. Those found guilty of major crimes get their sentences plastered all over the papers, so why shouldn't the police say that the driver was fined £60 and 6 pts on their licence? The response given above makes you believe that nothing has actually been done and no letter has in fact been sent. 

Of course they can be made. The Met will tell you within 2 weeks whether they have sent an NIP, warning letter or done nothing at all. 6 months after the NIP is sent I then email for an update and they will tell me whether the driver was sent on a course, accepted a fine/points (and detail what those were) or whether the case is going to court.

The only reason to do what this force has done is laziness and intransigence

To be fair they may (happy to be told they actually don't) respond to active requests for an update, but just not have the resource to proactively update. But I agree it's a nonsense that they treat close pass victims as mere witnesses. 

roadrunner23 wrote:

 Someone with more legal training than me might be able to explain why further updates from the police can't be made.

I have about 25 years of experience in the criminal courts, working at all levels (usually the Crown Court, usually prosecuting), and I know of NO LEGAL REASON WHATSOEVER why the Police feel that they cannot update the victim/witness with the progress of the matter.  In fact, it was common courtesy in my day to do so, and if the Police/CPS DIDN'T keep their witnesses informed, and then couldn't find them on day of trial, they would be roundly criticised by the Judge before having their case thrown out (and otentially costs awarded against them).

Of course, it could be that the Police feel that they cannot tell the victim/witness what the outcome was because of "data protection/confidentiality".  Which to my mind is only possible if you deliberately choose to ignore the exemption contained in Part 3 of the Data Protection Act 2018.

I was trying to find one as well. I wonder if the original close pass mentioned in the text was on a section that did have one. 

hawkinspeter wrote:

"Use the cycle lane"? There isn't one on that section.

What grinds my gears is that the traffic is inevitably held up at the traffic light going onto the roundabout, so there's just no point in a car jostling for position (as can be seen in the video).

There does appear to be a cycle marking on the left at 12s, so I think there is a shared use path.  That said, it is absolutely diabolical, with trees, tree roots, advertising stands and pedestrians obliviously staring at their phones.

it is a bad as it looks,...the local mountain bike trails are actually less hazardous https://bristolcars.blogspot.com/2015/04/mtb-trail-corrie-road.html

That must be a new bit of paint.

there is the bike-signs-and-trees joke of a path: https://bristolcars.blogspot.com/2015/04/mtb-trail-corrie-road.html

 coronation road is no fun to cycle on, be it on road or that path. i used to like the chocolate path -  but of course the mayor let that fall into the river

That stops before the above section, but as Burt pointed out, there appears to be some white cycles painted onto the pavement now.

It's been a sign-posted shared path for years. It's a bit crap, but most everyone deals with it fine. It's not great when you want to get a move on, which is why I tend to use the road more, but aside from that it's actually OK-ish in practice - crappy but workable. 

The bollocks up is that there is one blue lane sign that has the bike and pedestrian swapped compared to the surface markings and other signs - that's caused some interesting moments....

Yeah, I know about the sign-posted bit, but that stops (stopped) at the bridge opposite Dean Lane (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4456224,-2.5997714,3a,75y,102.59h,85.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svK5T1sDWsG4AQ-k68Gu-ww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). Google Maps doesn't show the painted cycles on the pavement further along either, so they must be a new addition. I'll be going along there later on, so I'll have a look.

Ach, mea culpa, i'm having a braino - yeah that bit towards Bristol Bridge hasn't had signage that I remember (bit of paint at the Redcliffe end IIRC donkeys years ago maybe). Got side-tracked looking at the MTB course vid.

I just cycled along Coronation Rd and the cycle lane still stops at the bridge. There was no sign of white cycles on the pavement further along, so they were probably temporary or unofficial.