When people jump red lights
Discussion
CAPP0 said:
Krikkit said:
untakenname said:
An actioncam is a must when on two wheels, sadly people generally only fit one after an accident. Helmet ones are a bit of a chore to set up each time but have a higher view point but built in 2 channel ones hardwired onto the bike only turn on with ignition or movement if used in parking mode so are pretty much fit and forget.
I bet they get used against the rider as often as for them outside the humdrum commute though...I know a cop could still theoretically back-calculate my speed last week by identifying the road, measuring visible features with a trumeter and working it out with a stopwatch, but we know they're not going to do that sort of thing nowadays. It's hard enough to get them to act on plainly evidenced offences. And the recording doesn't show who was riding at the time anyway. I think the risk is very low, but if it bothered me I would downsize the sdcard to 4gb (only holds about 20 mins of history).
Tardigrade said:
CAPP0 said:
Krikkit said:
untakenname said:
An actioncam is a must when on two wheels, sadly people generally only fit one after an accident. Helmet ones are a bit of a chore to set up each time but have a higher view point but built in 2 channel ones hardwired onto the bike only turn on with ignition or movement if used in parking mode so are pretty much fit and forget.
I bet they get used against the rider as often as for them outside the humdrum commute though...I know a cop could still theoretically back-calculate my speed last week by identifying the road, measuring visible features with a trumeter and working it out with a stopwatch, but we know they're not going to do that sort of thing nowadays. It's hard enough to get them to act on plainly evidenced offences. And the recording doesn't show who was riding at the time anyway. I think the risk is very low, but if it bothered me I would downsize the sdcard to 4gb (only holds about 20 mins of history).
Rawwr said:
Just had a phone call from the police. They think they're going to put forward prosecution for due care and attention and send him on a driver awareness course. Yes, his punishment for knowingly driving through a red light in rush hour, 5-10 seconds after it turned red and hitting someone, leaving them in agony, unable to walk and unable to attend work is most likely going to have to be to pay £100 and sit in a classroom for a few hours.
We are not amused.
https://www.college.police.uk/What-we-do/Ethics/Ethics-home/Documents/Code_of_Ethics.pdfWe are not amused.
9. Conduct
I will behave in a manner, whether on or off
duty, which does not bring discredit on the
police service or undermine public confidence
in policing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Gxvcf1MhEI&fe...
The van driver is claiming that his light was green. What do you think?
The van driver is claiming that his light was green. What do you think?
ks. The lights were probably in transition when the orange A2B lorry went through them. The Stobart lorry definitely went through on red and the van went through the red about five seconds after that. Some years ago I was proceeding in the car through a green light (which had been green for probably between 10-15s by the time I went through) when there was an almighty thump - some old duffer in an Integra Type R had run the lights. I got out with my finest WTF face on, and said "my lights were green" and he immediately replied "so were mine".
However, the person driving the car behind him, and who therefore witnessed the entire thing, was an off-duty Inspector. He not only bore out my story, but called up the troops and when they arrived instructed them to stick the Integra driver on for either DD or DWDCA, I can't remember which now.
So I'd keep pressing them.
However, the person driving the car behind him, and who therefore witnessed the entire thing, was an off-duty Inspector. He not only bore out my story, but called up the troops and when they arrived instructed them to stick the Integra driver on for either DD or DWDCA, I can't remember which now.
So I'd keep pressing them.
It might be worth actually going to the roundabout and getting some actual timings of the change sequence so you can state that the green on your slip road lights x seconds after the red light on the road the van is on. Then you will know exactly how long his light was at red before you even moved.
Trevor555 said:
pessimal said:
as much as i hate it, i'm starting to think every set of traffic lights should have a camera.
in the last few days i have seen someone stopped at a red light decide to go about 10 seconds before it turned green, and a few people going through them a good couple of seconds after, even in biblical rain.
i hate the nanny state, but even up here its starting to get silly
Totally agree, it's the only way to stop it.in the last few days i have seen someone stopped at a red light decide to go about 10 seconds before it turned green, and a few people going through them a good couple of seconds after, even in biblical rain.
i hate the nanny state, but even up here its starting to get silly
First off, I’m glad you’re ok and have “only” got bumps and bruises. I’m disappointed you only thought about that elevenerfier, Remy, and didn’t even consider me... 
