• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

cyclist hit and run captured on video. Driver refused to confirm he was driving

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tak3n

Banned
Totally baffling decision from the police here in the UK, basically this guy was run over by a hire car who drove off, the police tracked down the people who were driving, but because they refused to confirm it was them driving, the police could only charge them for failing to provide details

Result £150 fine!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ua92cASvgw

Police say there is not enough evidence to prosecute a hit-and-run driver who accelerated into a cyclist - despite the incident being captured on video.
The video clearly shows the car number plate, but it was a hire vehicle and Nottinghamshire Police said it cannot prove who was driving.
Instead, a man who was eligible to drive the car has been fined £150 for failing to provide driver details.
In a statement, the force said it was "disappointed" with the outcome.
Click to expand...



He wrote under the video: "To this day I have no idea why the driver did this to me, there was no confrontation with any driver prior to the attack, I do not know the driver or the car.
"I was not riding my normal route at my normal time so I do not think this attack was planned. Just a senseless and brutal attack on a fellow human being."
He said he needed four months to recover from his injuries, with a further month of physiotherapy, having suffered a severe back injury and internal haemorrhaging.
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-35472617
 
In a statement, the force said it was "disappointed" with the outcome.
Click to expand...

cce08e4ddc38b89270cc7f3efaef27fc.jpg
 
Is that Leeds? Looks like Leeds. Anyway, that's awful, but the bit at the end is a bit over dramatic. I understand a lot of people are pricks to cyclists but comparing it to racism and sexism?

Edit: Read the article, it's Nottingham.
 
PipefishUK said:
Is that Leeds? Looks like Leeds. Anyway, that's awful, but the bit at the end is a bit over dramatic. I understand a lot of people are pricks to cyclists but comparing it to racism and sexism?
Click to expand...

I think he is just angry and baffled and spouting off
 
Bishop89 said:
they have his bloody number plate... jesus fuck.
Click to expand...


"I wasn't driving"

But the car was registered to you at the time

"Yeah but I wasn't driving"

Who was driving?

"Not telling"

OK then. we will give you £150 fine for not giving us the details.

"Done"

fucking ridiculous
 
PipefishUK said:
Is that Leeds? Looks like Leeds. Anyway, that's awful, but the bit at the end is a bit over dramatic. I understand a lot of people are pricks to cyclists but comparing it to racism and sexism?
Click to expand...

on the other hand, he got run over by a car (very likely intentionally) so maybe he's not being over-dramatic, at least not from his perspective
 
Bishop89 said:
they have his bloody number plate... jesus fuck.
Click to expand...

I know, I was like WTF, the guy got caught out by him having a reverse camera and he still gets away with it simply by refusing to speak...

they should of took his silence as guilt FFS instead of letting him off, any sensible minded Jury would of been able to see right through it..

also if i was that cyclist I would be issuing a private prosecution
 
I commute to work everyday by cycle, and I see shit like this all the time, but........

Is there any actual proof that he got hit?, all I see is him going down and no impact?, is there any other angle that I can't see?
 
Jazzy Geoff said:
"I wasn't driving"

But the car was registered to you at the time

"Yeah but I wasn't driving"

Who was driving?

"Not telling"

OK then. we will give you £150 fine for not giving us the details.

"Done"

fucking ridiculous
Click to expand...

It's a poor result. But they have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that that person was driving the car at the time. A court won't accept that just because they have the plate. Maybe it would be better to have the 'driver' go to court over the fail to provide the driver and see if his attitude holds up, but I'm not in the UK and maybe someone else might have more insight into that.

Edit: also as pointed out above there's probably a good civil claim for the cyclist.
 
danowat said:
I commute to work everyday by cycle, and I see shit like this all the time, but........

Is there any actual proof that he got hit?, all I see is him going down and no impact?, is there any other angle that I can't see?
Click to expand...

What? A car accelerates into him and he goes down. What more do you want?

Edit: If you are seriously just blind or ignorant:

Fvzlsw7.gif
 
Did the driver at least confirm who else was driving his car? Was it reported stolen?

Surely there's more of an investigation for a violent attack than asking the accused if they did it.
 
Shuggananas said:
Backwards law. By default you should be considered the driver if you're the owner. It's called responsibility.
Click to expand...

Which is why the guy who hired it is obligated to provide the driver. His refusal leads to the fine, which in this case seems inadequate because of the circumstances. No reason he can't be prosecuted if further witnesses who can put him behind the wheel come forward.
 
xxracerxx said:
What? A car accelerates into him and he goes down. What more do you want?

Edit: If you are seriously just blind or ignorant:
Click to expand...

Chill dude, it was an honest mistake, for some reason the video started about a minute in and only saw the front facing camera, just rewatched in from the beginning and can see it now.
 
do you know what else stinks here, if it was a speeding ticket he would of been took to court for it, but knocking someone off their bike.... no money for the state so unless you tell us the truth you can go!
 
Tak3n said:
do you know what else stinks here, if it was a speeding ticket he would of been took to court for it, but knocking someone off their bike.... no money for the state so unless you tell us the truth you can go!
Click to expand...

That's because cyclists are fair game, the majority of car drivers don't give a fuck about us.
 
danowat said:
Chill dude, it was an honest mistake, for some reason the video started about a minute in and only saw the front facing camera, just rewatched in from the beginning and can see it now.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I was reacting to your nonchalant attitude about the impact when the actual video spoke for itself.
 
I don't see what difference it makes that it is a higher car or not. He was the only person registered to drive it. Surely this defence would be used all the time for traffic crimes if it worked?
 
I'd be all in favour of a reversal of the burden of proof in cases like this. As in, being the guy who was renting the car at the time it's almost certain he was the driver. So unless he has something persuasive to say about where he was / who else was driving at the time, it's beyond doubt in my mind that it was him.

Hiding behind a refusal to give details is cowardly.

Edit:

A civil suit would obviously use the lower threshold of "balance of probabilities", which I would think would be easily satisfied.
 
Shuggananas said:
Backwards law. By default you should be considered the driver if you're the owner. It's called responsibility.
Click to expand...

Bullshit. My ex-wife constantly got ticketed for running reds while driving my car. Should I be held responsible for her actions? If they cant prove who was driving, then you can't fine/prosecute.

Also, what is a "hire car?" Is that a rental car?
 
Leynos said:
Bullshit. My ex-wife constantly got ticketed for running reds while driving my car. Should I be held responsible for her actions? If they cant prove who was driving, then you can't fine/prosecute.
Click to expand...
I'm talking in the case where you can't prove who it is.
Also if you had been held responsible the first time I'm sure you'd have stopped lending her your car, which is the right thing to do, you were being irreponsible by letting her considering what she'd do.
 
Leynos said:
Bullshit. My ex-wife constantly got ticketed for running reds while driving my car. Should I be held responsible for her actions? If they cant prove who was driving, then you can't fine/prosecute.

Also, what is a "hire car?" Is that a rental car?
Click to expand...

If she got ticketed for running reds while driving your car and there was no photographic proof, yes you should be held responsible.

A hire car is indeed a rentl.
 
Tak3n said:
do you know what else stinks here, if it was a speeding ticket he would of been took to court for it, but knocking someone off their bike.... no money for the state so unless you tell us the truth you can go!
Click to expand...

To be honest the guy could have been given 6 points and a £1,000 fine for not identifying the driver so yea, it does stink a bit.
 
Horrendous. As far as I can see that's attempted murder at worst and dangerous driving at best. Why don't the police look at his mobile phone records and they'll find out where he's been that day and see if it corroborates with the accident location. They have the exact time and location of the accident. Assuming he has a mobile with him, I'd expect most people do. Then try him to see if he's guilty beyond all reasonable doubt with any other evidence gathered.
 
I thought these days because if this issue with speeding tickets they just assumed it was the registered keeper and gave them the fine, and it was up to them to argue the toss.

Ridiculous that they didn't do the same here.
 
OriginalThinking said:
Horrendous. As far as I can see that's attempted murder at worst and dangerous driving at best. Why don't the police look at his mobile phone records and they'll find out where he's been that day and see if it corroborates with the accident location. They have the exact time and location of the accident. Assuming he has a mobile with him, I'd expect most people do. Then try him to see if he's guilty beyond all reasonable doubt with any other evidence gathered.
Click to expand...

it looks like the guy is guilty, he knows he guilty but has told the cops he was not driving, he does not know who was and it is up to them to prove he was..

the cops have gone to the CPS (who decide what charges to go with) and they have turned round and decided they wont win in court so let him off
 
DBT85 said:
I thought these days because if this issue with speeding tickets they just assumed it was the registered keeper and gave them the fine, and utility was up to them to argue the toss.

Ridiculous that they didn't do the same here.
Click to expand...

exactly! that is why this is disgusting, you have to prove it was not you for a speeding ticket, but nearly kill someone, suddenly you dont have to prove shit
 
As a firm believer in "in dubio pro reo", I absolutely agree that owning a car and driving a car are 2 diffeent things, and the plate only proves the first. and no, as the owner you most certainly should not be legally responsible for whatever crime the driver is commiting, that is ridicoulus.

However, since this is a serious offense, should there not be a bigger investigation that goes further than only runnung the plates? I am certain there are ways to prove or at least some leads that could be used in a trial. Does the cyclist need to take some legal action for this to happen?
 
PipefishUK said:
Is that Leeds? Looks like Leeds. Anyway, that's awful, but the bit at the end is a bit over dramatic. I understand a lot of people are pricks to cyclists but comparing it to racism and sexism?

Edit: Read the article, it's Nottingham.
Click to expand...
Yeh attempted murder is a pretty mild offense.

/s
 
Doesn't this mean that for any speeding fine that would exceed 150 pounds you could just refuse to say you were driving? Pretty messed up. Fuck that driver.
 
This must be a resourcing issue. I'm sure if they wanted to they could make decent case.

Did anyone see him drive off in the car? Was the car reported stolen? Who returned the car? What was he doing when the incident occurred? Finger prints on the wheel? Phone records?

They just couldn't be arsed to make it stick for the sake of a dangerous driving conviction but this should be ABH at the very least.
 
Tak3n said:
it looks like the guy is guilty, he knows he guilty but has told the cops he was not driving, he does not know who was and it is up to them to prove he was..

the cops have gone to the CPS (who decide what charges to go with) and they have turned round and decided they wont win in court so let him off
Click to expand...

I think the CPS is too keen in many cases to "pre-judge" the case. I'm sure they know their stuff and that they are smart people, but surely their job isn't merely to ensure that they have a high win ratio? If you asked most people, I think they'd say there's good reason to take the alleged driver to court, even if the prospect of success is fairly low.
 
I bet the hiring company has something in their T and Cs that says when you are hiring a car you are responsible for it. There must be other factors here as it is the simplest piece of investigation to go to the hire company and check who had hired the car in the period when the video was captured. Perhaps that's the bit that couldn't be relied upon, the time and date of the accident.
 
QuicheFontaine said:
I think the CPS is too keen in many cases to "pre-judge" the case. I'm sure they know their stuff and that they are smart people, but surely their job isn't merely to ensure that they have a high win ratio? If you asked most people, I think they'd say there's good reason to take the alleged driver to court, even if the prospect of success is fairly low.
Click to expand...
I have heard from police officer friends that the CPS doesn't usually take on cases unless they think they have a high probability of winning it. Comes down to expenses and volumes, from what I heard.
 
Striek said:
Doesn't this mean that for any speeding fine that would exceed 150 pounds you could just refuse to say you were driving? Pretty messed up. Fuck that driver.
Click to expand...

I think that's different. If you get a ticket but wasn't driving you can always demand that the guy who was pays for it. If he doesn't you can take him to court over it. It makes sense for the owner to have final responsibility in those cases because he can be expected to have the means for compensation. This is different, if you get convicted for assaulting someone with a vehicle - or even attempted manslaughter - you could end up in jail, that's not something you can compensate on your own in cases where you weren't the driver and that means that the court needs more evidence before convicting you.

I'm still baffled he got away with it though. It should have been possible to combine the fact that he had access to the car with witness statements and examining his planner or similar to prove that the possibility of him being the driver is very high. I mean this is a pretty serious crime that comes with video evidence, it shouldn't be impossible to prosecute.
 
kavanf1 said:
I have heard from police officer friends that the CPS doesn't usually take on cases unless they think they have a high probability of winning it. Comes down to expenses and volumes, from what I heard.
Click to expand...

Sounds about right. I think it's a shame, but understandable. They've got a job to do, and routinely losing cases would probably get them roasted as being "poor value for the taxpayer", or somesuch.

Dunno what anyone can do about it really, but as I said it's a shame.
 
Leynos said:
Bullshit. My ex-wife constantly got ticketed for running reds while driving my car. Should I be held responsible for her actions? If they cant prove who was driving, then you can't fine/prosecute.

Also, what is a "hire car?" Is that a rental car?
Click to expand...

Can't fine or prosecute? What?

Are you seriously saying that you said "well I wasn't driving, I dunno what happened!" And the courts dropped the fine?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

EU mandates all new vehicles need to have AI camera that films the driver
2 3
103
285
LordCBH replied
Uber Held Liable, Ordered to Pay $8.5 Million in Driver Rape Suit
2
50
1K
xrnzaaas replied
Kiefer Sutherland arrested and accused of assaulting ride-share driver, L.A. police say
2
87
2K
jason10mm replied
Microsoft Deprecates Legacy Printer Drivers on Windows 11
News 
19
666
Futaleufu replied
Disney Layoffs Hit Marvel Studios Hard
2
59
1K
Vlodril replied
Top Bottom