[GoingRoundInCycles]

For the first time in more than thirty years, I am considering quitting cycling in London. Why? Well the drip, drip, drip effect of depressing news reports has got me thinking, why bother? Is the undoubted joy of being able to make my way quickly and efficiently under my own steam through the city worth the daily disrespect and the lack of legal support that I can expect should I unfortunately need it?

The first story that got me really thinking was the one about the abusive cyclist punched by the Audi driver. It was covered here on road.cc and I knew at once that it would only be a matter of time before Britain’s foremost sensationalist rag, The Daily Mail, would gleefully run the story. Cards on the table, I think the cyclist must be an absolute fool to think that behaviour like that would likely go unpunished in London, but in any case that isn’t what really interests me.

The thing that interests me most is the readers’ comments in response to the article and the amount and ratio of likes to dislikes.

Here is a list of the 10 most ‘popular’ comments:

1 Probably the same cyclist who runs red lights and cycles on footpaths. 7193 Likes 1975 Dislikes

2 The cyclist was provoking him. They think they own the roads. 6364 Likes 1486 Dislikes

3 This is unacceptable but the Cyclist did kind of bring it upon himself by needlessly chasing after the car. 5458 Likes 734 Dislikes

4 Personally i blame the cyclist, he was the one shouting his mouth off and seems a bit too big for his boots, fair play to the audi bloke for showing him the floor. 4862 Likes 1152 Dislikes

5 Towards the end of the video another cyclist goes through a red light. They do seem to think they are a law unto themselves. I’m not saying the car driver is in the right by any means, but……………. 3611 Likes 405 Dislikes

6 I’m a cyclist, i ride over 3000 miles a year on the roads of the UK and i’m on the side of the guy in the Audi, red arrow away but it is not the job of a man on a bike to aggressively approach a car, you don’t know who was driving, maybe it was a 17 year old girl and the man in the back was her father, no one knows, the cyclist was too aggressive and he is not a police officer, leave policing the roads to the people that are paid to do so or the CCTV controllers. I see people driving like idiots every single day, life is short, let things go. 3401 Likes 299 Dislikes

7 Cyclist = total nightmare….They think they can do whatever! The most annoying people on the road….They put every driver at risk…..99% of the time, it is cyclist fault but in the eyes of the law SADLY it is always the driver fault. In London all cyclist should be banned. They should get penalties, fine, road tax…..TOTAL NUISANCE 2520 Likes 715 Dislikes

8 From what i can see the cyclist deserved it. They are becoming pests on our roads again. Especially with their sad little cameras they wear. Cowards 2212 Likes 656 Dislikes

9 Hope the driver reports the cyclist for starting it all. 1958 Likes 548 Dislikes

10 About time cycles had number plates so those that continually jump red lights can be prosecuted. 1928 LIkes 246 Dislikes

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2546709/Moment-Audi-passenger-got-car-PUNCHED-cyclist-pushing-bike-taxi-shocking-act-road-rage.html

There are many, many more like that from commenters who rather than restrict themselves to comments about the specific incident, they have seized the opportunity to damn all cyclists as red light jumping, tax dodging pests. There exists an overwhelmingly depressing consensus.

Now it is tempting to write these comments off as just the sort of thing one would expect from readers of the Daily Mail but it is apparently Britain’s most visited newspaper website. In any case as a regular London cyclist, I see no reason to dismiss these views as being unrepresentative of Britain’s general attitude.

Some might say, “Who cares? It is a free country and people can think what they like of us.”, except of course that the consequences of this hostility are far reaching and potentially devastating for cyclists and their families. This brings me to news story No. 2:

“Lorry driver who crushed Boris Bike rider fined £620”
/content/news/109980-lorry-driver-who-crushed-boris-bike-rider-fined-%C2%A3620#comment-226673

Now the details of how the collision actually occurred are not clear but reading between the lines from the 9 point penalty on the licence (the maximum possible for this offence), the fine (3 times the average), that the level of ‘carelessness’ was adjudged to be right on the limit of being classified ‘dangerous’. To support that view, the driver was originally arrested on suspicion for dangerous driving and to make matters worse the driver was also found guilty of operating a vehicle in a dangerous condition. If you were trying to build a strong case for the more serious charge, this lorry driver has provided plenty of ammunition. So why did the CPS back down?

