Police officer knocked off bike and dragged 30m down road by motorist with 'poor eyesight'

Northumber_lad wrote:

Very disappointing to see half the comments saying that this was only investigated properly because it was a police officer involved.  We are all human beings and vulnerable on the roads. It seems to be the case that there's uproar when any sections of society are castigated by others - but if you are the police you don't count. 
I'm sure when the officer was lying in the road and the ambulance, police and collision investigation unit arrived, that they only started work after checking what the barely conscious cyclist did for a living.  

The response is a result of direct experience of contributors to this site in trying to get various police forces (and courts) around the country to respond to crimes committed against those who happen to be on a bike, when the perpetrator is in a car.
Some forces are better than others however many are reluctant to respond to complaints even with footage, witnesses and actual injuries.
It may be that this particular case had a responsive team involved from the beginning, and the victim's career was irrelevant, so I'll run with that for the sake of argument.
It doesn't however negate the lived experience that many forces frequently refuse to engage with crimes committed by drivers against vulnerable road users, especially people on bikes.
There are many dedicated police officers who really take this seriously, eg Andy Cox, insp Kevin who regularly contributes here. That does not however mean everything's dandy in the garden.
Not sure whether you're in the force yourself, or just an everyday cyclist like the rest of us, and i hope you continue to contribute. Either way do not expect people here to keep quiet about the experiences they have, and if you are in the force I'd hope you can use this site as a window to understand what people are actually experiencing, and maybe effect some change from within.

This is how you started your post below :
“ This wuld not have been handled so swiftly or severely if it hadn't been a copper.”
I’m sorry but while you and others have a right to an opinion that’s hurtful and unnecessary. Appreciate yours isn’t the worst comment I’ve seen ( this story is in a lot of press articles). I am flabbergasted that users of a site for cyclists, who complain about drivers placing cyclists at risk on a daily basis, can pick and choose which cyclists to support - especially when one of them is seriously injured. For those who have had a bad experience, there is simply no need to post disparaging comments towards a cyclist who was hit by a car based on a perception of the job they do. We should be unanimously condemning the issue, not taking tribal-like sides.
Next time you come across a cyclist at the side of the road who needs a bit of assistance, I’m sure you’ll continue to stop and offer help and not think twice about their occupation.

You are confusing what happened to the cyclist with the Police response.

The reasons given have been clearly outlined in the last 2 posts.

Nope , I'll stick with my comments thank you. Seems to be the theme. 

No they didn't make a case? No I'm not listening or no I'm sticking to my comments ?
It's very unclear what your post refers to.

Northumber_lad wrote:

This is how you started your post below : “ This wuld not have been handled so swiftly or severely if it hadn't been a copper.” I’m sorry but while you and others have a right to an opinion that’s hurtful and unnecessary. Appreciate yours isn’t the worst comment I’ve seen ( this story is in a lot of press articles). I am flabbergasted that users of a site for cyclists, who complain about drivers placing cyclists at risk on a daily basis, can pick and choose which cyclists to support - especially when one of them is seriously injured. For those who have had a bad experience, there is simply no need to post disparaging comments towards a cyclist who was hit by a car based on a perception of the job they do. We should be unanimously condemning the issue, not taking tribal-like sides. Next time you come across a cyclist at the side of the road who needs a bit of assistance, I’m sure you’ll continue to stop and offer help and not think twice about their occupation.

A quick scan of the comments reveals no criticism of the victim. The criticism is reserved for the lack of police support most people on bikes receive when reporting assault and intimidation.

You selectively quote me, I also said that the sanction wasn't stiff enough (btw, I stand by the first line in isolation, opinion it may be). Criticism of general police response to assault by drivers is not equivalent to lack of support for people injured in that way, and I'm surprised that you see fit to conflate the two.

Instead of being "hurt" by criticism, perhaps the police could review that criticism and respond by taking crimes against people on bikes seriously in all cases

Again, I'm not sure whether you are police yourself. If so no doubt you can therefore empathise with those who when reporting assaults and intimidation are "disparaged" and find it "hurtful" when their legitimate complaints are dismissed by victim-blaming, or they are not even accorded the status of victim, but instead demoted to mere witness.

This case appears dealt with as it should have been by the police. This does not happen in most cases. This was the point of my comment.

