Police Camera Action!

Mr_Cellophane

:twisted:

Specialized Needs

snailracer wrote:

snailracer wrote:

Kieran_Burns wrote:

so - putting aside the guy was a dick. Was he actually right?

Do you have to give your name?
Do you have to accept the fine?
Do you have to produce any documentation?

The guy could well be onto something, although a "real" policeman would simply have locked him up for some other generic, catch-all offence.

AFAIK a cyclist involved in a RTA is not obliged to provide details or even report it to the police - only motorists are. Not the same as jumping a red light, not sure what legalities apply there.

There are very few offences on the books that apply to cyclists - as written, most apply only to motor vehicles.

Actually, on further digging, you DO have to provide particulars:

"6) Refusing, or giving false name and address.

Source: Road Traffic Act 1988 Section 168

Offence: It is an offence for a person who is:
...
ii) the rider of a cycle who is alleged to have committed an offence under s.28 or s.29.

to refuse, on being required by any person having reasonable grounds for so requiring, to give his name and address, or give a false name or address."

I can't see the vid now, and on the reviews here would probably find it too cringeworthy anyhow. But was he asked to provide details (i.e. name and address) or was he asked to provide ID? The two are not the same. Also, was this a warranted officer or was it a PCSO?

jds_1981

While the cyclist was a bit annoying, if you're going to make police officers judge, jury and executioner (which they are for fixed penalty notices), they should have a *very* good understanding of the laws under which they're operating.

jds_1981

Also, road traffic act section 28 & 29 seem rather encompassing and open to intrepretation..

http://www.police-information.co.uk/leg ... exeng.html

Offence: It is an offence for a person to ride a cycle on a road dangerously.

Offence: It is an offence for a person to ride a cycle on a road without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road.

d87heaven

That reads to me they are the reasons you have to give the police your details. If its for anything else ie a fixed penalty notice then you can refuse? RLJ is road traffic act sect 36. But then could it also come under its riding dangerously or without reasonable consideration?

Drysuitdiver

video back up now.

both of them acted like cocks.

the copper should have known what law require him to gove details, giving internal acronyms is a non starter.

the other guy should have coughed for the RLJ.

Clever Pun

we all seem to be missing the main point... a copper on a bike caught him... he aint no self respecting cyclist

CycleOfViolence

The cyclist who shot the video and posted it should be beaten with a metal stick, CS gassed then Tasered.

He is everything that is wrong with society in 2011.

d87heaven

CycleOfViolence wrote:

He is everything that is wrong with society in 2011.

In what ways?

notsoblue

d87heaven wrote:

CycleOfViolence wrote:

He is everything that is wrong with society in 2011.

In what ways?

He's the kind of guy who questions authority. Can't have everyone doing that now can we?

This chap's video would be much less annoying if it wasn't so obvious that he ran the red light...

CycleOfViolence

d87heaven wrote:

CycleOfViolence wrote:

He is everything that is wrong with society in 2011.

In what ways?

If you have to ask, you're probably part of the problem.

motopatter

I've had a full on fight with a police cnut outside my own door coz the f*cker wouldn't let it lie. His mate in the car was shouting for him to leave it but wouldn't come and break it up. Took my kindly neighbours to awake to the ruckus at 2am and tell the poo-lice to be on their way.

The exact details were - I was sitting on kerb at the roadside 10meters from my house having a fag (given up since - this was about 10 years ago), cop car pulls over starts giving me lots of sh1t. I say I'm going home to there (point at house) more abuse copper starts 'demanding' this and that., threatens me, pushes me about, punches start both ways, I twist my weak ankle where he tussles me and and I twist it going over kerb onto road (his fault). Screaming in agony (torn ligaments - permanent damage) brings the neighbours out. They take his number as he exits quickly to his waiting bumchum in the car who did nothing. I pressed no charges btw

Hate them all (being an ex motorcyclist too ) It is the duty of the honest citizen to go about their own business and let them catch criminals (yeah).

So the guy filming - why should he show if he ran a light??? It's up to the copper to prove it yeah? so the fag tries to bully him and resorts to aggressive behavior. I see the copper as a bully in this one - insufficient knowledge of the law, but determined to actually be an ar$e

Life's not fair so stand up for what you can and take what you get, leave nothing behind, arrrrgggghhh

d87heaven

CycleOfViolence wrote:

d87heaven wrote:

CycleOfViolence wrote:

He is everything that is wrong with society in 2011.

In what ways?