I am speculating that pressing for the less serious charge meant that the offence would be tried in a Magistrate’s Court and there would therefore be a much better chance of securing a conviction without a jury. The more serious charge of causing serious injury by dangerous driving would most likely be heard at Crown Court in a trial by jury, probably ending in a mindboggling failure to convict if these recent examples are anything like typical:

“Minibus driver cleared over Southampton cyclist death”
/content/news/109784-minibus-driver-cleared-over-southampton-cyclist-death

“Lorry driver in Mary Bowers case receives ‘insulting’ £2,700 fine for careless driving”
http://www.ctc.org.uk/lorry-driver-in-mary-bowers-case-receives-%E2%80%98insulting%E2%80%99-%C2%A32700-fine-for-careless-driving

“Sam Harding bicycle death: Kenan Aydogdu cleared of manslaughter”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20725496

As Roger Geffen, Campaigns Director of CTC says:

… the apparent reluctance of juries to convict for “dangerous” offences makes the CPS reluctant even to attempt to prosecute them, particularly where the driver is willing to plead guilty to a lesser “careless” offence. And the upshot is that driving which has caused obviously foreseeable “danger” is routinely dismissed as mere “carelessness”, with derisory penalties being the all-too-common result.
http://www.ctc.org.uk/blog/roger-geffen/crushing-cyclist-lorry-while-on-mobile-really-careless-driving

Which brings us full circle back to the Daily Mail and its ‘lovely’ readers or to put it another way, the likely jury in the trial of the absent minded goon that put you in a wheelchair for the rest of your life. If attitudes like the ones cited above are representative of the public as a whole … well it only takes three people like that out of 12 on a jury and your case is fucked.

I cannot say that I blame the police, the CPS, or MPs for this state of affairs. If juries will almost invariably side with motorists and not convict, it doesn’t matter what laws you pass, how thoroughly you investigate and how stinging you make the penalties. At face value, if the CPS are unable to secure convictions in trials by jury like the three cited above where the evidence would seem to be very strong, I don’t blame them for not continuing to waste public money trying to prosecute unless it can be verified by multiple independent witnesses that the driver was drunk, drugged, blindfolded and having sex at the wheel at the time of the collision with the cyclist … and even then I imagine some of the Daily Mail readers will find a way to decide that somehow it was the cyclist’s fault.

Should I feel safe sharing the roads with the majority of other road users who seem to regard me as a ‘pest’, a ‘nuisance’, a ‘law unto myself’, a ‘nightmare’? Should I have any confidence in receiving justice if I happen to find myself a victim of a careless or dangerous driver?

It seems to me that it doesn’t matter a jot whether the public’s perception of cycling and cyclists is wildly inaccurate, spot on or more likely somewhere in between, we should be thinking about what we can do as individuals and collectively to promote understanding and improve our relationship with other road users because the current level of hostility is toxic. If we do nothing or are unsuccessful, expect plenty more where this ‘gem’ came from today:

/content/news/110075-police-take-no-action-against-moped-rider-caught-camera-kicking-out-cyclists

So what are we going to do about it?

Topic

[Anonymous]

Don’t give up. We need
Don’t give up. We need you.

Eventually there will be enough cyclists that everyone will know someone they care about who cycles. This is the true meaning of Critical Mass.

There was a time when we were the ‘in-group’ and motorists were the ‘out-group’. Look at the Punch cartoons from the early years of motoring (Cartoonists are fantastic social barometers).

Revolution means cycle and we are half-way round. We will rise again!

Just remember.
If the Daily Mail hates you, you must be doing something right!

[Eric D]

Thinking about why I
Thinking about why I disbelieve the driver in “It was unclear whether the young Czech woman had actually been struck by the defendant’s Mini”.

I’m only quoting the articles above from memory, but the boyfriend described the gap between mini and verge as tiny – two feet. The driver said the deceased + cycle was travelling sideways – at right-angles. Either she pivoted about the front wheel to the right, into the path of the mini, or to the left so she would land on grass ! I’ve been knocked off onto a grass verge at about 25mph, and was just shaken – not even hurt. The driver gave me tea from their thermos, and I pedalled on. And I wasn’t wearing a helmet.

Talking of helmets, one press report seemed surprised she died (after a week), even though she was wearing a helmet.

Police will be less thorough in a simple collision investigation, but a potential fatality should get a full manslaughter(murder)-quality forensic crime-scene procedure.
Road closed for hours, all vehicles body parts and accessories secured as evidence. Thorough search for marks on road, verge, vehicles – paint flakes, fingerprints, dna smears to match in the lab. Skid marks + debris photographed, measured and mapped on computer.

I wonder if wearing a helmet counts against you in terms of thoroughness of investigation ?

