Sussex Police have said they are investigating a February 12 collision on the A23 in Crawley having reviewed dash cam footage which showed a motorist hitting a cyclist while attempting to squeeze past him.
The video was captured by Richard Moule who had been in the car behind when the incident took place.
Moule had said that he thought the matter was being dealt with through insurance only. However, investigating officer PC Steven Lambeth subsequently said: “We have been able to view the footage filmed from the car’s dash cam and have spoken to the cyclist, the witness who filmed the incident and the driver about what happened. At this stage we are still investigating.”
In a statement, Sussex Police added: “A police unit responding to an unrelated emergency call came across this collision between a car and a cyclist on Crawley Avenue and stopped to help. No-one had called the police.”
Duncan Dollimore, Cycling UK’s Senior Road Safety and Legal Campaigns officer said: “Cycling UK is pleased to hear, despite earlier reports to the contrary, that Sussex police are taking this incident seriously and are currently conducting an investigation.”
35 thoughts on “Sussex Police say they are now investigating video of driver who hit cyclist while attempting close pass”
#Fakeinvestigation
#Fakeinvestigation
Investigate? What is there
Investigate? What is there to investigate? Driver knocks off cyclist with witnesses and video; case proven surely?
“I don’t recall who was
“I don’t recall who was driving”
“Sorry to bother you, have a sweet and enjoy the rest of your day”.
Good bloody job too!
Good bloody job too!
Shouldn’t take too long to
Shouldn’t take too long to pass to CPS. Dashcam footage should make enlightening veiwing in court.
atgni wrote:
Oh the niavety you actually think the CPS will decide to prosecute and take it to court.
Bless!
atgni wrote:
Whereupon 12
cyclist hatersupstanding members of the public will promptly decide that the driver couldn’t possibly have done anything wrong and in fact the cyclist must have been carrying a large number of magnets on his right hand side, forcing the poor innocent hardworking taxpaying motorist to veer into him through no fault of her own.Cynical? Me?
The cyclist clearly lost
The cyclist clearly lost balance and hit the car probably causing 20p worth of damage to the vehicle. The car was at least 2 inches away from the cyclist more than enough clearance! WTF was the driver thinking? This ‘close pass’ needs rolling out all across the country.
Not going to court ever as
Not going to court ever as the video published above has prejudiced the right to a fair trial. Don’t publish to the web if you want a prosecution.
Hamster wrote:
http://road.cc/content/news/216708-jeremy-vine-road-rage-driver-likely-face-jail-after-being-found-guilty
Hamster wrote:
So in your considered opinion, a sure-fire way to get away with a crime is to video yourself doing it and then put it on the web?
Hamster wrote:
I read this a lot. Can you explain how the fair trial is hampered by the existence of a video on the internet?
I’m pleased that Sussex
I’m pleased that Sussex Police are investigating this further and I do tend to side with the unfortunate cyclist just… But cyclist’s really do need to learn how to take the primary position to avoid this kind of thing happening. Take the lane, protect yourself and the driver behind you. Be proud that you are a road user just like any other but hogging the kerb or side of the lane is a recipe for distater.
Oscarzero wrote:
Protect yourself and the driver from what? The driver being incompetent/stupid/spatially unaware enough to think that a few inches of space is safe overtake room? Protect the driver from their own stupidity? Do you really think that’s the right way round to be looking at this?
I get your point and by the looks of that road I’d have been avoiding it or in primary too, but taking primary still leaves you completely at the mercy of shit driving, and it’s that that needs to be tackled the most.
davel wrote:
Watching the video, I thought the cyclist was going to turn left. I can imagine an inattentive driver would be trying to position ready for the road narrowing and already mentally ticked off the cyclist as having turned right with the other one.
Darkhairedlord wrote:
Why?
Darkhairedlord wrote:
— DarkhairedlordExactly. The driver was under the impression the cyclist had peeled off to the left, and was not aware there were two cyclists, one going straight ahead—in other words, not paying attention.
harman_mogul wrote:
Therefore prosecute for driving without due care and attention. Job done.
harman_mogul wrote:
Saw this the other morning on the way to work. Car overtakes me, starts to pull back in, doesn’t notice guy about 10m in front of me and nearly has a sorry mate. Just not paying attention and looking literally about 15 ft in front of their vehicles.
