Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Informal verbal warning from the police after submitting near miss

Hello everyone,

I have stumbled upon a bit of a problem. I record my rides with a GoPro on the front and another on the back of my bike, both to share good videos but also to share footage of dangerous driving with the police. I've had success previously, with no fewer than 11 convictions (including one getting their licence revoked!) from around 250 videos submitted. It's a lot of work and the rate isn't great but I'll do anything to keep vulnerable road users safe.

Here's where we get to the problem. In one of my videos that I sent to the police, I have to admit that I did not keep a cool head, and used what they have described as 'racially charged language'. I don't dispute that, and it was a momentary lapse when I was almost run down by a man who was on his mobile phone at the time (I know because I caught him as such on camera). At this point, in shock of almost being killed, I screamed something I am not proud of as I reached for the most offensive term I could. The driver did not hear me, or at least did not react, and I consider myself lucky that he did not.

I submitted the footage to the police regardless, and explained in the same way that I did above why I said what I did, and that I am not a racist person. Their response was to telephone me while at work and ask me to retract the report or I would potentially face a conviction myself which, for reasons I don't need to go into, is not something I want.

The issued me with what they described as an 'informal verbal warning'. Has anyone else received such a warning before, and know what it means? I think it's ridiculous that my momentary lapse of vocabulary as a result of almost being murdered by a dangerous driver could be used against me, when I'm helping the police out by submitting such videos.

Does anyone have advice on what to do next, and if this warning has any actual meaning, or is just a bluff? It won't stop me on my crusade against murderous drivers, but it does make me unsure if I am putting myself at risk by doing so in future.

Thanks I'm advance.

If you're new please join in and if you have questions pop them below and the forum regulars will answer as best we can.

Add new comment

49 comments

Avatar
quiff replied to Adam Sutton | 1 year ago
5 likes

While I agree with the sentiment, your slur of choice has its own biases.

Avatar
Adam Sutton replied to quiff | 1 year ago
2 likes

Yes, in Australia it is a term of endearment.

Avatar
quiff replied to Adam Sutton | 1 year ago
2 likes

Presumably not the intent behind your use in a heated moment though.

Avatar
Adam Sutton replied to quiff | 1 year ago
0 likes

No, as per the dictionary definition - an offensive word for a very unpleasant or stupid person

Avatar
quiff replied to Adam Sutton | 1 year ago
2 likes

Yes, but the point (as I'm sure you well know) is the etymology and why it is considered offensive. 

Avatar
Adam Sutton replied to quiff | 1 year ago
1 like

Yes, and your mistake is in thinking I am bothered.

Avatar
quiff replied to Adam Sutton | 1 year ago
2 likes

Bothered enough to reply 3 times. 

Avatar
Adam Sutton replied to quiff | 1 year ago
0 likes

quiff wrote:

Bothered enough to reply 3 times. 

I mean it is interesting, telling and somewhat not surprising that this is your focus rather than those defending it along the lines "it happens" and suggesting submitting in the future without audio.

Avatar
quiff replied to Adam Sutton | 1 year ago
2 likes

I couldn't imagine and do not condone using racist language in this (or any) situation myself, if that is your insinuation. I was just observing that your comment seemed to set up a hierarchy of racist language bad, misogynist language ok. I am not suggesting you are a misogynist, but the language arguably is.    

Avatar
Adam Sutton replied to quiff | 1 year ago
0 likes

Well if you want to view it as in purely gendered and misogynistic terms then so be it, but arguably this is not the case and indeed why post watershed today it is broadcastable. 

Avatar
Flintshire Boy replied to Adam Sutton | 1 year ago
4 likes

.

In hole.

.

Stop digging.

.

 

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to Adam Sutton | 1 year ago
1 like

Adam Sutton wrote:

Yes, in Australia it is a term of endearment.

Not my experience amongst those Australians I've played rugby against, unless I was very much misinterpreting their comments!

Avatar
Adam Sutton replied to Rendel Harris | 1 year ago
0 likes

Rendel Harris wrote:

Adam Sutton wrote:

Yes, in Australia it is a term of endearment.

Not my experience amongst those Australians I've played rugby against, unless I was very much misinterpreting their comments!

That might just be you though 

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to Adam Sutton | 1 year ago
2 likes

Adam Sutton wrote:

Not my experience amongst those Australians I've played rugby against, unless I was very much misinterpreting their comments!

That might just be you though 

I'd be very happy if it was, on the rugby field if someone starts having a go at you it shows you've got under their skin and got them worried, meaning you're playing pretty well.

Avatar
chrisonabike | 1 year ago
2 likes

As others have said some self-reflection may be in order.

I was surprised by the mention of someone actually having their licence revoked and even more it happening as a result of this kind of report. Looking at the government guidance it would appear that there is a gap between what is stated and what happens in practice (are licences regularly suspended for drug dealing?). Or are they really "throwing the book at" some drivers (not the Beano) and this is under-reported here?

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/learn-why-we-would-revoke-or-suspend-your-li...

Avatar
dubwise | 1 year ago
6 likes

You are a racist and fortunate to get away with an informal warning.

Do you shout white b*st*rd in similar situations?

Avatar
David9694 | 1 year ago
1 like

Yes, it happens. omit the soundtrack or maybe just pass on that one?  Don't overthink the warning - it doesn't sound like any formal process. 

Avatar
NOtotheEU | 1 year ago
9 likes

I'm guessing you used the n word by your relief that the driver didn't hear you? Not judging you but if I'm right perhaps consider why that was your first choice in a moment of (justified) anger?

Next time a video shows you doing something wrong, don't submit it. If you ever lose your temper and shout something you don't think the police will like, mute the video before submitting it. Better yet, mute them all apart from the odd one where the sound is relevent to the report.

On the rare occasion I've had a video that shows me doing something questionable like going through an amber I could have stopped at or really losing my temper and verbally abusing a driver (the day after a friend was killed in a hit and run) then I bin it. I make a lot of reports so I'm sure they would remember things like that and I don't want to give the police any reason to look less favourably on any of them.

I found this on a legal website that claims to be a specialist in removing warnings etc.

The police can also sometimes give informal warnings, which effectively amount to a verbal ticking off. The officers may take a note of your name, which can be stored on their local records, but it will not create a record on the PNC.

And this from another site.

An enhanced DBS check will include certain information about you held on local police records, if the police consider it relevant.

Avatar
Gm_Crop | 1 year ago
15 likes

The law can be an ass at times: I suspect the sentence for racially charged language (no physical harm, and in a narrow sense no risk of physical harm) would be greater than the sentence for nearly KSI someone from the safely of a tin box.

That said, it is a crime and we are one of the first demographics to object to the momentary lapse plea.

Keep recording, but maybe don't submit the ones with questionable language. Or better still don't use it.

Pages

Latest Comments