If you have to ask, you're probably part of the problem.

What a sensible reasoned argument you have put forward. :roll:

CycleOfViolence

motopatter wrote:

I've had a full on fight with a police cnut outside my own door coz the f*cker wouldn't let it lie. His mate in the car was shouting for him to leave it but wouldn't come and break it up. Took my kindly neighbours to awake to the ruckus at 2am and tell the poo-lice to be on their way.

The exact details were - I was sitting on kerb at the roadside 10meters from my house having a fag (given up since - this was about 10 years ago), cop car pulls over starts giving me lots of sh1t. I say I'm going home to there (point at house) more abuse copper starts 'demanding' this and that., threatens me, pushes me about, punches start both ways, I twist my weak ankle where he tussles me and and I twist it going over kerb onto road (his fault). Screaming in agony (torn ligaments - permanent damage) brings the neighbours out. They take his number as he exits quickly to his waiting bumchum in the car who did nothing. I pressed no charges btw

Hate them all (being an ex motorcyclist too ) It is the duty of the honest citizen to go about their own business and let them catch criminals (yeah).

So the guy filming - why should he show if he ran a light??? It's up to the copper to prove it yeah? so the fag tries to bully him and resorts to aggressive behavior. I see the copper as a bully in this one - insufficient knowledge of the law, but determined to actually be an ar$e

Life's not fair so stand up for what you can and take what you get, leave nothing behind, arrrrgggghhh

I don't believe you, I think you are just a criminal with a hatred of the Police venting on a forum, I also believe your crimes against society and others earlier in your life coupled with a touch of education have created the person you are today.

You are part of the problem.

motopatter

notsoblue wrote:

d87heaven wrote:

CycleOfViolence wrote:

This chap's video would be much less annoying if it wasn't so obvious that he ran the red light...

1) how is it obvious from the video that he ran a red light???????????????

2) did I miss a few seconds where it showed this taking place?????????

3) Or are you assuming???????

Give yourself a pat on the back if you answered yes to 3 :roll:

CycleOfViolence

motopatter wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

d87heaven wrote:

CycleOfViolence wrote:

This chap's video would be much less annoying if it wasn't so obvious that he ran the red light...

1) how is it obvious from the video that he ran a red light???????????????

2) did I miss a few seconds where it showed this taking place?????????

3) Or are you assuming???????

Give yourself a pat on the back if you answered yes to 3 :roll:

I think you need to read the forum again and see who said what...........you are confused.

motopatter

:roll:

motopatter

CycleOfViolence wrote:

motopatter wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

d87heaven wrote:

CycleOfViolence wrote:

This chap's video would be much less annoying if it wasn't so obvious that he ran the red light...

1) how is it obvious from the video that he ran a red light???????????????

2) did I miss a few seconds where it showed this taking place?????????

3) Or are you assuming???????

Give yourself a pat on the back if you answered yes to 3 :roll:

I think you need to read the forum again and see who said what...........you are confused.

no, a but drunkard and my editing/ quoting is puntang

waddlie

Those of you thinking Plod should be able to recite the legislation relating to their powers etc verbatim, have a read of the PACE Act and you might understand why they can't:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/60/contents

The Rookie

He commited a moving traffic offence and so was required to provid name and address yes, not doing so is a seperate and arrestable ofence

On being issued with a fixed penalty he didn't have to accept the piece of paper, but once its issued he has 3 choices - pay, opt to go to court or ignore, if its ignored it gets lodged as an unpaid fine and recovery costs added, so frankly its stupid not to accept it (it will typically cost about £500 by the time the Bailiffs catch up with you), and if he'd dropped the legal notice he would have been being served then that would be litering.

You don't have to produce documentation byut the Police are entitled to satisfy themselves you are who you say you are, so a wallet full of cards in your name for example, otherwise all cyclists woulkd call themselves Joe Blogs from 1 Somewhere street, if he's not happy, again he can arrest you. (Prompt and effective investigation of a crime)

In this case his BS wasn't matched by the officers knowledge, had the officer been better trained he would have known the above!

Simon

d87heaven

The Beginner wrote:

He commited a moving traffic offence and so was required to provid name and address yes, not doing so is a seperate and arrestable ofence

Simon

Did he? We only have the officers allegation to that effect.

But seriously....perhaps the police should issue helmet mounted cameras and instant playback equipment as well as better training. I feel sorry for the officer in some ways. He came across as arrogant, ill informed and out of his depth...........much like the twot he was speaking to (but only one of those two serves the comunity)

The Rookie

OK, it only requires the allegation that the offence was commited to make the demand for details lawful.

