Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Back to news
news
Crime & Legal
Carlisle cyclist injured after driver knocked him off bike on purposeA591 near Ambleside (via StreetView).jpg

Carlisle cyclist injured after driver knocked him off bike on purpose

Driver had already overtaken but stopped to continue argument
by Alex Bowden
Sat, Nov 25, 2017 16:22
35

A Carlisle man has appealed for witnesses to an alleged incident in which he was deliberately knocked off his bike by a motorist.

Writing on Facebook, Steve Alecock said he “could have been killed” in a confrontation with a motorist in the Lake District in September.

The North-West Evening Mail reports that at around 3pm on September 2, Alecock was riding along the A591 between the Low Wood Hotel and Ambleside when he became embroiled in an argument with a driver.

"I was knocked off my bike... I suffered injuries including a large haematoma on my hip, several chipped teeth, concussion and later shock, resulting in three weeks off work. The driver of a white Volkswagen Transporter 53 plate van got out and deliberately knocked me off."

One witness provided a registration number for the vehicle, but police cannot pursue this further unless additional witnesses come forward.

Alecock said: "This was a horrible incident and had there been anything coming in the other direction I could have been killed."

He added: “There was no excuse for what happened to me really, because he'd got past me and if he'd wanted to he could have just driven off, and he chose not to, he chose confrontation."

Anyone with information can contact police on 101 or Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.

Lake District
Steve Alecock
Alex Bowden

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.

Add new comment

35 comments

Avatar
Dan S | 7 years ago
6 likes

Please tell me that you realise that neither Carlisle nor Ambleside is in Scotland? They're also over an hour's drive apart, so the Carlisle police have nothing to do with it. The accident took place near Ambleside, he just happens to be from Carlisle.

Anyway, on the real point, the fact that he's a cyclist has nothing to do with the police requiring another witness. It's a fairly common thing for police to require in road traffic cases. I've had the same response when reporting dangerous driving by a car when I was driving my car.

It's not a legal requirement, but it is a common requirement by police. It serves two purposes: first it stops simple arguments coming to court and second it stops weak cases coming to court: the prosecution have to prove the allegation and that's generally very hard to do where it's one word against another with no other evidence.

In this case it rather depends what the witness saw. If they saw the incident then the requirement would seem to be met. If they only saw a white van and its numberplate but didn't see what happened then you've still only got one witness.

This happens to be a policy I disagree with fairly vigorously, but there it is.

Avatar
EK Spinner | 7 years ago
0 likes

The law in Scotland is different from England on this kind of thing, in Scotland 2 witnessess are required for corroboration, this is why you rarely see police officers working on their own.

BUT This appears to be in England, Carlisle police and Lake district location.

 

Avatar
Glasgow Cyclist replied to EK Spinner | 7 years ago
1 like

EK Spinner wrote:

The law in Scotland is different from England on this kind of thing, in Scotland 2 witnessess are required for corroboration, this is why you rarely see police officers working on their own.

 

Scots law does not require two witnesses, it requires corroboration and while that can be in the form of another person, it can also be in the form of forensic evidence such as transfer of paint, blood, or other residue/substance, fingerprints, video etc.   Otherwise, most murders and rapes couldn't be prosecuted.

In this case, assuming that the police have been given a correct registration number, they can require the registered keeper to identify the driver at the time of the traffic offence.  If he's stupid enough (and they often are) he may well own up to the offence but claim he was provoked - and there's your corroboration.

If the police have the reg number and are refusing to take any further action, I'd be lodging a complaint.

 

 

Avatar
bikeman01 | 7 years ago
14 likes

Steve Alecock needs to appeal to his MP regarding Carlisle police stating that they need two independent witnesses. 

I don't know if the law is different in Scotland but it is frankly ridiculous that they have a witness with the registration number but claim they can't persue this.

What if Steve had died? What if it was a murder rarther than a motoring incident. Do the Carlisle police basically do fk all unless they have two independent witnesses for every crime or is it just offences involving cyclists that require this?

I would urge Steve to make a nusance of himself and get some justice. 

It would also be helpful if journalists pulishing stories such as this made some effort to validate claims such as this which frankly beggar belief.

Avatar
StantheVoice replied to bikeman01 | 7 years ago
2 likes

bikeman01 wrote:

It would also be helpful if journalists pulishing stories such as this made some effort to validate claims such as this which frankly beggar belief.

Just to let you know we've sent a crack team of investigative journalists off up to Scotland oops, Carlisle and the Lake District to try and help the police in both areas with their non-existent enquiries, following their appeal for further assistance in tracking down this van driver. The Pulitzer Prize  panel are on alert.

Pages

Latest Comments