Cyclist falls near(edit;onto) vehicle.it & mobile impounded
Discussion
- Note - this account has been updated since originally posted but with previous comments left in place - please be aware that some responses were made before this change so the context of them may not be as accurate as it was initially
They slowed to the point where they were just above the speed of the cyclist and gave as much room as possible, as they began to overtake but at this point the cyclist fell into the road [-]they stopped without making any impact with him or his bike[-] and banged himself on the side of the van as he went down, they stopped to find the chap collapsed. Ambulances / police were called, the 65 year-old chap apparently "died" at the side of the road (major heart attack), was brought back, repeated this in the ambulance on the way to the hospital and then came back again to go into intensive care where I think he still is. Obviously thoughts are with him and his family but at the same time I'm curious about what happened to mine too.
My father and brother-in-law were separated and questioned at the scene (my brother-in-law was also breathalysed which is understandable), the van was impounded (along with all his tools and materials for jobs) and his mobile phone taken from him. The van was returned several days later but they still have his mobile - apparently it's being sent away so it can be checked to see if anything has been deleted from it (I'm assured it wasn't being used before or during any of this happening).
The two of them were then made to walk home after what must have been a fairly shocking experience - dealing with a chap having a heart attack and then being treated as though they had crashed into him.
I appreciate that the police have to take an open-minded approach to these things and investigate based on what is presented to them at the time but is it normal to confiscate a vehicle (presumably for forensic checks) like this? The deep mobile phone checks seem a bit much, I can understand them checking if it was in use at the time or just before etc but to send it away to see if anything has been deleted?
They live in a small village and gossip spreads fast, unfortunately the local paper isn't helping and has printed this which in my eyes points the finger at the van:
newspaper said:
Police are appealing for a vital witness to come forward after a cyclist was seriously injured in a collision.
The cyclist, a 65-year-old local man, is currently “very poorly” in Airedale General Hospital near Keighley after he collided with a silver Renault van on Skipton Road, Embsay, at around 12.15pm on Thursday.
Investigating officers believe the driver of a small blue Mercedes car which overtook the cyclist just prior to the collision may have information.
Traffic constable Dave Clayton, of Skipton Road Policing Group, said: “The Mercedes had nothing to do with the collision but may be a vital witness.”
There was no collision apart from the cyclist and the ground but the locals continue to discuss this as a cyclist run off the road by a van driven by a well-known local businessman. Both of them are quite shaken up by the experience.The cyclist, a 65-year-old local man, is currently “very poorly” in Airedale General Hospital near Keighley after he collided with a silver Renault van on Skipton Road, Embsay, at around 12.15pm on Thursday.
Investigating officers believe the driver of a small blue Mercedes car which overtook the cyclist just prior to the collision may have information.
Traffic constable Dave Clayton, of Skipton Road Policing Group, said: “The Mercedes had nothing to do with the collision but may be a vital witness.”
The car that overtook in front of them has come forward and confirmed that the chap was a bit erratic when they went past but otherwise that's about all the police have to go on at the moment.
Sorry, I've gone on a bit more than planned there but does all this sound normal under these circumstances?
Edited by thetapeworm on Wednesday 7th November 09:21
Edited by thetapeworm on Wednesday 7th November 09:28
the police have clearly dealt with more hits than heart attacks
in saying that they should probably get to the point and gives all things taken back if it's impacting on your daily job
i've all the sympathy for the guy who conked out
but doesn't mean it should impact on any innocent witness
in saying that they should probably get to the point and gives all things taken back if it's impacting on your daily job
i've all the sympathy for the guy who conked out
but doesn't mean it should impact on any innocent witness
I totally agree and am trying to look at this with as little bias towards my family as possible, I guess there is a theory that them crashing into him could have caused the heart attack(s) rather than this being the reason he collapsed into the road.
I'm just a little annoyed by the newspaper report more than anything, the police have a difficult enough job without me moaning about them.
Perhaps the way they have said he collided with the van rather than the van collided with him means I'm getting giddy for nothing.
I'm just a little annoyed by the newspaper report more than anything, the police have a difficult enough job without me moaning about them.
Perhaps the way they have said he collided with the van rather than the van collided with him means I'm getting giddy for nothing.
Edited by thetapeworm on Sunday 4th November 20:41
Not saying anything but are you also stating the police are completely wrong too?
http://www.northyorkshire.police.uk/index.aspx?art...
http://www.northyorkshire.police.uk/index.aspx?art...
He's not dead, mainly thanks to some chaps in a silver van who stopped to help and narrowly avoided hitting him when he fell.
The police statement is identical to that used in the media though, cyclist collided with van...
Du1point8 said:
Not saying anything but are you also stating the police are completely wrong too?
http://www.northyorkshire.police.uk/index.aspx?art...
Given the police arrived at the scene as a result of being phoned by the people who were involved I'd say they aren't in the ideal place to pass comment without hard evidence.http://www.northyorkshire.police.uk/index.aspx?art...
The police statement is identical to that used in the media though, cyclist collided with van...
Edited by thetapeworm on Monday 5th November 00:54
IroningMan said:
No intention of disputing your account, but which is more common:
a. cyclist has heart attack as someone drives carefully past.
b. cyclist is struck by passing vehicle?
And which is therefore likely to be the starting point for the police, or any objective observer?
Objective would involve looking at the evidence available, and making conclusions from there, NOT deciding a common conclusion, then looking to find evidence.a. cyclist has heart attack as someone drives carefully past.
b. cyclist is struck by passing vehicle?
And which is therefore likely to be the starting point for the police, or any objective observer?
thetapeworm said:
newspaper said:
Police are appealing for a vital witness to come forward after a cyclist was seriously injured in a collision.
The cyclist, a 65-year-old local man, is currently “very poorly” in Airedale General Hospital near Keighley after he collided with a silver Renault van on Skipton Road, Embsay, at around 12.15pm on Thursday.
Investigating officers believe the driver of a small blue Mercedes car which overtook the cyclist just prior to the collision may have information.
Traffic constable Dave Clayton, of Skipton Road Policing Group, said: “The Mercedes had nothing to do with the collision but may be a vital witness.”
There was no collision The cyclist, a 65-year-old local man, is currently “very poorly” in Airedale General Hospital near Keighley after he collided with a silver Renault van on Skipton Road, Embsay, at around 12.15pm on Thursday.
Investigating officers believe the driver of a small blue Mercedes car which overtook the cyclist just prior to the collision may have information.
Traffic constable Dave Clayton, of Skipton Road Policing Group, said: “The Mercedes had nothing to do with the collision but may be a vital witness.”
ds.Very odd how after the Police had apparently spoken to father and brother-in-law they still came to the conclusion that a collision had occured and have said as much on their website.
I guess ultimately if the story told in the OP is true then there should be some evidence (or rather lack of it) of a injury or trauma as a result of a collision between the old guy and a vehicle. I would've thought the paramedics and doctors would've been able to cooberate the story about him having had a heart attack, unless the presumption is that he had a heart attack because of a collision?
I guess ultimately if the story told in the OP is true then there should be some evidence (or rather lack of it) of a injury or trauma as a result of a collision between the old guy and a vehicle. I would've thought the paramedics and doctors would've been able to cooberate the story about him having had a heart attack, unless the presumption is that he had a heart attack because of a collision?
Durzel said:
Very odd how after the Police had apparently spoken to father and brother-in-law they still came to the conclusion that a collision had occured and have said as much on their website.
Not really. When I was hit by a cyclist recently, the police were quite clear that my account was only believed as a result of an independent witness bothering to stop and state quite clearly that it was not my fault, which was supported by the damage to my car. And it seems fair enough: the police have to rule out whether the driver is lying about the cause of the accident, and cyclists spontaneously falling on a clear road is reasonably rare, whereas people trying to avoid being blamed for accidents is reasonably common. Hopefully the police will determine the true cause promptly, because I know from experience quite how traumatic it is whilst waiting to be cleared of any wrongdoing.
What exactly are they expecting to find on the phone?
an angry birds log file to show it was being played a game at the exact moment of the alleged collision
suppose they really could pin point the exact time of the incident, and verify the clock on the phone was synced with an accurate source and prove the phone was being used, there were 2 people in the car, the passenger could have been using it
If they have a genuine reason to investigate it as a collision, perhaps a witness claiming they thought they saw a collision, otherwise they seem well out of line the way they have handled it, especially reporting it in the paper and on the internet as a collision
an angry birds log file to show it was being played a game at the exact moment of the alleged collision
suppose they really could pin point the exact time of the incident, and verify the clock on the phone was synced with an accurate source and prove the phone was being used, there were 2 people in the car, the passenger could have been using it
If they have a genuine reason to investigate it as a collision, perhaps a witness claiming they thought they saw a collision, otherwise they seem well out of line the way they have handled it, especially reporting it in the paper and on the internet as a collision
Hopefully the cyclist will make a full & speedy recovery. Police will want to interview him to find out his side, & that will hopefully collaborate with your story & all end well.
Trauma could have happened to cyclist on fall, & work van may have marks, scrapes etc so indicating collision (purely speculative) + no other witness apart from 1st car overtaking unless they come forward.
Still can imagine very stressfull for all involved.
Trauma could have happened to cyclist on fall, & work van may have marks, scrapes etc so indicating collision (purely speculative) + no other witness apart from 1st car overtaking unless they come forward.
Still can imagine very stressfull for all involved.
Edited by RJJ on Monday 5th November 10:17
Hypothetically speaking given this is an elderly gent who apparently suffered a heart attack isn't there going to be some risk that he doesn't remember much of the incident? If you're riding a bicycle and then suddenly find yourself in hospital, with Police asking you about a collision or whatever, maybe you might join the missing dots?
It's a pretty scary notion if this story is 100% true as it has been told, since what could you say that would disprove the elderly guy? God forbid he actually passes away in hospital.
It's a pretty scary notion if this story is 100% true as it has been told, since what could you say that would disprove the elderly guy? God forbid he actually passes away in hospital.
Usual Police attitude these days it seems. The "playbook" says it must be a collision despite evidence to the contrary and they "taint" evidence by publicising it this way. I personally think too many motorists lie down and roll over giving those Police who seem unable to investigate properly with easy clear ups.
In your BiL's position, I would be having a fairly serious discussion with a senior officer about the way the incident is being portrayed.
If they have sufficient evident to corroborate their version of events they need to share it. Failing that, if they are still investigating and are unclear as to the circumstances, then they need to amend the statements that they are making, including advising the local news agencies of their correction in their stance.
In small communities, the damage done by allegations like this can be huge. I would be suggesting in the nicest possible way that I would not be tolerating any defamation of this type and that if they continue to portray the incident in this way that, when all the facts are established, I would be seeking a full statement to be made by the police clarifying the errors in their previous statements.
If the Police aren't sympathetic to his position, I'd got to the media to correct the story, making the above clear as well.
If they have sufficient evident to corroborate their version of events they need to share it. Failing that, if they are still investigating and are unclear as to the circumstances, then they need to amend the statements that they are making, including advising the local news agencies of their correction in their stance.
In small communities, the damage done by allegations like this can be huge. I would be suggesting in the nicest possible way that I would not be tolerating any defamation of this type and that if they continue to portray the incident in this way that, when all the facts are established, I would be seeking a full statement to be made by the police clarifying the errors in their previous statements.
If the Police aren't sympathetic to his position, I'd got to the media to correct the story, making the above clear as well.
telecat said:
Usual Police attitude these days it seems. The "playbook" says it must be a collision despite evidence to the contrary and they "taint" evidence by publicising it this way. I personally think too many motorists lie down and roll over giving those Police who seem unable to investigate properly with easy clear ups.
But what would you do to refute the claims?"I didn't hit him honest" isn't likely to wash.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff