Policeman in the wrong or law student being a dick? [UK]

UglyBolloxFace

Came across this video on Youtube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KL2Z5BcN4io

While I agree that the video title may be a bit exaggerated, I think the cyclist may have some merits in what he did.

If he didn't stand up for his rights, the policeman would have been all over him.

But then again, what's the point in being argumentative with the police - it doesn't get you anywhere.

What do you think?

And a question - say if one of us were in town (any town, Dublin or otherwise) and the Gards stopped you and asked for ID, could we also say something along the lines of what was said in the video?

stovelid

Cyclists deserve everything they get.

RichieC

Probably both.

Duff

Yer man is a twat.

Fart

stovelid wrote: »

Cyclists deserve everything they get.

Here we go again. :rolleyes:

chin_grin

Lets break it down with the opening edited segments. It looks like attention seeking for the 21st century.

What?! "Advised by my lawyer to remain silent." just for running a red light.

He instigated being a c*nt. So of course the policeman is going to be touchy.

stovelid

Fart wrote: »

Here we go again. :rolleyes:

I have trouble assigning gravitas to any posts from somebody called fart.

Wolfe Tone

He is not a law student, his is a freeman or something like that

upandcumming

Cyclist is a complete cunt. I hope he is crushed to the ground by a large lorry. A lorry that is delivering a large container of Coca Cola to me.

Logical Fallacy

So did he run a red light or what?

Temptamperu

Asshole first year student, He cut a red light deserves everything he gets. If I had of been the copper i would of givin him a belt of a torch or trunchen or something.

ejmaztec

This was on here months ago.

Wetbench4

I feel sorry for the copper, you can see he's bricking it in case he says the wrong thing on camera and gets in trouble. Could the cyclist not just stop at the red light, for his own safety if not the law.

Find him, arrest that gob****e. He broke a traffic law, he refused to provide his details to a police officer, he made unreasonable demands of that officer therefore mocking him.

Marcusm

The hilarious thing is that s168 Road Traffic Act 1988 provides the constable with the power to compel the provision of the name and address if he believes he has been guilty of reckless, careless or even inconsiderate cycling. I guess the guy found this out later which is why he did not pursue the matter.

Not sure what his agenda is but to be clear, the Met Commissioner has already confirmed that persons stopped in the UK other than for RTA offences or if in a specially designated area under the Terrorism Act are perfectly entitled to photograph or film the police and are entitled to give a false name or address as there are only very limited circumstances in which a police officer may demand your details. He can obviously arrest you in the commission of a crime but not sure if that was necessarily the case here.

I still love passing through Dublin airport and being told by the Guards to carry a passport (Irish obv) on me at all times while in Ireland!

hatrickpatrick

Someone summarize the video for those who can't stream it right now?

MungBean

Law student my hole, another freeman wasting police time to try can scam his way our of adhering to the law.

The cyclist was lucky the copper didn't invoke the anti-terrorist laws on him, under these rules the officer can arrest anyone who refuses to provide name, address and reason for being in the place he was found. A bit of a catch all!

chin_grin

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Someone summarize the video for those who can't stream it right now?

Man on bike runs red light (supposedly).
Cop stops him to issue ticket.
Man on bike gets uppity and immediately starts going on about his lawyer.
Cop remains cool to a barrage of questions about him having to state the exact law where he has to issue a ticket.
Cop tries to grab camera.
Man on bike has sh*t fit.

It's passive aggression on the man on bikes side. He acted like a knowitall c*nt. I hope it comes back to bite him on the hole.

kumate_champ07

stovelid wrote: »

Cyclists deserve everything they get.

cheaper transport, better health, no traffic jams?

hatrickpatrick

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Someone summarize the video for those who can't stream it right now?

"law student" gets stopped after riding through a red light on his bicycle by a copper on a bicycle, he then goes all "I know my rights" etc to the policeman.
He challenges every single thing the policeman says and in the end does a runner, luckily for him the policeman decides he's more trouble than it's worth, and doesn't go after him.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

chin_grin wrote: »

Lets break it down with the opening edited segments. It looks like attention seeking for the 21st century.