[Eric D]

It’s a complete lottery who
It’s a complete lottery who gets on a jury.

One of the problems with democracy is that it is a very short step from ‘majority rule’ to ‘oppression of minorities’.
Peter Tatchell has some interesting comments about problems with democracy – I haven’t heard them myself.

I just discovered this case today:
http://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/news.php?id=1354657
http://road.cc/content/news/95681-pharmaceutical-consultant-who-killed-cyclist-while-driving-wrong-side-road
Unanimous decision within 4 hours’ jury deliberation.

If the last quote from the defence is typical, it seems to have been ‘character assassination’ of the deceased’s boyfriend ! Their bikes collided first, when he took emergency avoiding action.

It seems that de-criminalising ‘reckless driving’ seems to have left a gap between ‘careless driving’ and ‘dangerous driving’.
Remind me, why did Parliament do that ?
Because all driving is ‘reckless’ ? (ie ‘knowing your action is risky, you proceed regardless’)

Note also “I decided the safest thing to do was to continue straight ahead BECAUSE THEY WERE IN SINGLE FILE. If I had been concerned I would have stopped [suddenly].”
Thinks: CYCLE TWO ABREAST ?
[suddenly] is omitted by the local paper, but present in road.cc and even the Daily Mail.

Comment from a local ‘experienced cyclist’ : “Without doubt a novice cyclist should not have been there”.
She wasn’t a novice – it was her first ride [on a new (used) bike] – bad reporting !
http://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/news.php?id=1363185

Usual Daily Mail comment: “Thats the problem with bikers, no driving lessons, no test and don’t follow the highway code … insurance.”

The Mail says “It was unclear whether the young Czech woman had actually been struck by the defendant’s Mini but the other pair of cyclists claim they heard an impact.” [independent witnesses disbelieved ?] How come drivers often “don’t notice” bodies bouncing off their bonnets ?
Poor forensics. She survived a week – was it not treated as ‘possibly fatal’ by the investigators ?

Again the defence may have stretched that into ‘reasonable doubt’, but even the Mail contradicts itself “She had been trying to overtake two other cyclists in her red Mini but collided …”
Reports that she had been thrown 15 yards are incorrect – the cyclists ended up 15 yards apart, mostly due to his reaction and stopping distance.

How serious do injuries between two cyclists riding together ever get ?

They say “It’s better that 1000 guilty people go free than one innocent person get convicted”, but I’m sure justice could have been better served here, particularly by the police, prosecutor and judge – I guess the jury were misled.
There is apparently no way to appeal a ‘not guilty’ verdict – really ?

[skippy]

Coming to this item as a
Coming to this item as a result of :

https://www.facebook.com/groups/StopKillingCyclists

A lot of sense in this article , and like others , i wish it was possible to BEAT SENSE into some of the motorists that cause me grief on Austrian Roads ! Sadly that would not work , since many are copying the lack of dedication to practicing the “Regs” that EMERGENCY VEHICLE drivers fail to utilise in their daily duties on the roads .

Until the Polizei are seen to be giving 1 1/2M safe pass with Signals , Herr/in Public , will choose to ignore those Driving requirements with a shrug & ” Well they don’t do it , so why should i “?

Your ” LIKE ” will help :

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Vision-ZERO-Worldwide/540123632761709

BoZo & David Cameron having a ” Vision “? That would be the DAY !

[GoingRoundInCycles]

Well done, arfa.
Thanks
Well done, arfa. =D>

Thanks to everyone for taking the time to comment.

[arfa]

Postscript to this thread.
Postscript to this thread. The driver concerned got a lengthy ban for leaving the scene of an accident. I was the only witness who showed up. Moral of the story, if we want bad drivers dealt with, look out for each other.

[sm]

More cyclists on the road is
More cyclists on the road is the answer for me (so quitting isn’t an option!). The sooner we ‘normalise’ cycling the better. We’ll do that with more cyclists.

That’s why I’m not so sure the whole ‘stop killing cyclists’ campaign and their ilk are helping – they just emphasise the dangers of cycling. More here on a recent blog post, questioning the tactics of some cycle campaigns:

Cycling is not dangerous – kill your emotive language

[andyp]

‘Don’t be a shouty fist
‘Don’t be a shouty fist waving sign giving lout. ‘

this. very much so.

[userfriendly]

Just checked, and printing
Just checked, and printing 26.4 million leaflets, one for each British household – A5 folded, colour front, B/W back – would come in at 1 million pounds. That’s printing costs, not including delivery.

