- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Moped rider attempts to kick Chi Yong LaPolice take no action against moped rider caught on camera kicking out at cyclist's bike
A London cyclist who gave police video footage that showed a moped rider kicking out at his bike as he passed him has been told that no action will be taken against the man in question because there were no independent witnesses to what happened.
The incident happened on the New Kent Road on the evening of 16 January as Chi Yong La rode home to Greenwich from his job in the West End with publisher Conde Nast.
Riding away from the kerb to avoid potholes, drain grilles and manhole covers, he exchanged words with a man on a moped who was undertaking him to his left.
As the man sped away, he aimed a kick at Chi's front wheel, leaving the cyclist struggling to maintain balance on the busy road.
"I was really shaken up," he told road.cc following the incident. "I was really holding on for dear life, making sure I didn't topple over."
Chi lodged a complaint with the police, and sent them a video of the incident - like many cyclists, he uses a helmet camera so that in the event of an incident involving a motor vehicle or pedestrian, he has something more than just his own word to fall back on.
The full video he sent to police can be seen here (contains some swearing).
The letter he received from the Traffic Criminal Justice section of the Metropolitan Policer Service's Operational Command Unit for the South East Region, reads:
I am writing concerning your complaint to police regarding the manner in which a motor vehicle bearing the registration mark GJ05FGF was ridden along New Kent Road @ 16:44 hours on the 16/01/2014.
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.
In view of the lack of independent witnesses to support your claim, we are unable to initiate proceedings on this occasion. However, the registered owner/keeper of the vehicle has been notified of your allegation and a record of the incident will be kept within this office.
Chi told us that the police response was "disappointing to say the least but I can't say I expect anything more."
One question the incident, and the police's reaction to it, does raise is just how seriously they take helmet camera footage, and why that should be seen as less acceptable than independent eyewitness testimony, which can be inaccurate depending on the person's recollection.
Another is that police regularly appeal to the public for help in catching suspects whose alleged crimes have been caught on CCTV, with no witnesses around, and where the footage is of much lower quality than that typically captured by helmet cameras.
In January 2012 we reported how motorist Scott Lomas was convicted of a public order offence after he threatened cyclist Martin Porter who was riding to work.
The Metropolitan Police only referred the matter to the Crown Prosecution Service after Porter had twice complained about their initial decision not to take action. despite his having provided them with helmet camera footage.
The fact that Porter is a Queen's Counsel, making him more suited than most to negotiating the criminal justice system, is likely to have been a factor in the case reaching its eventual conclusion.
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.
Latest Comments
- bensynnock 23 min 20 sec ago
Here in Southampton we just get long lines of cars queuing for cruise ships. ...
- hawkinspeter 47 min 17 sec ago
Whilst EV cars are an improvement over ICE cars, I think they're a distraction from the possibilities of e-bikes, e-scooters and e-cargo-bikes etc....
- David9694 2 hours 54 min ago
I like how drivers make the case for making monitoring covert, not overt.
- andystow 3 hours 6 min ago
She seemed a bit upset about a minor misjudgement that could have killed someone and is going to cause months of stress and inconvenience.
- Backladder 3 hours 12 min ago
No we don't agree, personally I would take primary, even if only for a short period although I can understand why some riders might not want to...
- brooksby 3 hours 33 min ago
And which looks very like the bag produced by indy bag manufacturer Wizard Works…...
- HoarseMann 3 hours 44 min ago
If it was a 'no vehicles' sign (all white circle centre), it would mean cyclists could ride in the hours that HGVs and disabled drivers are allowed...
- stonojnr 5 hours 14 min ago
The bit at the start and end looks like a cycle lane, but the bit they drive on looks just like a patched filter lane for traffic lights.
- JOHN5880 5 hours 15 min ago
Hey, you 4 execs helped run a company into the ground and have no jobs anymore... Come work for us because you have great experience in the...
