“Complete incompetence”: Reaction to police statement defending caution handed to road rage assault driver; Josh Quigley smashes day one of cycling distance record attempt; Tour de France film; Richmond Park crash driver fined + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
"Complete incompetence": Reaction to police statement defending caution handed to road rage assault driver
Good to know for the next time anyone wants to assault someone. Just admit it and only give them a black eye and it’s completely fine 👍 https://t.co/mJVZatdfB9
— Steve 🇵🇸 (@Lollercake) September 13, 2021
Some of you might have seen that Wiltshire Police got back to us last night with a statement on the video of a driver punching a Swindon Wheelers member and knocking another to the ground with their car. The driver was handed a caution…which the police force said was in line with national policy.
The reaction has continued to roll in, with many even more bewildered by the case having heard Wiltshire Police’s official line. Chris on Twitter questioned the “no injury” claim: “A black eye isn’t ‘no injury’, even ignoring all the other offences committed (as @wiltshirepolice appear to be).”
Dee McCrossan compared placed the driver’s actions in a different context and questioned if the outcome would have been the same…”Crazy. If someone throws hands like this outside pubs/clubs they get charged with assault…Not to mention the assault with a vehicle on his partner…beyond words.”
The classic…. motorist objects to being held up by cyclists, so aggressively passes…. But then slows down to dick about and prolong their delay. Can’t be in that much of a rush then.
— Duncan Shea-Simonds (@DSS123) September 13, 2021
A black eye = no injury? Since when?
— Ian (@iloveridge) September 13, 2021
That’s just complete incompetence from @wiltshirepolice
— Andrew Buss (@ambuss) September 13, 2021
That is exactly the outcome I would expect had that been a police officer repeatedly assaulted and another officer run over. Exactly this outcome.
— Makecyclingsafeagain (@Makecyclingsafe) September 13, 2021
The pro cycling story of the weekend...
Just heard myself and @nedboulting on @BBCRadio1Offici commentating on that small clip of Xander attacking on the pavement at the @TourofBritain … my son got a shock in the car.. “Daddy is that you on the radio” 🤣🤣
— Adam Blythe (@AdamBlythe89) September 14, 2021
You can keep your qualifier US Open win without dropping a set. Has Emma Radacanu ever attacked the breakaway at the Tour of Britain? Didn’t think so. Only joking of course…what odds on Xander Graham to win the Tour by 18? Finish your exams and get out to France, lad…
Josh Quigley smashes day one of cycling distance record attempt
DAY 1 STATS: 352 MILES / 352 MILES TOTAL / 16% OF RECORD
7 DAY CYCLING DISTANCE WORLD RECORD ATTEMPT 🚴🏻♂️🥇
GUINNESS WORLD RECORDS: “GREATEST DISTANCE CYCLED IN ONE WEEK – UNPACED” 🏆🌍
Sponsor: @Thomas_Franks_
What a start 😎! Bike, rider and weather in perfect harmony. pic.twitter.com/G7OuJNJby3
— Josh Quigley (@JoshQuigley2026) September 14, 2021
Josh Quigley’s latest record attempt is up and running…the ultra-endurance cyclist is having a second crack at the seven-day cycling distance world record. He unfortunately had to pull out of the first attempt back in April after succumbing to some nasty knee pain.
Yesterday was day one of the effort, which he’ll be riding entirely on the same circuit in Aberdeenshire. Josh racked up 352 miles on the opening day. To 99.9 per cent of us that would be an all-time big day out. Now try six more days back-to-back…
We’ll all be hoping Josh can finally get some good luck out on the road. His 2019 round-the-world attempt ended when he was seriously injured by a driver in Texas. On the same trip his bike was stolen…and he was fined for riding through Bedford town centre. Someone needs to stop smashing mirrors…
Another epic cycling endurance achievement...'The Amazing Chase'
Following in Lachlan Morton’s tyre tracks, Jack Thompson successfully beat the Tour de France to Paris back in July having given those lazy pros a week’s head start. In a lovely piece of timing, Thompson is also the current holder of the seven-day distance record Josh Quigley’s out to beat this week…
Wahoo Fitness were the official supporters of the Tour challenge and filmed this cracking short documentary following his progress.