What?! "Advised by my lawyer to remain silent." just for running a red light.

He instigated being a c*nt. So of course the policeman is going to be touchy.

Wetbench4 wrote: »

I feel sorry for the copper, you can see he's bricking it in case he says the wrong thing on camera and gets in trouble. Could the cyclist not just stop at the red light, for his own safety if not the law.

Did he actually run a red light? Was that on camera? Did he admit it?

Hope you guys are never on a jury!

MungBean

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Did he actually run a red light? Was that on camera? Did he admit it?

Hope you guys are never on a jury!

He doesnt have to admit it, the cop seen it and issued him a ticket. He refused to accept it, refused to give his details, refused to even talk of the incident. He acted like a 9 year old, "cant gimme a ticket if I dont want it" kinda logic.

chin_grin

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Did he actually run a red light? Was that on camera? Did he admit it?

Hope you guys are never on a jury!

That's why I put "supposedly" on my last post. I'll edit my original if you like? :pac:

If I was on a jury though I'd love those glasses with the eyes on them. You know the ones. Like that simpsons episode.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

MungBean wrote: »

He doesnt have to admit it, the cop seen it and issued him a ticket. He refused to accept it, refused to give his details, refused to even talk of the incident. He acted like a 9 year old, "cant gimme a ticket if I dont want it" kinda logic.

So the police are infallible then? I see...

On a separate note, can you be arrested for failing to comply with the request of a police officer?

Dudess

If he ran the red light, what a dick for behaving like that. Can't stand pricks who abdicate their own responsibilities.

farna_boy

If he didn't run the red light, I am sure it would have been in the video.

MungBean

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

So the police are infallible then? I see...

On a separate note, can you be arrested for failing to comply with the request of a police officer?

I didnt say the police were infallible, dont make up bullshít to fit your argument.

If the cyclist had issue with the fine he had the opportunity to contest it both to the issuing officer and through the court if he felt the need but he didnt. He decided to ignore the issue completely and antagonise the situation.

He could and should have been arrested until his identity was established.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

farna_boy wrote: »

If he didn't run the red light, I am sure it would have been in the video.

Oh, definitely. I'm just not jumping to conclusions here. I wonder if there is a more sinister reason for withholding the ID. Is he wanted for somethign a bit more serious, perhaps?

stovelid

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

cheaper transport, better health, no traffic jams?

And the ancillary benefits of immunity from road courtesy, Lycra cladding and smugness.

parrai

Information on cycling law in England and Wales

• Home
• Abbreviations
• About
• Contact
• Topics index

When do you have to give your details?

8 February 2011

tags: bikes, cycling, exchanging details, law
by blondwig

My usual bike is a roadie. It seems to have its own way of encouraging me to ride faster and faster, so that regardless of where I’m going I’ll arrive in a fit state for nothing more than a shower, a couple of bananas and a rest.
So recently I’ve started taking a BorisBike to work occasionally, for a more leisurely experience. My only problem with the BorisBikes is that, with alarming frequency, my bum slides off the seat. I’ve tried setting the seat at different heights, and wearing different trousers, but nothing can stop the slide. I haven’t yet called the TfL helpline about it, mainly because I’m worried that, in truth, the problem isn’t with the seat.
BorisBikes have one special feature that normal bikes don’t: an identifying number on the side. I’m no expert, but I presume this means that anyone who knows the number of the bike you were riding, and the time they saw you riding it, could (if TfL helped) trace you.
Obviously tracing the rider of a normal bike, which doesn’t carry an identification number, will be much harder. This made me wonder what the rules are in this area. If you ride a bike, when are you obliged to give your details?
Rather unexpectedly, it turns out that the rules on exchanging details are different, depending on what kind of vehicle you’re driving or riding.
This post looks at the obligations which apply to carsas well as the obligations applying to bikes, because, let’s face it, you might need to know both. If you’re riding your bike and involved in a crash with a car, it might help you to know what the driver of the car is obliged to do afterwards, just as much as it might help to know your own obligations.
This post is about the rules of exchanging details. It’s not a substitute for practical advice for what to do after an accident, which is also easily available on the internet.
Mechanically propelled vehicles
Car drivers have a series of obligations to stop and give details when they’re involved in accidents.
The details are complex. At a basic level, where an accident occurs “owing to the presence of a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road”, and the accident causes injury or (loosely) property damage, the driver has to:

• Stop; and
• Give their name and address and the car’s registration number to anyone who requests it with reasonable grounds (for example because they witnessed or were involved in the accident). (RTA s. 170(1), (2))

If someone requests those details and the driver doesn’t give them, the driver will commit an offence. (RTA s. 170(4))
If there’s no-one around who asks for details, or for some other reason the driver doesn’t give their details at the scene, they have to report the accident to a police station as soon as reasonably practicable and in any event within 24 hours. (RTA s. 170(3))
Failing to comply with these obligations is a serious matter, and can lead to disqualification from driving or even a prison sentence. So if you’re in an accident with a car driver and you ask for the driver’s details and are refused (but you got their registration number, for example) you may want to report it to the police. (RTOA Sch 2)
These obligations only apply to the driver of a mechanically propelled vehicle. This doesn’t include regular (pedal-powered) bicycles, so these obligations don’t apply to you if you’re riding a regular bike.
It does include things like cars, trucks and motorbikes. It also includes e-bikes (i.e. electrically-assisted pedal cycles) – so if you ride an e-bike, you have the same obligations to stop and give details after an accident as a car driver.
Bicycles
If you ride a bike, the rules require you to give your name and address if:

• You are alleged to have committed an offence of dangerous cycling or careless/inconsiderate cycling; and
• You are required by any person with reasonable grounds for asking to give your name and address. (RTA ss. 28, 29, 168(b))

So if there’s an allegation and a request for details, you have to give your name and address. If this happens and you don’t comply (or you give false details), you’ll commit an offence, for which the maximum penalty is £1000 (you can’t be given a FPN). (RTOA Sch 2, 3)
The law doesn’t offer much help understanding how these obligations work in practice. But the conclusions below seem to follow.
First, the person who asks for your details doesn’t need to be a police officer. Anyone can require your details.
Secondly, before you’re obliged to give your details, someone needs to have made an allegation that you were cycling dangerously or carelessly/inconsiderately. But they probably don’t have to mention the specific offences. So:

• A simple “oi, that was dangerous, give me your name and address” would probably be enough to mean that you’d commit an offence if you didn’t comply.
• Similarly if they said “you just crashed into my car, give me your name and address”, they might be implicitly alleging that you cycled carelessly. You’d probably be risking an offence if you refused to answer. This means that if you’re in a crash with a car and ask for the driver’s details, you’re probably obliged to give your details too.
• You might find the police relying on this rule to ask for your name and address if they see you cycling while talking on your mobile (which might be careless cycling).

There are some other practical points to bear in mind too:

• Obviously if you’ve been hurt it’s not a good idea to ride off. But there doesn’t seem to be any obligation on a cyclist to stop after an accident. If you’re gone before anyone alleges or requests anything, it’s difficult to see how you could commit an offence by not giving your details.
• If you do ride off and haven’t given details, then (depending on the circumstances) it might be hard for the requirement to give details to be enforced (unless the police or a witness catch up with you).

Of course a police officer in uniform can require you to stop, and the police seem to have a general power to require your name and address (they can arrest you if they think you’ve committed an offence and can’t ascertain your details).
Hopefully you’ll never need to know any of this. Keep safe, keep your mind on the traffic (and not on the sandpaper contraption you’re going to have to stitch to your jeans to keep your bum on the seat) and happy cycling!
——-


So it would appear the cyclist was being a dick

Dotrel

I'd say yer man stuck up the video thinking he'd become a viral hero or something. Looks like it has backfired on him.

Fair play to the copper for humouring that shíte for a full 5mins before finally having enough. Bloody libtards.

The Scientician

The policeman should have Oaklanded him.

