"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

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."

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

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 very hard to predict,and then there doesnt seem to be this natural progression through for them in the following years.

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 

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.  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:

Or one wishing those pesky woke cyclists will go away.  50/50 either way.

I'm still trying to work out what "woke" means, and no-one I've asked seems to be able to define it.

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 people too dim to understand its proper meaning have to turn it into a perjorative.

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 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.

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 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.

Awavey wrote:

...big repair bill...

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:

Awavey wrote:

...big repair bill...

Er, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that that's a bit beyond repair.

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 colliding with the cyclist.

hirsute wrote:

It was 5mph in colliding with the cyclist.

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 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:

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.

Clearly that car had some pretty f-ing amazing acceleration! 

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 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 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.