Driver involved in shocking Richmond Park crash which left cyclist in hospital handed a fine and six penalty points
On 10/09/21 at Lavender Hill Magistrates Court, the driver of this Nissan pleaded guilty to driving without due care & attention. He was order to pay costs of £100, fined £150, to pay victim surcharge of £34 and given 6 penalty points on his driving license. pic.twitter.com/mJVAAdnDYt
— Royal Parks Police (@MPSRoyal_Parks) September 14, 2021
Back in February we shared the story and subsequent calls to ban motor traffic from Richmond Park after a crash saw a cyclist taken to hospital with facial injuries. At the time questions were asked about how such severe damage could have happened in a 20mph zone?
Royal Parks Police confirmed the driver appeared at Lavender Hill Magistrates’ Court and pleaded guilty to driving without due care and attention. He was ordered to pay a £150 fine, costs of £100 and a victim surcharge of £34. He also received six penalty points on his licence.
Royal Parks Police said the entire incident was caught on the driver’s dash cam and the force’s Twitter account gave more details on the incident: “The driver failed to see a cyclist as he pulled out of the junction with Ham Cross, with the cyclist hitting the side of the car. After the collision, the driver has mistakenly hit his accelerator instead of the brake.
“This caused him to pull away at speed down into Ham Dip, where he then collided with solid metal barriers, narrowly missing the trees. The driver was believed to have been doing about 5mph at the time of the collision with the cyclist.”
Surrey traffic cops doing what they do best...schooling ignorant drivers on road safety
It’s the @PoliceChiefs Vulnerable Road Users awareness week.
102 cyclists died and 3,700 were seriously injured on UK roads in 2019
Motorists inability to overtaking safely is a common issue we deal with.
This video demonstrates how it’s safely and legally.
Look, Plan, Pass. pic.twitter.com/wojliHTaz0
— Roads Policing Unit (RPU) – Surrey Police – UK (@SurreyRoadCops) September 14, 2021
In amongst all the criticism for Wiltshire Police’s response there’s been some good educational policing going on. Surrey Roads Policing Unit, as usual, has lead the way on informing motorists online about safe pass practice.
Operation Dragoon, Northumbria Police’s road safety op has also been at it…
It’s also @PoliceChiefs Vulnerable Road Users awareness week. Raising awareness of at risk road users. Cyclists are today’s focus. In 2019 102 cyclists died on the UK roads, with 3,700 seriously injured.
Overtaking safely is a common complaint we receive. This is how it’s done. pic.twitter.com/ehsOYY3hjn— Operation Dragoon (@OpDragoon) September 13, 2021
This second video attracted plenty of praise…but also the usual anti-cycling sentiment. Thankfully, the Surrey Police admin was on hand to do what they do best…
You’re significantly more likely to suffer a head injury by being a driver in a motor vehicle. Do you wear a helmet when you drive?
The majority of Cycle lanes are not fit for purpose…forcing vulnerable cyclists into the drains, potholes and debris. No requirement to use them.
— Roads Policing Unit (RPU) – Surrey Police – UK (@SurreyRoadCops) September 14, 2021
British Cycling announces strong squad for UCI Road World Cycling Championships in Flanders
British Cycling has announced the squad of 30 elite, under-23 and junior riders who will travel to Flanders for next week’s UCI Road World Championships. Lizzie Deignan is joined by Anna Shackley, Alice Barnes, Anna Henderson, Pfeiffer Georgi and Joss Lowden for the women’s road race. Georgi and Lowden will also do the time trial.
Maddie Leech, Millie Couzens, Flora Perkins and Zoe Bäckstedt have been selected for the junior women’s road race. Dan Bigham, Alex Dowsett, John Archibald, Joss Lowden, Alice Barnes and Anna Henderson will all take to the start ramp for the strong-looking mixed team time trial squad.
On the men’s side of things Tom Pidcock, Ethan Hayter, Ben Swift and Mark Cavendish are just four of the cards GB can play. The hilly course will likely be too tough for Cav, but the Manxman can play a support role alongside Connor Swift, Jake Stewart, Fred Wright and Luke Rowe. What a team.
Hayter is following up his Tour of Britain second place by also taking on the time trial, along with Dan Bigham.
