Video: On-board footage as Jérémy Roy miraculously escapes crash at Tour Down Under finish

That looks more like a lot of sliding damage which would not have been nice without a helmet. Anyhow, single vehicle collisions like this are what helmets are best used for - not so much the typical driver hitting you in traffic type of collisions.

Teenagers can vote in all UK elections, although in national and English ones only those teenagers aged 18 and 19. "16 and 17-year-olds can vote in these elections" would better suit the point being made.

IMO you would need to be a real Giant fanboy to consider these, when you can get a set of FarSports EvoS5s for pretty much 1/3rd of the price of these. They are lighter, more progressive shape, considerably easier to repair should you need to, and are hooked. And built by a well regarded company that owns their own factory.

Exactly. I'm wondering what stats they used to justify the "under-used" argument. And could they apply the same system to measure those stats on motor vehicle use? Unless the roads are fully utilised at all times (24/7), surely there is a case that they too can be scaled back...

Sadly we see this across the country, badly thought out cycle ways being built without thought to their actual need. Councils hide behind the induced demand mantra rather than undertaking detailed and sensible consultation before building anything. Built it and they will come really is a falsehood and we deserve a better thought through network.

What was that about induced demand?

The defence may well have argued that, and the magistrate may have accepted it, but that's not what the law says. It says that you have only driven without reasonable consideration for others if someone is inconvenienced. But the offence is committed if you drive without due care and attention, OR without reasonable consideration for other person. You have done the first if the driving falls below what would be expected of a careful and competent driver, regardless of whether anyone was inconvenienced. And CPS guidance specifically cites driving too close to another vehicle as an example.

Some years ago (before there was a cycle lane) I used to commute on Sidmouth St. But only because I worked on the London Road campus, from anywhere else there are better alternatives. As a cycle route it runs from between two busy roads, neither of which are exactly cycle friendly. So it's hardly surprising that no cyclists use it.

The officer's comments unfortunately reflect the reality of UK law. While the Highway Code guidance indeed refers to 1.5m, that is not anywhere in the law. And the criteria in law for proving a charge of careless driving does in fact rest on whether the rider is being "inconvenienced", as the discovered several years ago when the Met prosecuted a taxi driver who nearly hit me when cutting into my lane from the left near Marylebone. The prosecution lawyer was a barely competent newbie who fumbled over his words. The court computer was barely capable of playing the video footage, which kept freezing and crashing. The cabbie had an highly assertive defence lawyer who immediately seized on this point, and argued to the magistraite that I clearly hadn't been "inconvenienced" because I had not stopped or swerved, and had carried on my journey. Never mind that didn't have time to do either of those things, or that I was centimetres from being hit - the magistraite acquitted him on those grounds. That is unfortunately the outrageous reality of actually prosecuting a close pass incident. I know it's popular to blame the police and the CPS for not prosecuting enough close passes ... but the fact is the law is inadequate, and if the driver has a good lawyer then they can likely get off most close pass prosecutions.

Let's not forget the protruding "side" mirror...