Also I think the cyclists attitude 100% suggests he did jump the light don't you? If you hadn't, you would deny it.

Simon

motopatter

The Beginner wrote:

I think the cyclists attitude 100% suggests.....

I think the cyclists attitude 100% suggests he was wearing green underpants the day before :roll:

lots of people on here judging the cyclist for something which is not apparent on the tape. From the evidence presented (all be it not a complete account of the whole incident) I feel the copper came across as a bit of a bully and a tool. The cyclist was pretty cocky though, but knew more than the copper who then appeared to try and knock the fellas camera off his head. Not befitting for a plod now is it?

Having said that I'd have been mighty tempted to lump the cyclist one if I was the copper.

50:50 imo

The Rookie

He didn't know more than the copper, most what he said was BS, he just BS'd better.

Lets be honest, of course he ran the light, no normal person would stand there arguing that long without saying they didn't if they hadn't, had it gone to court it would have been guilty.

Only upside is he spent so long arguing it was probably all his red light savings for that journey.

50:50 - take off those glasses mate,the lenses are all red coloured!

Simon

d87heaven

It would have been interesting had it gone to court to see what was said about the pc grabbing the cyclist camera. Im sure if anyone did the same to a plod then it would be deemed assault.

Not sure if I prefer motopatters red glasses or Simons blinkers........

waddlie

Incompetent cop vs idiot with an agenda.

Like watching Wales play Australia at Rugby, it's one of those situations where you want both sides to lose.

notsoblue

motopatter wrote:

The Beginner wrote:

I think the cyclists attitude 100% suggests.....

I think the cyclists attitude 100% suggests he was wearing green underpants the day before :roll:

lots of people on here judging the cyclist for something which is not apparent on the tape. From the evidence presented (all be it not a complete account of the whole incident) I feel the copper came across as a bit of a bully and a tool. The cyclist was pretty cocky though, but knew more than the copper who then appeared to try and knock the fellas camera off his head. Not befitting for a plod now is it?

Having said that I'd have been mighty tempted to lump the cyclist one if I was the copper.

50:50 imo

Why would a bike mounted police randomly accuse people of jumping red lights? And why would someone who was falsely accused of jumping a red light completely fail to deny having done so during an extensive argument with their accuser?

d87heaven

So the guy is a tool and may have jumped the light (Im betting on he did) but iIt started with the common PCs tactic of trying to get him to state what he did ie jump the red light and incriminate himself. The guy asked a few reasonable (if pedantic and loaded) questions as he is entitled to and then it just turned in to a verbal bout of bullsh##ing.

You could ask.......Why would a policeman grab someones camera. Why did the policeman get tied in knots by a tool.

I feel that it highlights
RJL happens
The police are undertrained or take for granted that people obey them
Debate on a forum is useless
Somne see the guys personna a reason for him being guilty
The flagrant disrespect that society has for the police and(some would say justified after this video)
The interweb stimulates a series of opinions sprinkled with facts.

Allez Mark

I had a look at some of his other youtube vids last night. They pretty much confirmed what I was thinking. The bloke is a complete cock.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AKPQ3cANbU

EDIT: Ha Ha. It says fool where I wrote c**k

kiss my cock

motopatter

notsoblue wrote:

motopatter wrote:

The Beginner wrote:

I think the cyclists attitude 100% suggests.....

I think the cyclists attitude 100% suggests he was wearing green underpants the day before :roll:

lots of people on here judging the cyclist for something which is not apparent on the tape. From the evidence presented (all be it not a complete account of the whole incident) I feel the copper came across as a bit of a bully and a tool. The cyclist was pretty cocky though, but knew more than the copper who then appeared to try and knock the fellas camera off his head. Not befitting for a plod now is it?

Having said that I'd have been mighty tempted to lump the cyclist one if I was the copper.

50:50 imo

Why would a bike mounted police randomly accuse people of jumping red lights? And why would someone who was falsely accused of jumping a red light completely fail to deny having done so during an extensive argument with their accuser?

I don't know, but I haven't jumped to any conclusions either.

I feel I'm only arguing for the sake of it as I could draw the same conclusions about his guilt given his actions :oops: I guess I don't like the way the constable tried to bully the accused when he met with some perfectly reasonable (in that he was entitled to know these things) questions. Copper lost his cool cyclist didn't, but neither were cool 8)