Performance director Stephen Park told the BBC: “The Road World Championships are a key feature for the Great Britain Cycling Team’s road squad and it will be great to see the likes of Mark [Cavendish] and Lizzie [Deignan] bring their form and experience into a team keen to do the jersey proud and bring back medals.
“It will be interesting to see how the elite men’s road race plays out, too – based on what we know about the course and with so many riders in top form, we’ve made the decision not to go with one team leader, giving us a number of options as the race plays out.”
James Shaw earns another crack at the WorldTour, according to Dutch media reports
James Shaw may well have finished in the top ten at the Tour of Britain without the stage three team time trial. Regardless, the 26-year-old has earned another shot at the WorldTour and will be riding for EF Education-Nippo next year, according to Wielerflits.
Shaw finished fifth on the brutal Pennines stage to Gateshead and has consistently impressed at Continental level since perhaps unfairly losing his World Tour spot with Lotto-Soudal at the end of 2018.
He was fifth at the Tour of Norway and Tour of Slovenia this year and finished in the top five of stages at both races.
Raudax?
Right…I’d wager 90 per cent of riders wouldn’t even notice it says Raudax not Rapha…I’m just surprised these weren’t in the Aldi Specialbuys we saw yesterday.
Cheer yourselves up on a grey Tuesday...Have I Got News For You uses Xander Graham to take a pop at Piers Morgan
After a schoolboy cyclist manages to outpace pro riders at the Tour of Britain, experts say he must have received coaching from Piers Morgan.
— Have I Got News For You (@haveigotnews) September 14, 2021
Levenshulme LTN filters to be made permanent
Manchester City Council has announced 14 LTN filters in Levenshulme are to be made permanent. You might remember back in January when vandals filmed themselves ramming the planters off the road. The community rallied to repair the damage and Chris Boardman said vandals wouldn’t intimidate the cause.
The 14 that remain survived the initial consultation, which saw 11 removed last year following feedback from locals. Phase 2 of the trial was successful and the council says it will look for additional locations to support the existing ones, as well as other traffic calming measures across Levenshulme and Burnage.
Good news.
Engagement was lengthy but arguably the right thing to do.
Bring on elsewhere please – we need to balance needs of all people & improve our environment.— Make a Beeline to Chorlton (@aroundM21) September 14, 2021
A reader comment that sums the situation up nicely...
Road rage has appalling traits and is never a good look. How many seconds did waiting to pass safely cost him? Hardly any but his reaction cost time! Glad the headcam proved a deterrent when he spotted it. The assault is a crime but so was his driving, putting other lives at risk
— Andy Cox (@AndyCoxDCS) September 12, 2021
Top marks to nniff for succinctly capturing the mood: “I think that the reason that so many of us are very dissatisfied with this is that I most of us have encountered comparable behaviour; perhaps not the direct physical contact, but certainly the verbal aggression and use of a vehicle to intimidate and threaten.”
We’ve just recorded the next episode of the road.cc podcast, so keep an eye (and ear) out for that if you want to hear us rambling about the video (spoiler alert: there’s also an interview with Andy Cox, whose comment above we featured yesterday)…
14 September 2021, 08:04
14 September 2021, 08:04
14 September 2021, 08:04
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £2.49. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
48 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
I'm sure Scribe will be chuffed to bits referencing a pair of 3 year old wheels, another problem with hunts is you just never know what the prices are with the stupid sales it puts me off
Ards and North Down Cycling Campaign earlier this week held an event with local police encouraging drivers to leave a safe passing distance of 1.5m when overtaking cyclists This will achieve nothing whatsoever, because the drivers and the discouraged potential cyclists all know that the police postscript to the pretend encouragement is: 'but if you choose not to, don't worry because we have no intention of even thinking about enforcing the 1.5m distance, just like all the other UK police forces, and it doesn't matter if it's only 10% of that. Try not to hit them unless you have to get them out of the way, but if you do, scarper and you'll probably get away with it. If you've been drinking, just say you had a few drinks after you got home to calm your nerves after hitting what you thought was a fridge or a sack of potatoes, if they show up at your door.