Still, that cost seems rather low to me compared to the billions spent on road maintenance and safety. There has to be some budget that can be tapped for a simple campaign like that.

The leaflet wouldn’t even need to make its agenda obvious 😉 how about a Daily Mail-like tabloid layout and a sensationalist headline, e.g. something like

“The TRUTH about road tax – have we been lied to? Who really pays for our roads?”

[wmpmw02]

Fortunately for me I do not
Fortunately for me I do not have to cycle in London. You all have my admiration. One way I thought of that may show the benefits of cyclists commuting in London is to arrange a week long demonstration where cyclists commute using there cars. I imagine the impact on congestion may be frustrating to all those usually moaning about cyclists. I say a week long demonstration as a day will be just put down to one of those bad days we all get. London is the only place this would have any effect.

[GoingRoundInCycles]

@userfriendly:
A disconnect
@userfriendly:
A disconnect that results mostly from ignorance. I refuse to believe that the majority of people are evil and full of hatred. They just don’t know any better. And ignorance is best addressed with education. This is where the government needs to step in.

I agree but not just the government. I’d like to see CTC reaching out to the RAC and other motoring organisations to try to thrash out and publicise a code of conduct / good practice that takes into account the needs of all road users. We have plenty of areas of common interest; pot holes, appalling signage, unnecessarily complicated road layouts etc and maybe we could put more pressure on government and local authorities if we work together?

@Argos74:
Or get active. Join a local campaign group. Join a national campaign group. You mentioned television shows that don’t involve people snorting petrol fumes with their trousers round their ankles. Bugger that. Buy a videocam, Start doing shows and putting them on Youtube. Find out what local politicians are doing for the physical cycling infrastructure, promote the good ones, and really promote the idiocy of the bad ones. Ride out with family, friends, colleagues. Not all of them will be riding carbon speed machines, but they will be riding. Promote bike training and maintenance courses. Do charity runs, there’s plenty of them about, or start one with your local club/workplace/mates. Perhaps most importantly, just ride.

I like this a lot.

@farrell and @oldstrath: I think that is called adding fuel to the fire … I am thinking more about extinguishers right now. 😉

@oozaveared:
That’s a pretty pessimistic point of view. The thing to remember about news is to why it actually is news? ie why does it get coverage?

Dreadful news coverage isn’t the point that I am trying to make. My point is that the negativity towards cyclists exhibited more and more openly by the general public, is worse than I have ever known it and it is having a serious impact on our ability to seek redress when we are unfortunate enough to become victims of terrible driving.

Take the Blasphemy Laws. I am glad they are gone but the reason that they are gone is because as society became increasingly secular it became virtually impossible to find a jury that would convict. The CPS gave up prosecuting anyone so the last few attempts at prosecution were brought by private individuals or evangelical Christian groups and they were also doomed to failure.

It feels a bit like that right now. I know that it is (somewhat) of an exaggeration but what do cyclists have to do to get even an investigation going let alone justice in a case like the recent moped criminal kicking the cyclist’s front wheel on camera?

Like @userfriendly, I don’t believe for one minute that the vast majority of motorists are evil, heartless scum on the lookout for cyclists to maim and kill but I do believe that there is a tiny minority who have a pathological hatred for cyclists and I worry that they are increasingly emboldened by the knowledge that they can pretty much do what they like and get away with it. Just claim that the cyclist you hit was ‘wobbling all over the road’ in court and the chances are there are at least three people on the jury who will buy that crap and let you off.

[oozaveared]

That’s a pretty pessimistic
That’s a pretty pessimistic point of view. The thing to remember about news is to why it actually is news? ie why does it get coverage?

In the case of the punched cyclist the main reason why it was covered in a national paper and elsewhere including on road cc was because there was some nice clear video of the incident. ie Pictures were available. I don’t think a report of a man punching a cyclist after some verbal exchanges in the rush hour would be news without pictures.

By the way the same thing happens with car drivers all the time. People shout at each other and make rude signs and occasionally get out of their cars and assault each other.

Most people avoid getting into such situations by being grown ups. Don’t shout abuse at other road users (or anybaody really) or make rude gestures or get into pointless arguments. If you do then it may well escalate. Whether you are on a bike a motorbike or in a car or lorry it doesn’t matter. You have no idea who the person in the other car is. Police officer, uninsured drunk driver, drug addict, violent psychopath.