As someone above mentioned, don’t be too hasty to settle any claim, make sure your injuries are all sorted, even if it means waiting a bit longer. I know it’s a pain, but the difference could be a fair few quid.
Lastly, with regard to driving offences, it’s not the outcome of the driving that’s measured, it’s the standard of it. Until a few years ago, if you were driving without due care and attention and happened to kill someone as a result, you would only have been prosecuted for DWDCA. Fortunately, the law has since changed and there is now a separate offence of causing death by DWDCA, which (rightly, IMHO), carries a heavier penalty than a simple DWDCA.
If the driving isn’t bad enough for the threshold of “dangerous”, it’ll only ever be prosecuted as a due care offence. Depending on which side of the fence you’re on (offender or aggrieved), one of the available options of a driver improvement/awareness scheme can seem like a godsend or an absolute piss take.
I know in my force, everything road traffic wise gets sent through and processed by a central unit and it’s there the actual decisions on prosecutions/courses (where they fit in with the guidelines) are made, it’s not down to the cop who attends on the day. That said, the officer can “suggest” a preferred outcome, especially if there are mitigating or aggravating factors.
If you’re not happy with the possibility of a course being offered, you need to raise it ASAP, ideally in writing (email would do and it would obviously be quicker than by post, as well as not having the opportunity to get “lost”). As a victim, you’re entitled to ask about any decision making process for prosecutions and your views should be taken into account. However, that doesn’t necessarily mean that you’ll get the van driver prosecuted.
It’s not just traffic stuff, there are more and more schemes to divert people away from being prosecuted for the less serious stuff. Try not to take it personally, it’s just how the system is at the moment I’m afraid. The whole criminal justice system/courts are absolutely creaking at the seams and it’s a wonder any of it functions. As I say, it’s not personal to you, it’s down to inefficiencies and cuts.
Again, I’m glad you’re ok and that hopefully, the bike can get sorted. I’m not trying to “Dibblesplain” to you, because I’m in the same position, the driver who pulled out on me didn’t even get sent on a course, let alone prosecuted! It’s an imperfect system, but it does hopefully allow the more serious stuff to get dealt with. That’s not much consolation when you’re the victim of the less serious stuff.
I hope you’re up and about soon.
As someone above mentioned, don’t be too hasty to settle any claim, make sure your injuries are all sorted, even if it means waiting a bit longer. I know it’s a pain, but the difference could be a fair few quid.
Lastly, with regard to driving offences, it’s not the outcome of the driving that’s measured, it’s the standard of it. Until a few years ago, if you were driving without due care and attention and happened to kill someone as a result, you would only have been prosecuted for DWDCA. Fortunately, the law has since changed and there is now a separate offence of causing death by DWDCA, which (rightly, IMHO), carries a heavier penalty than a simple DWDCA.
If the driving isn’t bad enough for the threshold of “dangerous”, it’ll only ever be prosecuted as a due care offence. Depending on which side of the fence you’re on (offender or aggrieved), one of the available options of a driver improvement/awareness scheme can seem like a godsend or an absolute piss take.
I know in my force, everything road traffic wise gets sent through and processed by a central unit and it’s there the actual decisions on prosecutions/courses (where they fit in with the guidelines) are made, it’s not down to the cop who attends on the day. That said, the officer can “suggest” a preferred outcome, especially if there are mitigating or aggravating factors.
If you’re not happy with the possibility of a course being offered, you need to raise it ASAP, ideally in writing (email would do and it would obviously be quicker than by post, as well as not having the opportunity to get “lost”). As a victim, you’re entitled to ask about any decision making process for prosecutions and your views should be taken into account. However, that doesn’t necessarily mean that you’ll get the van driver prosecuted.