- Oakhambike 6 hours 1 sec ago
£11.5k for a bike weighing over 8kg that's 2 fingers to customers let alone UCI
Add new comment
73 comments
Does that mean I can go kick a police officer and when that's filmed on shoulder cam expect to avoid prosecution?
Double standards as usual I expect.
Of course the moped rider has a 'choice', and that choice is to follow the rules of the road, or not - and he chose not. He should wait behind until a clear and safe place to overtake. Same as any other road user. That is no excuse for undertaking.
It's not just cyclists that the police can't get their act together for
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/the-shocking-moment-a-man...
Has this been downloaded to youtube? A surprising amount have been and in some cases they have helped promote the case and final action taken (police/councils/government bodies) don't like too much bad publicity.
I have posted above on what I think should have happened (DD Charge ) and more realistically what could have been done by the Met without even breaking sweat. (Careless Driving FPN 3 points and £100) So I am all for going after the guy.
The difference though was that he kicked out toward the cyclist. Now up to the point that he actually connects it's not an RTC and it's not an assault. He may claim that he was making the gesture not trying to kick the wheel. They are different charges.
In the case of a cop with a camera the difference would be this. Kick towards a cop and it would be a public order offence, threatening behaviour. Actually kick the cop and it's assault.
Sentencing wise
Fear or threat of low level immediate unlawful violence
such as push, shove or spit = Low to medium level community order +Band B fine
so it's a threat therefore minimum of that lot.
Assaulting a police officer is a summary offence. The starting point is a custodial sentence 6 - 26 weeks.
CTC's Road Justice campaign, which is calling for a much more robust response from the criminal justice system to crimes like this (and worse) would like to get in touch with the cyclist involved. If you're the cyclist or if you know them, please get in touch via the website contact form - http://www.roadjustice.org.uk/contact
The campaign has written to the Met police seeking a proper explanation of why no action was taken against the moped rider.
Hang on a mo my friend. I just read that. The police did arrest and the CPS did prosecute someone but they were acquitted. That's not the police's fault. They did their bit.
The CTC (Cycle Touring Club of GB) have a legal section to fight for cyclists cases in relation to other road users and bodies. It might be worth passing this onto them.
----------------
I have now seen the posts just above which state this in a bit more detail - sorry.
Did they really? In addition to the event being filmed by another bus, all buses have cameras on board + witnesses
And they still couldn't present enough evidence to secure a conviction?
Hmmm.
So they had the video from the following bus. Tick
and they had the video from inside the bus that the chap was thrown out of. Tick
They presumably had the witness statement from the chap thrown out of the bus. Tick
And statements from any other witnesses. Tick
They passed these to the CPS. The CPS looked at them and thought they could get a conviction. The CPS brought the case to court. The court looked at the evidence. The defence put their side of it (whatever that was) the verdict was acquittal.
Possibilities:
The victim couldn't or wouldn't identify the perpetrator
The video in the bus didn't show anything.
The perpetrator was wearing a hoody or scarf and couldn't be seen on camera.
The person they arrested convinced the court that whoever it was on the bus it wasn't him.
One of the witnesses said something that undermined their credibility
or ......
So tell me again which bit the police got wrong?
My interpretation of mrmo's post is they were merely pointing out with jaded realism how a typical jury (most likely packed with bad drivers!) would likely interpret this. I think your reply might be missing their point.
I recall that in high-profile US trials we hear a lot about jury-vetting, where admitted racists might be excluded from trials with racial elements, etc. Personally I'd like to see trials involving dangerous/aggressive behaviour from motorists have juries that we can be sure aren't full of Top Gear watching petrolheads! If a cyclist is the victim, then at least some of the jury should be cyclists or at the very least non-drivers!
It isnt the Police's job to present the evidence to the court, thats the job of the cps barrister / solicitor. Get your facts right before making accusations.
When they say lack of independant witnesses... Did they make any attempt to contact the bloke who rode up and discussed it having seen the whole thing?
Pages