Oscarzero wrote:
i certainly side with the cyclist that has been hit, but yes, i’d have taken primary (in fact i probably ride primary all the time). However, here’s the thing, what evidence is there that riding in primary leads to less close passes, collisions, etc? Does *anyone* have any data on such (note, i have one piece of data on this topic).
If anything the car needed to
If anything the car needed to be moving further over to the right not left to filter for the roadworks ahead, obviously oblivious to anything going on around them. If they had been maintaning a proper position behind the cyclists rather than creeping along side them, they would have seen that the cyclist wearing bright yellow jersey was continuing straight on.
There is no excuse for this, Clearly impatience mixed with incompetence and complete disregard for the cyclists safety.
If ever the close pass initiative was in question this is surely the evidence that is needed to keep it going.
I find when I’m driving and I
I find when I’m driving and I think I’m really close to something, if I stop and get out, I’m actually a couple of feet away. To be close enough to clip someones bars, from my view in the drivers seat it would feel like I’m driving over the person.
Glad the rider, and bike, fell away from the car and a limb didnt go back under the wheels (as has happened to me).
1) Driver has poor skills to cause the crash. Even if they’d not collided, it would still have been a pass with inches to spare. Some points and a re-test would seem sensible to me (in all casses like this … you demonstrate you can’t cope driving on the roads, you re-test).
2) The driver actually stopped, which is great to see. How many articles are there each week about riders being knocked off their bikes and drivers just driving away without even seeing if the rider is injured or not.
Hope the rider is made right with bike damage and any compensation needed to cover costs/hassle of medical/time off work etc.
Interesting the driver did
Interesting the driver did stop but just couldn’t make that little extra effort to get out of his tin box and apologise/ ask if he could help/ apologise/ you can imagine the conversation in the car.”Oh my god i have hit a cyclist, oh! he’s alright he’s got to his feet and somebody else has helped him. Well there’s no point in us getting out as well, otherwise we’ll be late getting to the /supermarket/library/lunch/coffee”………… anything better than facing the reality of your actions
230548 wrote:
Apparently, she did eventually get out of her car after about 5 minutes. This, the fact that she took so long to brake and then put it in reverse is concerning, at best.
According to the Daily
According to the Daily HateMail readers…
“The cyclist wobbled into the car”
“The cyclist should have noticed the car was too close”
“It’s those stupid skinny tyres that made him fall”
“They’re all crazy – look at that woman who tore the wing mirror of a van yesterday”
Clearly it was the fault of
Clearly it was the fault of the road, or the traffic lights, or someone else.
here’s a radical little
here’s a radical little fantasy I had…
the woman pays for the damages, and is a bit shaken up at her actions that she shows increased awareness in the future
the cyclist gets some new kit and the bruise on his elbow heals up in a week or two, he learns to be a bit more wary of idiot drivers on busy traffic packed dual carriageways
they deal with it like two adults, having learnt from the incident and then go merrily on their way
beezus fufoon wrote:
Enough of your nonsense – my pitchfork’s not going away until it’s done a-stabbin’.
beezus fufoon wrote:
Fantasies are fine as long as you don’t try to live in them. It’s because people _don’t_ generally behave like that that we invented the state and laws and stuff. The countries where the state has gone bye-bye don’t seem to be living that dream, after all.
beezus fufoon wrote:
ha ha. ‘learns to be more wary of idiot drivers’. That’s like saying if you, as the Minchinhampton rugby XV, study the All Blacks it will mean you wont be splattered by them in a match. Doesnt matter how wary you are – if they drive into you, you are still screwed.
edster99 wrote:
…and that’s why you lost your job as head sports psychologist of the Minchinhampton rugby team?
edster99 wrote:
Think Painswick RFC would stand a chance.
waynem1983 wrote:
Yeah, they are hard as nails. Although I have heard Chalford are even tougher.
Looks intentional to me,
Looks intentional to me, driver veers left in a typical ‘punishment’ style manner. This is the exact opposite of what the driver should have been doing as they approached the lane closure.
Griffsters wrote:
I’d go for the veer due to them looking right for too long as they worry about not being let in to the single lane and allowing the car to drift off to the left.
Careless driving in my eyes.