It’s not just traffic stuff, there are more and more schemes to divert people away from being prosecuted for the less serious stuff. Try not to take it personally, it’s just how the system is at the moment I’m afraid. The whole criminal justice system/courts are absolutely creaking at the seams and it’s a wonder any of it functions. As I say, it’s not personal to you, it’s down to inefficiencies and cuts.
Again, I’m glad you’re ok and that hopefully, the bike can get sorted. I’m not trying to “Dibblesplain” to you, because I’m in the same position, the driver who pulled out on me didn’t even get sent on a course, let alone prosecuted! It’s an imperfect system, but it does hopefully allow the more serious stuff to get dealt with. That’s not much consolation when you’re the victim of the less serious stuff.
I hope you’re up and about soon.
Rawwr said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Gxvcf1MhEI&fe...
The van driver is claiming that his light was green. What do you think?
Thats a fair bat he gave you. I'm surprised you have nothing broken.The van driver is claiming that his light was green. What do you think?
Dibble said:
First off, I’m glad you’re ok and have “only” got bumps and bruises. I’m disappointed you only thought about that elevenerfier, Remy, and didn’t even consider me...
You're lucky I'm not bringing charges against you for having to look at your arse.Dibble said:
As someone above mentioned, don’t be too hasty to settle any claim, make sure your injuries are all sorted, even if it means waiting a bit longer. I know it’s a pain, but the difference could be a fair few quid.
Lastly, with regard to driving offences, it’s not the outcome of the driving that’s measured, it’s the standard of it. Until a few years ago, if you were driving without due care and attention and happened to kill someone as a result, you would only have been prosecuted for DWDCA. Fortunately, the law has since changed and there is now a separate offence of causing death by DWDCA, which (rightly, IMHO), carries a heavier penalty than a simple DWDCA.
If the driving isn’t bad enough for the threshold of “dangerous”, it’ll only ever be prosecuted as a due care offence. Depending on which side of the fence you’re on (offender or aggrieved), one of the available options of a driver improvement/awareness scheme can seem like a godsend or an absolute piss take.
I know in my force, everything road traffic wise gets sent through and processed by a central unit and it’s there the actual decisions on prosecutions/courses (where they fit in with the guidelines) are made, it’s not down to the cop who attends on the day. That said, the officer can “suggest” a preferred outcome, especially if there are mitigating or aggravating factors.
If you’re not happy with the possibility of a course being offered, you need to raise it ASAP, ideally in writing (email would do and it would obviously be quicker than by post, as well as not having the opportunity to get “lost”). As a victim, you’re entitled to ask about any decision making process for prosecutions and your views should be taken into account. However, that doesn’t necessarily mean that you’ll get the van driver prosecuted.
It’s not just traffic stuff, there are more and more schemes to divert people away from being prosecuted for the less serious stuff. Try not to take it personally, it’s just how the system is at the moment I’m afraid. The whole criminal justice system/courts are absolutely creaking at the seams and it’s a wonder any of it functions. As I say, it’s not personal to you, it’s down to inefficiencies and cuts.
Again, I’m glad you’re ok and that hopefully, the bike can get sorted. I’m not trying to “Dibblesplain” to you, because I’m in the same position, the driver who pulled out on me didn’t even get sent on a course, let alone prosecuted! It’s an imperfect system, but it does hopefully allow the more serious stuff to get dealt with. That’s not much consolation when you’re the victim of the less serious stuff.
I hope you’re up and about soon.
I do understand all that, Dibble, honestly I do but it's so hard to let it go when the van driver was so far over the line of taking the piss that I can't see any other way of viewing it other than dangerous. I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens.Lastly, with regard to driving offences, it’s not the outcome of the driving that’s measured, it’s the standard of it. Until a few years ago, if you were driving without due care and attention and happened to kill someone as a result, you would only have been prosecuted for DWDCA. Fortunately, the law has since changed and there is now a separate offence of causing death by DWDCA, which (rightly, IMHO), carries a heavier penalty than a simple DWDCA.
If the driving isn’t bad enough for the threshold of “dangerous”, it’ll only ever be prosecuted as a due care offence. Depending on which side of the fence you’re on (offender or aggrieved), one of the available options of a driver improvement/awareness scheme can seem like a godsend or an absolute piss take.