Sadly, I feel that the reaction to this will be the same as the many multiple shootings that the US endures, every year - shock, tears and platitudes, swiftly returning to the status quo (untill the next time)
@Velo-drone I did not submit reports of either of the two heinous close passes I experienced with my daughter while on holiday there in half term But you could show them to us! I sent one to upRide today: it's the silver Kuga above, and will likely be viewable in a couple of days, and the long holdup on here can be sidestepped by simply omitting the 'h' from the https at the beginning of the link. It's all very easy to do. Other hosting sites are available.
@matthewn5 On which - I've not been there (and I've heard from a couple of cyclists online who say that they *are* good...) but I suspect the following blog post (from 2012 - As Easy As Riding A Bike) nails it: "They built it, and they didn’t come – the lesson of Milton Keynes" Verdict: the place was designed (1) for very convenient driving (not surprising - aspirational driving was the thing at the time, they had a blank canvas etc). (2) While the designer genuinely tried to provide for cyclists that comes across as "we need to get the cyclists off the roads because we fixed it for the cars to move fast". As is common (across the decades) in the UK it's nominal safety from motor vehicles but at major cost to convenience. Not to mention lack of social safety. FWIW there's also videos online by Alexei Sayle of him cycling around giant car parks there...
@mitsky Doesn't matter ..... Insurance / No insurance, License / No license These types will drive anyway!
@VIPcyclist Agree regarding cycle lanes, but the article is referring to cycle _tracks_ in Milton Keynes, which if I remember rightly are segregated but also don't run next to roads, so they're often quiet, dimly lit and secluded.
First, the actual change from issuing a bunch of "warning letters" to basically taking no action on anything is more or less no change to be honest. There is no evidence that sending a warning letter does anything. Not all forces even keep a record of warning letters. I'm aware of no actual empirical study of outcomes from sending a warning letter. Its main purpose therefore can only be to say that something has been done, rather than to actually improve road safety outcomes, because nobody cares enough to check if it achieves any outcome. It's the equivalent of finding a bike thief, and popping in a note through the door saying "please don't do that", and considering it an effective response. The apparent discrepancy between the NPCC position given early in the article, and the judgment later on that the Derbyshire policy "appears in line with the guidance" muddies the water considerably. There is a gaping lack of clarity over what police forces can and can't (or will and won't) do under the NPCC guidance. The suggestion for cyclists to provide speed measurements is silly - most cyclists don't have that capability, or won't be using it on e.g commuting rides. It's not clear why the speed of the cyclist is particularly relevant in any case? The Highway Code guidance relating to passing cyclists refers only to the speed of the motor vehicle. Saying you'll only take action in "exceptional circumstances" but not giving any indication what those circumstances might be is tantamount to saying "don't bother reporting, because it's 99% likely to be a complete waste of your and our time and we're not going to tell you how you might assess whether your case might be in the 1%" So, unsurprisingly the Derbyshire Police policy does seem to have at least one clear impact. I did not submit reports of either of the two heinous close passes I experienced with my daughter while on holiday there in half term. Why would I? Why would anyone? And why would it be a surprise that some drivers in Derbyshire choose to drive as if they have a free rein to endanger cyclists lives without fear of any consequence - because in fact they do. The notion that "forensic analysis" is needed to determine if a close pass is actionable or not is nonsensical. I would say laughable, but it's not really a laughing matter. It is not necessary to determine if the car is 140cm vs 151cm away. It is generally perfectly obvious whether the car is less than a car's width away, or more than a car's width away. That's sufficient to make a reasonable judgement on whether the driving could be considered careless or not - bearing in mind that the vast majority of actioned cases would be easily visually identifiable as substantially below that distance.
@Pub bike 10,000 men find out a year they’ve got prostate cancer too late. We need to get those numbers down. There’s no screening unfortunately in the UK There's no blanket overall prostate cancer screening because the experts in the UK National Screening Committee have decided that it would do more harm than good. It's not because of cost, it's because the PSA test is not that good. There are big trials in progress to improve testing. When it comes down to PSA testing of specific groups, such as those with a genuine family history, the risk-benefit balance may well be different. I suspect thar Sir Chris has had at least tacit approval of his "just google ‘prostate cancer UK risk checker’ and there’s three questions, it takes you 30 seconds and that will help you assess your individual risk. If you’re high risk, go to your GP and ask for a PSA, a blood test" advice so it's probably reasonable. I am 74 and have never taken a PSA test. I have no family history I know about. 'Better to be safe than sorry' is bad advice when it comes to prostate cancer screening.