I’d say it is particularly good advice for cyclists. Unlike a motorist you can’t just wing the windows up and sit safely in your steel box if things get nasty. Unlike a motorcyclist you can’t just speed away through the traffic. As a cyclist you have neither the speed to get away or the protection of a vehicle if any road rage transpires.

So try not to contribute to it,or do anything that makes it more likely. Or if you do then be aware of the consequences.

Now ask yourself why road rage occurs. Why do people feel it’s ok to cut in to orderly queues on a road but not at a supermarket checkout. Why will they scream abuse at other road users for mistakes or for travelling too slowly but politely forgive them for a mistake or just walk a bit more slowly on a pavement without saying anything?

It’s the box mainly. In their box they feel safe from consequences. Unless a police officer sees them hurling abuse they’ll suffer no consequences of that behaviour. If they started behaving like that on the high street then they would run the risk of confrontation and assault.

Now we can’t help how motorists react from the safety of their steel box. All we can do is control how we act. Just act like you would in the high street. Don’t be a shouty fist waving sign giving lout. It won’t completely protect you but at least it won’t inflame others to get out and whack you one.

[thereandbackagain]

arfa wrote:First up, as has

arfa wrote:

First up, as has been said before, if you ever get the urge to read anything on the Daily Mail website, go and sit in a cold dark room until the feeling goes away; it will.
Second, do not give in.
What to do ? Well for a start, look out for each other. If something badly wrong is happening, stop, take down details and offer to be a witness. On Friday I will be going to court as a witness to a cyclist left hooked off his bike by a hit and run driver. Guess what ? The driver’s plea is not guilty because he has probably been advised that the witness won’t show up. Wrong assumption, I will be there and he’ll probably change his plea at the last minute.
Perhaps a bit more news coverage of successful prosecutions for bad/obnoxious driving might start to turn the tide.
Get on to your MP. Inform him/her that the lack of justice is unacceptable and that the party addressing this will get your vote. This is your period of maximum influence in the run up to an election.
This is a long haul but it will be worthwhile for the next generation at the very least.

Good for you, looking out for each other is important. Making sure your voice is heard is important. I know the quote is apocryphal, but remember

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

[arfa]

First up, as has been said
First up, as has been said before, if you ever get the urge to read anything on the Daily Mail website, go and sit in a cold dark room until the feeling goes away; it will.
Second, do not give in.
What to do ? Well for a start, look out for each other. If something badly wrong is happening, stop, take down details and offer to be a witness. On Friday I will be going to court as a witness to a cyclist left hooked off his bike by a hit and run driver. Guess what ? The driver’s plea is not guilty because he has probably been advised that the witness won’t show up. Wrong assumption, I will be there and he’ll probably change his plea at the last minute.
Perhaps a bit more news coverage of successful prosecutions for bad/obnoxious driving might start to turn the tide.
Get on to your MP. Inform him/her that the lack of justice is unacceptable and that the party addressing this will get your vote. This is your period of maximum influence in the run up to an election.
This is a long haul but it will be worthwhile for the next generation at the very least.

[oldstrath]

farrell wrote:Perhaps there

farrell wrote:

Perhaps there should be a new regulation to ensure that all new bikes are sold with one of these:
http://www.aspli.com/products/1919/break-glass-emergency-escape-hammer?gclid=CNCqjo6MsrwCFZShtAodKiYADg

Just think of the fun you could have riding through a long queue of traffic.

I’m not serious about vandalising peoples property by the way, but I do often wonder that if there were a spate of motorists being seriously assaulted by groups of vigilante cyclists perhaps a bit more respect would be given. Maybe people would think twice about bullying their way through at pinch points or offering up punishment passes if they thought they were running the risk of being surrounded by an angry mob yards down the road. Might as well make the most of not being registered, hey?

Perhaps then the police would start genuinely asking questions about road safety. When motorists start not making it home to their families due to acts of aggression from cyclists maybe people will start considering why it’s happening and reconsider what is acceptable behaviour when driving.

Of course this isn’t going to happen, nor would I want to live in a place where this happened. We all know the Ghandi quote about an eye for an eye making the whole world blind and lord knows we have enough people on the roads not using their eyes as it is, but sitting back and politely asking to not be killed, maimed, injured or treated like some sort of sub species is getting us nowhere. Maybe it’s time for something different?

And of course if we did such a thing even some people on here would scream blue murder about vandalism and disgraceful criminality. Quite possibly the same people who are prepared to allow ‘momentary lapses of attention’ as an excuse for murder. Maybe smashing a few peoples’ precious metal boxes might indeed get their attention. Because sod all else does.

[Author]

Replies