In August 2017, Ramsey Barreto filmed the aftermath of a road traffic collision on his phone as he drove past. A police officer spotted him and pulled him over.
The BBC reports that he was charged with ‘driving a motor vehicle while using a hand-held mobile telephone.’ This seems fair enough – except that Barreto then successfully appealed, arguing that "he wasn't using it to communicate".
The regulations refer to using, ‘a hand-held mobile telephone or other hand-held interactive communication device,’ and the judges decided that the inclusion of the word ‘other’ works to confine the meaning of ‘using’ to phones being used ‘for an interactive communication’ function.
This is clearly a massive nonsense. Not only is using a mobile phone to film something while driving incredibly dangerous, it also creates a host of other bizarre distinctions.
Writing in The Spectator, Matthew Scott points out that it means that operating a phone to play recorded music is not ‘using’ a phone, whereas doing so to stream music probably is.
Emma Patterson, whose law firm took up Barreto's case, points out that a driver filming using their phone could still be prosecuted for driving without due care or dangerous driving.
"We think the law will change very quickly," she said. "In the meantime it's very likely that police officers that pull you over for fiddling with mobiles are more likely to charge you for driving without due care.”
Add new comment
7 comments
"Joshua Harris director of Road safety charity Brake told the London Evening Standard (link is external) that the results indicate more funding is needed.
“These findings reveal that most adults just don’t think it’s safe to cycle on our roads and more is clearly needed to be done to convince them otherwise."
Oh the irony! Brake, the very organisation which has spent thirty years lying about the risks of cycling to convince everyone that it is incredibly dangerous so that they could promote helmets. At least they didn't mention them this time, but then, they do have thirty years of disinformation to make up for. Perhaps if they apologised and issued a statement saying that they were wrong I might have the tiniest shred of respect for them.
http://www.brake.org.uk/news/711-310811
Well, that Bob didn't do his research properly, did he?
I feel rather sorry for old Bob. In a time that will live in our collective memory as an Age of Considerable Stupidity he has just outed himself as The Stupidest Man in Britain.
if, that is, he is indeed a man.
https://youtu.be/G1QywDPkDjg
".......behind someone that's just eaten 759 Brussels sprouts."
Hopefully there’d be a passing James Burke to capture the moment with some impeccable timing.
.
rocket_bike.jpg
Top tip - do not try cycling behind someone that's just eaten 759 Brussels sprouts.
Would inhaling the gas be classified as doping or can riders get a TUE for it?