48 thoughts on ““Complete incompetence”: Reaction to police statement defending caution handed to road rage assault driver; Josh Quigley smashes day one of cycling distance record attempt; Tour de France film; Richmond Park crash driver fined + more on the live blog”
If we all complain to the
If we all complain to the IPCC then they should look in to it and maybe make them press harder chargers because a caution is crazy!
I’m not sure why the Police
I’m not sure why the Police have ignored the driving offences*. Even if they’ve closed the assault case they can surely pursue these.
* I think I know why they’ve ignored the driving offences but I’m happy to give them benefit of doubt.
Completely incompetent or
Completely incompetent or corrupt?
I wonder if they would have issued a caution to a cyclist who punched a driver through the car window?
I suspect your statement is
I suspect your statement is very valid and could evidence unconcious bias in the system so if a cyclist either hits the motorist and causes an injury (black eye) or if they hit the car creating damage, or not, what would be the consequences and do they lead to harsher sentences ? Here it is aggrevated as the motorist starts the incident by waiting for the group to catch up before seeking an arguement and then becoming violent. I suspect a higher sentence is warranted (to show equality with other similar types of crime), though a caution does give the person a criminal record. I hope all the victims take the person to court for civil damages, if only to allow his seconds of rage to last as years of penance and payment with court proceedings and higher insurance costs.
Well also – aggravated
Well also – aggravated assault is not common assault – so they’re also wrong considering this as a common assault in the first place.
I think that the reason that
I think that the reason that so many of us are very dissatisfied with this is that I most of us have encountered comparable behaviour; perhaps not the direct physical contact, but certainly the verbal aggression and use of a vehicle to intimidate and threaten.
And to add – many of us have
And to add – many of us have also had insult added to injury (literally) by the police failing to respond adequately to obvious incidence of gross incompetence or acts of violence by other road users.
Maybe it’s not worth worrying
Maybe it’s not worth worrying about as it ended in a fine,points,big repair bill, increased insurance premiums and most importantly no one was seriously hurt. But that explanation the parks police have provided, really doesnt make a whole heap of sense to me.
Awavey wrote:
Er, I’m going to go out on a limb and say that that’s a bit beyond repair.
To be honest, I’m astounded that the driver was in any state to make any plea or pay any fines.
mdavidford wrote:
Er, I’m going to go out on a limb and say that that’s a bit beyond repair.— Awavey
Nonsense, lick o’ paint and a new rad and will be right as ninepence.
I’ve got this mate, works in a body shop, but does a bit of freelance. If you pay him up front, he won’t charge VAT. Tell him I sent you…….
Joking aside, 5mph to that? I’m coming to the conclusion that the rozzers aren’t just corrupt, or lazy. They are facking monumentally, institutionally dim. I’d be ashamed to try and fob anyone off with that kind of statement as it’s so patently wrong.
It was 5mph in hitting the
It was 5mph in colliding with the cyclist.
hirsute wrote:
Yes, but then colided with barriers after jaming their foot on the accelerator “mistaking it for teh brake”…..
If they can tell us it was
If they can tell us it was 5mph on hitting the cyclist I’m sure they can tell us the impact speed on writing off the car.
Compulsory retest in those circumstances.
hirsute wrote:
Clearly that car had some pretty f-ing amazing acceleration!
IIRC, ok I checked the old
IIRC, ok I checked the old article,but it was a Nissan Leaf,so electric motor type acceleration.
If I was the driver, or the
If I was the driver, or the cyclist, there’s a strong possibility that I would have lost confidence in the Nissan Leaf’s AEB – Automatic Emergency Braking system.
So it presumably has Nissan’s
So it presumably has Nissan’s single e-pedal system where the brake pedal and accelerator are combined. I’ve not driven one but this doesn’t seem to square with the explanation that the driver mistakenly hit the wrong pedal.
aegisdesign wrote:
All the e-pedal does is provide a function like strong engine braking. You just take your foot off the accelerator pedal and it will slow to a complete halt (no creeping like an auto). There is still a brake pedal and you still need to use it to stop quickly.
