Home
Campaigners applaud force’s willingness to admit mistakes

Derbyshire police has reversed its decision not to investigate what Cycling UK described as “one of the worse close pass videos” it has seen. The cyclist involved, Luke Smith, says the driver is now being prosecuted and that the force has pledged to review its policy regarding the submission of video evidence.

Smith was riding through the Bowshaw Roundabout at Dronfield, just south of Sheffield, last week, when a driver cut in front of him at speed, missing him by centimetres. However, when he passed the footage to Derbyshire Constabulary, they declined to take action and didn’t even watch the footage.

72-year-old time trialist killed in Derbyshire road traffic collision during club 10

Cycling UK’s Duncan Dollimore commented: “The video of the vehicle overtaking Luke shows a close pass at speed, cutting across his path and putting him in obvious danger.

“If Derbyshire Police told Luke they wouldn’t be able to do anything because he hadn’t been hit there’s an obvious training need which needs to be addressed, because they’re wrong.

“If they initially refused to view the video there’s a police service issue to consider.

“If, having finally viewed the video, a sergeant concluded that the driver’s conduct did not even merit a discussion, let alone prosecution, that sergeant has no business dealing with any road traffic complaints or investigations.”

Chris Boardman was another to question the force’s approach and was subsequently told that an investigation had been launched.

Smith has since confirmed that the driver will be charged, tweeting: “I've been to the police station tonight. They're going to prosecute and are issuing an NIP. No other witnesses required.”

He added:

Cycling UK says it still intends to write to Derbyshire police on the issue of close passing and renewing its previously rejected offer of a close pass mat, but Dollimore welcomed the news.

"Having criticised Derbyshire Police for their initial response, Cycling UK are delighted to hear that they have now recognised their mistake, investigated and prosecuted the driver.

"As cyclists we know how dangerous and intimidating close passes like Luke experienced can be. Some police forces seem to understand this, others are slowly getting the message, but some have far to go.

"We've still got free close pass mats available for any police force which accepts close passes are a problem and wants to something to address it."

Boardman also applauded the force’s willingness to admit mistakes.

Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.

11 comments

Avatar
Ramuz [292 posts] 2 months ago
0 likes

A close pass mat won't help here.

Avatar
ktache [565 posts] 2 months ago
9 likes
Ramuz wrote:

A close pass mat won't help here.

It might for police training and perhaps an attitude adjustment.

Avatar
hawkinspeter [784 posts] 2 months ago
6 likes

With the reduced numbers of police, can we at least make sure that they actually know what their job is? Why do we have to wait for social media to call them out on their bullshit?

I'd recommend handing surprise tests to various police and firing the ones who score too low.

Imagine if you phoned the fire brigade when you smelled smoke and the answered with "sorry, we can only respond when you see a fire".

Avatar
BehindTheBikesheds [506 posts] 2 months ago
1 like

so if police officer is the only 'witness' to a crime they won't investigate ...off you fuck sonshine.

there was a witness, the fucking victims you cretins!

Avatar
brooksby [2401 posts] 2 months ago
0 likes
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

so if police officer is the only 'witness' to a crime they won't investigate ...off you fuck sonshine.

there was a witness, the fucking victims you cretins!

Come now, think about it: the victim is    *clearly*not an impartial witness...  4

Avatar
Yorkshire wallet [1252 posts] 2 months ago
2 likes

The camera is surely an impartial witness though? 

 

Avatar
Jackson [373 posts] 2 months ago
10 likes

Seems inefficient having to raise every driving complaint in a nation of 65 million people via Chris Boardman.

Avatar
brooksby [2401 posts] 2 months ago
0 likes
Yorkshire wallet wrote:

The camera is surely an impartial witness though? 

 

You'd think so, but clearly the police disagree.

Avatar
Grahamd [545 posts] 2 months ago
3 likes
brooksby wrote:
Yorkshire wallet wrote:

The camera is surely an impartial witness though? 

 

You'd think so, but clearly the police disagree.

Better review all the speed camera prosecutions then.

Avatar
ktache [565 posts] 2 months ago
4 likes

And all that cctv evidence.

Avatar
BehindTheBikesheds [506 posts] 2 months ago
0 likes
brooksby wrote:
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

so if police officer is the only 'witness' to a crime they won't investigate ...off you fuck sonshine.

there was a witness, the fucking victims you cretins!

Come now, think about it: the victim is    *clearly*not an impartial witness...  4

There's no mention of impartiality, just a 'witness'.

I was stopped last year by plod when driving (afew hundred metres from home after a long journey), he and his mate came out with a load of BS, I told them I didn't need to produce ID as I'd done nothing wrong/broken no laws, I don't carry my license in any case. I also stated they didn't need to 'check' who I was because i'd broken no laws. I also replied to his question of if the vehicle was mine that did he have any reason to beleive it wasn't, I said if you check it's insured/MOT'd/VED paid.

He then (unlawfully) threatened to arrest me, after accusing me of drinking (because he was getting desperate at that point) which is a common assault and threat of kidnap. Would his word and that of his buddy be in any way impartial as witnesses IF things had gone to court, the fact that his recording device in his car would have proven both of them to be lying wankers would have being by the by but he would have said anything (lie) in court to protect himself against my counter accusations against him and his word would have being accepted in court, why?

They basically had to back down though, no breathalyser, no producer because I called him out as a liar (over the arrest for no license BS) and told him he needed to learn to drive properly with due care to other road users as he hadn't used his indicator nor driven around the mini roundabout safely/correctly (which I had because I always do) so was in less control of his vehicle than he alleged I was with mine and clearly had hearing problems and no sense of smell/ability to judge speed.

The baby, sorry advanced professional police driver (this was a traffic vehicle) then went on to drive in front of me at 10mph as a final show of his power.

And these people are considered credible witnesses, they are no more independant/impartial than joe public who have had offences committed against them!