The Chief Constable of Leicestershire Police has agreed that an incident caught on camera by a cyclist in which he was clipped by a vehicle’s wing mirror was a close pass – but said the force was unable to act on the footage because it was not submitted in accordance with Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) guidelines which he said require the original video, not one posted to YouTube.
The video was filmed on the morning of 28 August last year by road.cc reader Wayne as he commuted into the centre of Leicester along the A47.
“As I was riding in the bus lane a silver Transit private hire minibus close passed me,” he told us. “I caught up with the driver at the next set of traffic lights, during a slightly heated conversation I was told I belonged in the gutter by the driver.
“As we pulled away from the lights, he drove his vehicle at me, clipping my shoulder with his wing mirror.
“I subsequently reported the incident to Leicestershire Police via their online system, attaching the link to the YouTube video.
“The incident was acknowledged, and I was later asked to provide the original footage, unfortunately as this was a couple of months later, I had not saved a copy.
“I received a letter on 8 February from the police informing that the vehicle owner had been contact regarding this incident however they could not proceed as they were not in possession of the original footage.
Following a tweet I sent on the 8th a friend forwarded this to the Twitter account of the Leicestershire police Chief Constable Simon Cole who replied he would look into the case.
“Today he replied, stating that it was a close pass however without the original footage they could not proceed with the case.
“As the YouTube video shows, this incident is a very close pass with some intent to injure me at the end, so it’s disappointing that despite clear evidence of dangerous driving the police will not act on it.”
Wayne added that he regularly sees the same driver while riding to work, and that the motorist has since confronted him.
He said: “I see this vehicle and its driver frequently on my commute, and following the initial report to the police I also contacted the licensing department at the local council, which he was aware of and confronted me about a week later wanting me to pull over and ‘talk about it’, when I declined he told me I’d ‘bottled it’.
“I still this driver on my commutes, based on this outcome he may well now feel he did nothing wrong and is free to repeat this behaviour.”
As we point out in this article about what to do if you capture a close pass or other piece of poor driving on camera, it is worth familiarising yourself with the policy on video submissions of the police force(s) responsible for the roads you ride on.
> Near Miss of the Day turns 100 - Why do we do the feature and what have we learnt from it?
Over the years road.cc has reported on literally hundreds of close passes and near misses involving badly driven vehicles from every corner of the country – so many, in fact, that we’ve decided to turn the phenomenon into a regular feature on the site. One day hopefully we will run out of close passes and near misses to report on, but until that happy day arrives, Near Miss of the Day will keep rolling on.
If you’ve caught on camera a close encounter of the uncomfortable kind with another road user that you’d like to share with the wider cycling community please send it to us at info [at] road.cc or send us a message via the road.cc Facebook page.
If the video is on YouTube, please send us a link, if not we can add any footage you supply to our YouTube channel as an unlisted video (so it won't show up on searches).
Please also let us know whether you contacted the police and if so what their reaction was, as well as the reaction of the vehicle operator if it was a bus, lorry or van with company markings etc.
> What to do if you capture a near miss or close pass (or worse) on camera while cycling
Add new comment
19 comments
*Crocodile Dundee voice* That's not a dangerous van driver. *This* is a dangerous van driver:
https://twitter.com/Ma3Route/status/1227466835462938628
This advice regarding youtube contradicts the official information I got from Thames Valley police with regard to video evidence. They have 3 ways you can send them video evidence as a link to the vid in a Drop Box or Google Drive account or on DVD or USB drive or to quote from the offical email I received 'Upload the video to Youtube, and send over a link to view this'. So it's sounds like Leicestershire Police policy rather than CPS guidelines.
The CPS guidance he cites doesn't actually require the original video, just an authentic copy. If they have a policy of not acting on You Tube videos then fair enough, but that needs to be made clear on the portal when someone is making the report, before they delete the original footage. It looks like it's the same portal my force uses, which (from recollection) asks you whether you want to upload now via their portal, or send it to them afterwards. My force has acted on videos uploaded to You Tube in the past, so the inconsistency is also frustrating. I also fail to see why a video uploaded to You Tube is any different from a file uploaded directly to their portal in terms of authenticity. Maybe they get more metadata to interrogate so they can verify its authenticity if later challenged?
... and once again a Chief Constable is on hand to show everyone that the police are completely and utterly useless. As others have pointed out, a recording of other crimes in YouTube would be more than sufficient for the Police to investigate - not least in this case as the delay by the police in actually responding to the original complaint seems to be a key factor.
Is it really the case now that the average Chief Constable lacks the nous to even command his officers to go and "have a word" in a case like this?
If it was me I probably would have just downloaded the video off YouTube again and submitted it. Unless they're going to get a digital forensics investigator in how are the police ever going to know?
The chances of someone manipulating the video is the same regardless of whether its the 'original' or copied down from YT anyway so can't see why the police should care.
Whilst I appreciate that original footage is preferable for video evidence I can see no reason why any evidence cannot be presented and then it's validity challenged (eg if there is a question as to whether or not the video has been tampered with, in which case an expert witness can be called in). Would the police/CPS reject video evidence of a murder because it wasn't the original footage? It seems totally ludicrous that clear evidence of a crime cannot be presented in order to secure a procecution - it goes against the whole ethos of a justice system.
The police could contact the driver, their hands are not tied even if they can't prosecute.
At least the knob knows that if he tries anything again it will be captured on video. If he's recorded behaving similarly again I have to wonder whether someone might feel the need to take the law into their own hands. I'm sure the police would take a dim view of that happening but drivers like this bar steward and the 'unnamed' incompetent jerk driving the Tesco van BV17 KBJ (article here) can sail on without caring a jot for anyone else.
Wasn't the driver also breaking the law by driving in the bus lane, or is it one of those non-24 hour ones?
Whatever, first grade knob head.
Private Hire Vehicle, essentially a taxi.
Another quality professional driver.
Doesn't matter as they don't count as Taxis in those circumstances.
yep, needs to be a "hackney carriage" with a taxi sign on the roof
Thing is, it's all about local rules. I have seen private hire vehicles in Reading's bus lanes, and those things have rigorous camera enforcement. Just looked it up, and in Reading (I live in Caversham) only those Hackney carriages and Private Hire Vehicles registered in Reading can use the Kings Road bus lane. Pretty specific!
Though this is in Leicestshire, and the YouTuber is named CityCyclist so maybe Leicester which do not count l Private Hire as Taxis and they are NOT allowed in the bus lane.
I'd have been sorely tempted to lean in and swipe his keys.
Remember kids, if you swipe some keys, throw them somewhere awkward so that you can't get accused of stealing them. In my head, the court defense would be that you were threatened by the driver and in fear of your own health/life, you attempted to disarm the driver by throwing their keys down the drain.
Did it once, took them to the local nick, "I found these"...
That CPS guidance is *******s.
I can say that with some certainty, given that I have not only studied the laws of evidence, but also applied them in countless trials in the Crown Court.
All I see is the CPS arbitrarily imposing rules that make it easy for them (and the Police) to decide not to prosecute.
From the above, I infer that you're a lawyer (solicitor/barrister)?
Is there anything that we can do to 'force' the police to prosecute?
I've thought about it. But with my rotten luck, the driver would have a spare set in his pocket, and you can be almost 100% sure that when he got them out and got the engine running again, he would ram you off your bike.
And he would get away with it.
D-lock, it's the only way to be sure