This vehicle will also have AEB emergency braking, which includes cyclist detection using the camera and radar. However, the camera and radar both point forward and the angles might have meant the cyclist was out of the field of view. Also, the AEB system for cyclists/peds is only active at speeds above 10kph and below 40kph. I suspect if you floor the accelerator, it will override any emergency braking anyway (it tends to do for speed limiters and cruise control).
brooksby wrote:
The speed required for that level of damage would have been pretty phenomenal. Lets assume:
that would mean that the driver must have had their foot pressed to the metal for over 5 seconds after a collision, and would have been careening out of control for about 45m
Are there really no collision investigators in the police?
I think that the twunt was already speeding, and the rider was lucky to get away with the injuries they did. And that the police prioritised a nice cuppa over a proper investigation.
*Assumption detail break down
As someone pointed out, it
As someone pointed out, it was a Nissan Leaf, so 0-60 in 7.8 seconds. Remember when that used to be high performance car speeds? It is another reason why Leccy cars need to be looked at closely because they perform so differently. Tesla for example decide to sell their car on 2 seconds 0-60 if you buy the optional extra Ludricous boost. Ludricous for the Governing authorities to allow that option on the road.
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
My brain is too frazzled to do the calcs again, but yes, facking ridiculous that a car is designed to allow this outcome
Captain Badger wrote:
Not required in this case as the whole thing was captured on the drivers dashcam. It would be pretty evident from that – may have even had a GPS speed logged on it. It’s a shame they’ve not published the video.
I’m astounded that they’ve been handed their licence back and the fine seems really low. Getting the brake and accelerator mixed up is not a mitigation, it’s a massive red flag that you should stop driving!
HoarseMann wrote:
I’d say that dashcam footage is one strand of evidence at investigators’ disposal. Investigation and summary is still required.
Agree with you on the judgement. What was the point?
Maybe Ren or other regular
Maybe Ren or other regular park users can confirm on what metal barriers he hit as none are showing on Streetview as of August 2020. But the Police explanation of “pulling out of the junction with Ham Cross” makes me think it was this one and if it was, the car ended up next to the tree / pond on the left so not far to do that amount of damage or building up speed to do it. And if he did, those barriers are not exactly safe then.
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
I’m guessing that it’s these railings Queen’s Rd
https://maps.app.goo.gl/adcn4VMg3XF4yvBy5
There are a couple of photos in the original police Twitter post with railings that look like them https://mobile.twitter.com/MPSRoyal_Parks/status/1362347460845318147?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1362347460845318147%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Froad.cc%2Fcontent%2Fnews%2Fcycling-live-blog-18-february-2021-281009
WTF, that is a long way to be
WTF, that is a long way to be careening out of control at 30-40mph. Just dumb luck no other person was in the road at the time.
Should someone who doesn’t
Should someone who doesn’t know which pedal is the accelerator and which is the brake be allowed to drive?
Sorry but a black eye isn’t
Sorry but a black eye isn’t “common assault” its ABH. So that’s problem one.
Problem two – this clearly isn’t common assault – there’s a strong argument for aggravated assault. That requires the person to have intended to cause serious harm. Well, close passing, brake checking, leaning out of a moving vehicle and repeatedly attacking someone and pulling them off their bike would suggest that, at the very least, there’s a potential case to answer – even though a jury would no doubt conclude that even if he fully intended to cause harm, those pesky cyclists deserved it so it’s fine.
Honestly, they really need to put the spade away.
With all those contributing
With all those contributing factors, this looks more and more like corruption rather than incompetence; no police force could be that incompetent surely?
Occams razor applies.
Occams razor applies. Officer made poor on the spot decision but his management have to be seen to be supporting him. (if it was a him).
I’m betting there’s a senior rozzer wishing for a time machine right now. Or one wishing those pesky woke cyclists will go away. 50/50 either way.
Secret_squirrel wrote:
— Secret_squirrelI’m still trying to work out what “woke” means, and no-one I’ve asked seems to be able to define it.
That’s because it’s a loaded
That’s because it’s a loaded term depending on who is saying it.
If it’s one of its proponents it would mean something like “aware of injustice and racism in society”.
If it’s a detractor it would mean something like “a person who uses identity politics and anti-white rhetoric to divide and antagonise society”.
I think it was supposed to
I think it was supposed to mean “not asleep” and hence aware.