Or, you could think twice about posting comments like that in the first place.  Your words are clearly hurtful and disparaging, but I wouldn't expect you to withdraw from your post, seeing how you have dug yourself in instead. Little thought or empathy shown towards any family members of this or other victims who read these pages.  Sounds very much like 'if I've had a bad experience, I'll make sure you do too'. 

Northumber_lad wrote:

Or, you could think twice about posting comments like that in the first place.  Your words are clearly hurtful and disparaging, but I wouldn't expect you to withdraw from your post, seeing how you have dug yourself in instead. Little thought or empathy shown towards any family members of this or other victims who read these pages.  Sounds very much like 'if I've had a bad experience, I'll make sure you do too'. 

That's quite a lot to conclude from nothing at all.

Have a great evening.

He does seem to have a reasoning deficit, rather like one of those "artificial intelligence" online bots where you can have a meaningless "conversation" based on the form of words rather than their actual meaning.

Not to repeat the good Captain's response. However, It's not so much anti Police trash talk as frustration at the apparent difference in the way that traffic incidents involving a member of the service appear to be dealt with compared to the experience of many contributors to this site.

Road safety is a high priority to cyclists as a group because it isn't our no claims bonus and the hassle of some dented panels at risk from a negligent, uninsured driver but our continued well being. As a group we also have personal experience of being on the receiving end of some extremely aggressive, wantonly incompetent and intimidatory driving inflamed by certain personalities in mainstream media given a platform to attack us for using the public highway and using language that would be illegal if used to reference groups with protected status.

There definitely appears to be a disparity between Police forces in how they respond to complaints of antisocial and dangerous driving, more commonly now backed up with video footage. That some appear to act, even if by letter of advice and others seem to deliberately avoid taking action within the limited timeframe of issuing a NIP is a cause of concern and often comes out as blaming the Police when they are the sharp end of an entire legal system that seems to favour the rights of drivers over the rights of the people they kill, injure and intimidate.

nicmason - is that you?

I can't talk for the others, but for me the only apparent treatment that might have been more favourable was the instant DVLA license removal from the roadside tests. It might be the norm though. 

The sentencing seems to show no special treatment though. Personally if someone gets into a car when medically unable to operate it legally and safely, then that should be more then just careless. 

I have a non injury one from early this summer in northumbrias area due in the magistrates court in november so its not so much police related as police force related just need to ge the rest up to the same standard.

biker phil wrote:

Amazing how the police didn't come up with loads of excuses as to why they couldn't be arsed, sorry, didn't have the resources to pursue this. Oh wait, hang on a minute....

Yeah, it's definitely funny how the laws are applied so "fairly" when it's for one of their own.

Why can't this happen more often?

Because most of the time it's not a police officer who is the victim.

I've worked in the criminal justice sector for over 20 years.  FAR more resources were expended achieving justice when the victim was a police officer (whether on duty or off) than any normal member of the public.  And I was once involved in a case where it was a Police & Crime Commissioner who was the victim, and no expense at all was spared ensuring that the criminal was identified, caught, prosecuted and punished - if it had been one of us in the same position, the investigation would have stopped at the very first stage.

Sorry if this comes across as cynical - and it's certainly not meant to be bashing the police.  But the simple fact is that THIS victim achieved justice because he was a police officer and not because he was a cyclist.

I think it's reasonable for police to prioritise crimes against police more than anyone else - it's human nature and it also can lead to their jobs being slightly less dangerous if the crims understand that hitting an officer will drastically increase any sentences.

What we want, however, is for crimes against cyclist to be prosecuted in a fair manner and it seems as though that's a postcode lottery instead.

cidermart wrote:

His licence was revoked the same day yet still given a 6 month driving ban, wouldn't this mean they'd have to resit their driving test anyway 🤔🤔🤔 Luckily he was ok, and in "the job" too no doubt. Permanent ban would have been a better outcome as mentioned previously.

I don't think they would have to take a test unless it was stipulated by the judge. They would if course have to prove their vision met the required standard before getting their licence back.

There is this amazing late 13th/early 14th-century Italian invention called glasses which may help.  Oddly I can't drive without mine, but I could with them on. (I'd need to get round to learning to drive, but that's another matter).

Don't let that stop you, others don't.

eburtthebike wrote:

Unless their eyesight has miraculously improved, how could they possibly be fit to drive?

May just need glasses or have a correctable visual disorder e.g. cataracts.
I had my license revoked after voluntarily contacting the DVLA about my own vision . Fortunately it was corrected after surgery and I was eventually able to get my license returned.