Please report dangerous drivers to the police - Roadsafe. Report to plod, not just whinge here.

could probably roadsafe the car undertaking the one in front of it as well.

You should. Proper dick move.

That's quite the dick move.

roadsafe + frozen sausages.

Also submit vid to Motomadness

Kinda wish I had the gopro on the bike still. Did a nice 35 miler to stretch, but barely two miles out and passed with inches to spare. Could have done with evidence and roadsafed them.

So so glad other drivers (even trucks, vans and lorries) were 90% respectful. Only one or two other sub-1M passes. Quite satisfied with drivers in general, for a change.

bet you’ll be super surprised to hear that this guy drives like a massive wanker

1 Attachment

What the

1 Attachment

If there’s a video on there about how to close pass like a motherfucker then it will all make sense

Undertake with a close pass is a 4x combo score for dickishness

Yet another derisory sentence:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/motorist-81-crashes-cyclists-country-12913678

For once it’s actually ok to read the comments.
But anyway, WAC
How in anyone’s mind will it be fine for this guy to drive again in 2 years?
Like 2 years of not driving whilst getting older is going to make him better?
Hit someone through your own fault or kill someone with your car and you should never drive again. It is not a right.

Jesus that makes for some shocking viewing.

How in anyone’s mind will it be fine for this guy to drive again in 2 years?

Has to take an extended re-test which he will fail, I assume.

Yeah I figured the same but why bother giving them the chance?
If you’re a doctor or a solicitor and you break the law and somebody gets hurt/killed/taken advantage of, you’re banned from practising for life.
Yet driving, a much less serious venture, you’re given 2nd, 3rd, 4th chances after KILLING A PERSON THROUGH NEGLIGENCE. (Not in this case luckily though I expect the verdict would have been the same)

It's crazy that the Judiciary have allowed such a leniency in the interpretation of the law regarding car crimes; this case is a shocking example to say the least. It appears that if one needed to murder someone they should pick the car as a weapon because they would probably only get a few points on their license and a minuscule ban/fine.

IANAL but I'm struggling to see how this incident can lead to a charge of dangerous driving, but not causing injury by dangerous driving. Surely serious injury occurred, and it was a direct result of dangerous driving? Or does the law work in some perverse-reverse logic whereby the sentence for the more serious charge just seems a bit too harsh for the poor old motorist bloke, so just go with the lesser charge? Or are broken bones, cracked ribs and concussion not serious injury??

the more serious charge just seems a bit too harsh for the poor old motorist bloke, so just go with the lesser charge

Every time this. Very often see drivers getting off on causing death by dangerous driving and instead getting a careless driving charge resulting in a slapped wrist.

Might the CPS have offered to drop the more serious charge if he admitted (therefore avoiding a trial by jury) the lesser one?

Very possibly. Just frustrating as, yes a prosecution for a lesser charge is better than acquittal for the greater charge but the greater charge is the one he’s actually committed so very obviously.
He did drive dangerously, he did cause serious injury.
Our justice system is fantastic but it falls short in these cases badly.

CPS's main priority for the last 15 years is to increase conviction rates, above anything else. I should know, I worked for them back then.

If they are more likely to get a conviction on a lesser charge, then they will, at the expense of adequate punishment and reducing crime.

Was that a decision based on lack of resources? Go for the most convictions with the limited resources available?

Proving all accusations beyond reasonable doubt in court is hard work I'm guessing, and without the time and resources then it wasn't possible.

I understand there would be a limit, some would just not have enough evidence available at all.

As far as I can tell, Tarrant said he had no idea there were any cyclists and no idea he'd collided with any cyclists. That's why he wasn't done with Leaving The Scene. Which is terrifying.

Tarrant said he had no idea there were any cyclists and no idea he'd collided with any cyclists.

It's bazzar that this is a cast iron get out of jail free card for motorists, rather than admitting there guilt. I wonder if Charlie Alliston had tried that in court he would have walked away a free man.

His world may just have fallen apart the other day:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/16/shock-over-ruling-that-brides-of-christ-need-not-be-virgins

That was absolutely shocking to watch.

It doesn’t say how they identified the driver. I’m guessing via his license plate from the video footage. Which is scary to think if those cyclist didn’t have cameras on their bicycles he would of never been identified/held accountable.