I know in my force, everything road traffic wise gets sent through and processed by a central unit and it’s there the actual decisions on prosecutions/courses (where they fit in with the guidelines) are made, it’s not down to the cop who attends on the day. That said, the officer can “suggest” a preferred outcome, especially if there are mitigating or aggravating factors.
If you’re not happy with the possibility of a course being offered, you need to raise it ASAP, ideally in writing (email would do and it would obviously be quicker than by post, as well as not having the opportunity to get “lost”). As a victim, you’re entitled to ask about any decision making process for prosecutions and your views should be taken into account. However, that doesn’t necessarily mean that you’ll get the van driver prosecuted.
It’s not just traffic stuff, there are more and more schemes to divert people away from being prosecuted for the less serious stuff. Try not to take it personally, it’s just how the system is at the moment I’m afraid. The whole criminal justice system/courts are absolutely creaking at the seams and it’s a wonder any of it functions. As I say, it’s not personal to you, it’s down to inefficiencies and cuts.
Again, I’m glad you’re ok and that hopefully, the bike can get sorted. I’m not trying to “Dibblesplain” to you, because I’m in the same position, the driver who pulled out on me didn’t even get sent on a course, let alone prosecuted! It’s an imperfect system, but it does hopefully allow the more serious stuff to get dealt with. That’s not much consolation when you’re the victim of the less serious stuff.
I hope you’re up and about soon.
julian64 said:
Trevor555 said:
pessimal said:
as much as i hate it, i'm starting to think every set of traffic lights should have a camera.
in the last few days i have seen someone stopped at a red light decide to go about 10 seconds before it turned green, and a few people going through them a good couple of seconds after, even in biblical rain.
i hate the nanny state, but even up here its starting to get silly
Totally agree, it's the only way to stop it.in the last few days i have seen someone stopped at a red light decide to go about 10 seconds before it turned green, and a few people going through them a good couple of seconds after, even in biblical rain.
i hate the nanny state, but even up here its starting to get silly
Rawwr said:
I do understand all that, Dibble, honestly I do but it's so hard to let it go when the van driver was so far over the line of taking the piss that I can't see any other way of viewing it other than dangerous. I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens.
Keep pushing for a prosecution. Ultimately, the decision will probably made by someone going through a ton of these reports, “measuring” each of them against a matrix to see what they are and what the prosecution outcome will be. They “should” take the victim’s views into account, but...You’ve always got the option to question the decision making process, but unless it’s been to the CPS for a charging decision (unlikely, if they’re not looking at a dangerous), there might not be the “Victim’s right to review” that there is with CPS charge decisions.
If you want to complain/challenge, feel free to pm me and I’ll happily suggest a few “key words” that’ll hopefully make the decision maker at least think a bit.
You may well be fighting a losing battle I’m afraid, but I’m happy to help if I can. You just need to decide how much time, effort and stress you want from it all, when it might be “easier” to park it and just move on, rather than getting increasingly annoyed with “the system”.
Start, if you haven't already, to think about a claim on his Insurance for loss of earnings, travel costs, new kit etc. Get as much documentation as you can and a brief that knows what they are doing. If the CPS prosecute that will aid your case. You may think that this is a lot of faff and it is but it will make a difference.
Also watch your social media, as I know from personal family experience that Insurance companies will trawl your and any of your friends accounts for anything to mitigate a claim. So no bungee jumping for a few years
Get well soon fella
Also watch your social media, as I know from personal family experience that Insurance companies will trawl your and any of your friends accounts for anything to mitigate a claim. So no bungee jumping for a few years
Get well soon fella
Rawwr said:
I do understand all that, Dibble, honestly I do but it's so hard to let it go when the van driver was so far over the line of taking the piss that I can't see any other way of viewing it other than dangerous. I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens.
On further reflection I'd take a decent punt that he was using his phone and not looking up. It's one thing jumping a light, it's one more thing jumping a light really late, but to not have seen you and braked/avoided, well...Difficult to prove I guess unless there's a will to look at phone records.
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff