Driver intentionally hits cyclist

[redstu]

BBC News - Highgate hit-and-run cyclist 'left in road with brain bleed'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-48146...

The police have sent a request to the registered keeper of the car, who will recieve a court summons if they don't reply in 33 days.

Surely with the evidence available the police should be on the doorstep of the owner and actively trying to find the driver.

This isn't a parking or speeding offence it could potentially have been death by dangerous driving.

I know the police are stretched but this one seems a bit easier to follow up than many cases.

[anothernameitist]

Bloody Hell,

How did the BMW not hit the car that went round the corner.

Poor performance from the police too

[LosingGrip]

redstu said:

BBC News - Highgate hit-and-run cyclist 'left in road with brain bleed'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-48146...

The police have sent a request to the registered keeper of the car, who will recieve a court summons if they don't reply in 33 days.

Surely with the evidence available the police should be on the doorstep of the owner and actively trying to find the driver.

This isn't a parking or speeding offence it could potentially have been death by dangerous driving.

I know the police are stretched but this one seems a bit easier to follow up than many cases.

BBC Website said:

The Met said it had sent a form to the registered owner of the BMW to ask who was driving at the time.

The owner will be summoned to court if they fail to return the form within 33 days.

Officers are collating witness statements and reviewing CCTV footage, the force added.

So they are doing more.

The letter (NIP) is a standard thing. If the driver denies it being them, or doesn't respond, they'll need to prove who the driver was, so CCTV and witness statements will do that.

[PAULJ5555]

Not sure if it was "intentional", could the car have been going too fast and understeered across the road. I cant see if it had taken a corner just before the video.

[PAULJ5555]

"Mr Dey said he asked the restaurant for its CCTV footage when police told him they would not be able to go there for several days - by which time he feared any footage might be deleted."

Good old plod.

[Dave Hedgehog]

PAULJ5555 said:

"Mr Dey said he asked the restaurant for its CCTV footage when police told him they would not be able to go there for several days - by which time he feared any footage might be deleted."

Good old plod.

stop being silly

they sent a letter to the registered owner what else do you expect them to do? seize the car before it could have been repaired / any blood removed?

Edited by Dave Hedgehog on Friday 3rd May 13:37

[gareth_r]

LosingGrip said:

So they are doing more.

The letter (NIP) is a standard thing. If the driver denies it being them, or doesn't respond, they'll need to prove who the driver was, so CCTV and witness statements will do that.

If someone is clobbered with a blunt object, and the assailant is identified, do the police write them a letter?

BBC said:

Mr Dey said he asked the restaurant for its CCTV footage when police told him they would not be able to go there for several days - by which time he feared any footage might be deleted.
The Met said it was grateful for Mr Dey's help in sending them the video.

Nice of them to express their thanks.

I'm surprised that the Metropolitan Police didn't send someone round to give Mr Dey advice about victimising the driver through "social media".

Edited by gareth_r on Friday 3rd May 13:45

[Pica-Pica]

Dave Hedgehog said:

PAULJ5555 said:

"Mr Dey said he asked the restaurant for its CCTV footage when police told him they would not be able to go there for several days - by which time he feared any footage might be deleted."

Good old plod.

stop being silly

they sent a letter to the registered owner what do you expect them to do? seize the car before it could have been repaired / any blood removed?

I would certainly expect them to be a lot more active than that.

[Pica-Pica]

PAULJ5555 said:

Not sure if it was "intentional", could the car have been going too fast and understeered across the road. I cant see if it had taken a corner just before the video.
Nah! This is PH, BMWs NEVER understeer.

[gareth_r]

Pica-Pica said:

PAULJ5555 said:

Not sure if it was "intentional", could the car have been going too fast and understeered across the road. I cant see if it had taken a corner just before the video.

Nah! This is PH, BMWs NEVER understeer.

More likely to have been texting or updating Facebook.

[PAULJ5555]

Dave Hedgehog said:

PAULJ5555 said:

"Mr Dey said he asked the restaurant for its CCTV footage when police told him they would not be able to go there for several days - by which time he feared any footage might be deleted."

Good old plod.

stop being silly

they sent a letter to the registered owner what else do you expect them to do? seize the car before it could have been repaired / any blood removed?

Edited by Dave Hedgehog on Friday 3rd May 13:37

To be fair they were probably busy dancing and skateboarding with protesters in London.

[henrycrun]

gareth_r said:

More likely to have been texting or updating Facebook.

remove their fingers, without anesthetic

[anonymous-user]

Who the hell leaves the scene of a serious accident they have just caused? Utter scum!

[NotBenny]

Andy20vt said:

Who the hell leaves the scene of a serious accident they have just caused? Utter scum!

someone who is doing something they don't want to have to admit to, and hope they can get away with it.

[Seight_Returns]

I suspect (or at least I hope) the request by post is procedural to stop the offence being time barred.

[2Btoo]

NotBenny said:

Andy20vt said:

Who the hell leaves the scene of a serious accident they have just caused? Utter scum!

someone who is doing something they don't want to have to admit to, and hope they can get away with it.

... and who also knows that the chances of the offence catching up with them are slim. Which, given the police response, seems not unreasonable.

[matrignano]

PAULJ5555 said:

Not sure if it was "intentional", could the car have been going too fast and understeered across the road. I cant see if it had taken a corner just before the video.

Undeerster at 20mph?

[Lindun]

No chance of understeer, just someone not paying attention while driving and compounding it by acting the way all youth seem to now and driving off. When the police catch up with them, they’ll deny it, the police will decide they can’t prove it was them despite more evidence than they normally have and a nice low level drug dealer will be free to continue his criminal ways.

[markyb_lcy]

I'm wondering if this must be a stolen car because any idiot knows London is chock full of cameras and the likeliness of getting away with it if it isn't stolen, is pretty low.

Then again, by not even bothering to get the CCTV themselves, they aren't exactly making it difficult for the perp. Not chasing this up for several days (and risking evidence being deleted) really is taking the piss.

Not turning up to house burglaries that have ended is one thing, but this really is a new low IMO. One can only wonder how many crimes go unsolved because of lack of urgency where CCTV is potentially involved.

[markyb_lcy]

Lindun said:

No chance of understeer, just someone not paying attention while driving and compounding it by acting the way all youth seem to now and driving off. When the police catch up with them, they’ll deny it, the police will decide they can’t prove it was them despite more evidence than they normally have and a nice low level drug dealer will be free to continue his criminal ways.

There really is nothing to suggest the perp is a drug dealer. I would also say there's nothing that nails this as intentional, though it could well be.

TBH I'm significantly more terrified by this person's driving than I am about the fact they might possibly sell drugs.