-
-
-
-
The traffic sergeant that came to the scene was obviously trying not to put the driver at fault to cover the polices own ass, but in this situation it is hardly going to be the cyclists fault.
I wouldn't way that for definite, there's always a lot of politics when investigating someone from another division. Also, similar to a driver admitting fault at an accident, an officer of the same organisation also should not admit fault for a whole raft of insurance and legal reasons.
However, in case of any possible collusion, sit on them on this one. Make sure you track and log every single move. Also, get your precedents in order and get them to the police. You don't want them swerving the investigation under a presumption of rider illegality.
Get straight onto the Local Authority about the CCTV. They should provide you with full details of all council, city, police and private systems in the area that might provide even a shred of coverage. If get stalled even once then start citing Data Protection and Freedom of Information.
All the best to Mary of course.
-
-
hippy, you can get custom handlebar tape from these people - http://www.offthefront.com/sports.htm
-
-
-
-
-
-
they can't be charging ID-less cyclists with vagrancy surely Shirley?
That's a bum rap.
No, indeed they can't. But as mentioned upthread, if they have witnessed you commiting an offence (as opposed to crime) then it becomes offense to withhold information or provide false information.
If you say you don't have an address, you just confessed to vagrancy.
If you provide an address, they can always take you there to check. One might presume you would at least be carrying keys. They are a form of proof of ID. Even if you aren't carrying keys, it's not unreasonable that they might expect you to tell them your plans to regain entry to said address.It's quite easy to see how withholding ID can turn into a big clusterfuck for yourself ending up with the police engaging in a book throwing exercise. No bell, that's an offence. No reflector, that's an offense. No reflectors on your pedals, that's an offence. Wasting police time, that's an offence. And so it goes.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
What about all the Bxastard motorists using mobile phones or stopping in the centre of yellow box junctions, when do they get their tickets! Could you photograph motorists and their number plates on the phone at busy road junctions or wherever and then give the evidence to the police? I wonder if they would do anything?
If you do it as an official report then they occaisionally send out a PCSO to have a word with the driver to remind them to obey the law. Otherwise its a polite letter saying please don't do it again because it means more paperwork for us.
-
-
-
DPA (not FOI due to public interest issues) create a transaction between the member of the public and the local authority (or private business) that is independant of the police. By law, this cannot be refused, regardless of the severity of crime involved. However, the local authority may elect to inform the police of a request relating to an ongoing investigation. This is where the law balances well in Mary's favour.
Lost CCTV isn't something that the police could get to easily, even if they were so inclined.
Amazed at the pessimism here. Just because the police are "an authority" doesn't make them some all powerful entity who indulge in endless black bag operations to protect their own. They have a large insurance policy for a reason.