The clown ran a red light... Would he have been so smart if he ended up mashed between the wheels of an artic?

Paparazzo

Cyclist is a knob. "you tried to touch the camera, how dare you, YOU TRIED TO TOUCH THE CAMERA"
Wish the cop beat the camera into his head.

minidazzler

Deleted User wrote: »

Find him, arrest that gob****e. He broke a traffic law, he refused to provide his details to a police officer, he made unreasonable demands of that officer therefore mocking him.

Is it illegal for a cyclist to break a red light? Is there something specifically in the statute books of the UK saying the same?

30Min

What a complete arsehole (the cyclist).

I wonder if someone broke into his house or punched him in the face (which I would love to see), would he be happy for the perpetrator to go on his merry way because the arresting officer couldn't ream off the numerous laws he'd be acting under.

parrai

minidazzler wrote: »

Is it illegal for a cyclist to break a red light? Is there something specifically in the statute books of the UK saying the same?

Logic would suggest it is... I mean, it is creating a hazzard for traffic with the right of way... Think about it. Cyclists have to abide by the same rules as any other road user, goes without saying, I would have thought.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

MungBean wrote: »

I didnt say the police were infallible, dont make up bullshít to fit your argument.

If the cyclist had issue with the fine he had the opportunity to contest it both to the issuing officer and through the court if he felt the need but he didnt. He decided to ignore the issue completely and antagonise the situation.

He could and should have been arrested until his identity was established.

Relax, will you!

All I did was point at the fact that everyone was just assuming he ran the red light! Your argument was that "the cop saw it", my point is that the cop could have simply been wrong, no one is perfect.

mikemac

The constable should have knocked some sense into him with his torch

First year law students, they know everything and they know nothing

Laisurg

Well to be fair if i had a camera in my face i would of done the same thing, I don't actually think he was in the wrong there and was a lot more patient with your man than a lot of other police would of been

MungBean

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Relax, will you!

All I did was point at the fact that everyone was just assuming he ran the red light! Your argument was that "the cop saw it", my point is that the cop could have simply been wrong, no one is perfect.

You implied that my argument was that the cop couldnt have been wrong.

My argument was that the cop seen him, pulled him over. The guy refused to discuss it, refused to accept the ticket and refused to give him details. If he didnt run the red light he should have pointed out that he didnt. He never questioned the officers version of events just refused to accept the officer had authority to deal with it.

Marcusm

minidazzler wrote: »

Is it illegal for a cyclist to break a red light? Is there something specifically in the statute books of the UK saying the same?

It would likely to be careless or inconsiderate cycling which constitute offences under ?s28 RTA if nothing else.

parrai

http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie/rules-for-pedestrians-cyclists-motorcyclists/cyclists/cyclists_other-road-users.html


Don't ever cycle through red traffic lights or pedestrian lights.

(This is according to the RSA)

Dazza Mc kenna

I love how the camera was switched off at the red light :rolleyes:

Dotrel

Why do I get the impression that this div was deliberately running the red light hoping this fella would pull him over. He certainly seemed to have his 'facts' learnt off and also know quite a bit about this particular PC. Not to mention camera ready. Smells like a set-up.

Kinda like yer woman in that video who was causing trouble at the Garda checkpoint on Lower Liffey Street during the Queens visit. One wonders how many times they have to cause the offense before they get the footage they need.

4leto

The cyclist is the a dick, just put your hands up when you know you have done wrong, jaysus as a cyclist, I refuse to recognise redlights, 1 way streets any traffic law. I really should cop on.

holystungun9

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

He is not a law student, his is a freeman or something like that

I am not a number, I am a free man

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xcaxlxgnvf0

Dudess

Police brutality - lol. Fvcking hipsters, trying to find repression where there isn't any. Most of them will end up running daddy's business anyway once they get over their protest fetish phase...

Hank Scorpio

guy filming is a total Muppet, copper seemed decent enough

SeaFields

For all we know he was arrested and charged after being pursued. The power of video editing. Eitherway he seems like a knob-end.