But its primary use now seems to be to identify the speaker as someone who thinks that currently society is actually perfectly fair and everyone who says it isn’t is either a failure, a class warrior, an activist on the make, or someone out to destroy our basic freedoms to pollute and exploit as we see fit.
That’s always the way, the
That’s always the way, the people too dim to understand its proper meaning have to turn it into a perjorative.
I was going to quibble and
I was going to quibble and say it was only a bruise – but googled instead 😀
Definition – from a Solictors, not the rozzer’s – so bear in mind its probably the “textbook” answer. https://www.afglaw.co.uk/common-assault-abh-and-gbh/
What is actual bodily harm (ABH)?
Actual bodily harm occurs when harm is caused to a victim’s body. The harm doesn’t have to be serious, but it does need to be more significant than a slap or shove. Bruises or scratches as evidence would qualify as ABH.
ABH contains more intention to use unlawful force. The offender only needs to use unlawful force, even if they do not intend to do harm, for the offence to be classed as ABH. For example, if someone is pushed and they fall and bruise their arm, this is ABH as the offender’s intent was to use unlawful force rather than cause injury.
Secret_squirrel wrote:
I remember having the same quibble when I was a law student 11 years ago! Bruising = ABH, once you break the skin (or a bone) its GBH (or for broken skin technically wounding which is GBH’s conjoined twin that no-one recognises the difference).
Problem one: whilst this
Problem one: whilst this meets the legal textbook definition of ABH police forces are led by CPS charging standards. These state that minor bruising/reddening is treated as a common assault level offence, a black eye would equate to this.
Problem two: Aggravated assault doesn’t exist as an offence. If you are talking about Attempt GBH then he would probably have needed to plough the car in to him with the clear intention of seriously injuring him.
Would you wonderful people at
Would you wonderful people at road.cc like to ask Surrey Police what they think about Wiltshire, both the incident and the Wiltshire police?
I’ve asked Wiltshire’s Police
I’ve asked Wiltshire’s Police and Crime Commissioner for an explanation of why no charges have been brought. I’ll post the response on Road CC (if I get one) but I suggest everyone commenting here does the same.
Yepp, me too. Rather be the
Yepp, me too. Rather than be the old bloke shouting into the wind I thought I would do something productive and ping a comment over to the PCC…had to check it a few times to make sure I wasn’t the one on the end of a prosecution
CPS guidance on administering
CPS guidance on administering a caution:
Views of the Victim
Before a simple caution (or a Conditional Caution is given) it is important to establish where appropriate and possible what the victim’s views about the offence are and the proposed method of disposal. It will be important to consider the nature and extent of the harm caused and whether any form of compensation could be paid. If so, a Conditional Caution might be preferable to a simple caution.
Victims’ views although important cannot be the deciding factor. That decision must be made by the decision maker in the light of all the circumstances of the case.
Is that really a good team GB
Is that really a good team GB have picked for the worlds ? Barring the juniors/u23 as they always spring a random result, I cant believe they are really expecting any medals.
Check out the results from
Check out the results from the Junior European Track Champs a few weeks ago – if the GB team win anything I don’t think it will be random! Confession – Flora Perkins beasted me up Tourmalet when she was 13 ?
Maybe not random then,just
Maybe not random then,just very hard to predict,and then there doesnt seem to be this natural progression through for them in the following years.
Once again Surrey Roads
Once again Surrey Roads Policing Unit showing how it should be done. Derbyshire Roads Policing Unit however have some way to go to catch up. Anyone else feel this particular post is a bit ‘victim shamey’?
https://twitter.com/DerbyshireRPU/status/1437400544398675970?s=20
Wow. Compare and contrast the
Wow. Compare and contrast the response from Surrey on someone advocating all cyclists should wear Hi-Viz.
Also the famous “cycling friendly ” WMP one has decided old car drivers are vulnerable road users according to their poster.
https://twitter.com/Trafficwmp/status/1437745089665802242
So was Xander Graham that kid
So was Xander Graham that kid in the skinsuit and aero helmet hammering it along the pavement while the race leaders were going past? Who got passed a bidon by the leader?
I thought that was brilliant 😀
Yes it was. The reply tweet
Yes it was. The reply tweet to HIGNFY was the best though
“He’s white and male, I doubt Piers has the remotest interest in suggesting he does things differently.”