Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
tyreon
Posts: 936
Joined: 4 Oct 2012, 4:39pm

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

Post by tyreon »

This guy(injured cyclist)pursues his campaign for some dent justice: full marks. But for him continuing to do so,all publicity and authorities go on...as is usual. Mmmmm... Loved the bit about 'if it had bin Prince Harry'. Yeh I presented the same argument when I had some wrong doing to myself: sorry man,there's one law for those with £££ and another for the lower orders. Wake up(no offence)!

On a wider topic(and dismiss this bit if you will),I was 'pleased' :twisted: (really not the correct word)that the car driver is using all his cunning to avoid/evade responsibility in getting convicted: at last he is learning from his masters! those politicians/bankers/leaders of GB who have crucified/killed others but have never been held accountable.

I look forward to his next posts. Imagine if the guy was not so educated,shy,ill-spoken,not tech-savvy...he wouldn't get a look-in for any for of retributive justice. People are being shafted every day+++

I wish the guy well. It's his fortitude that carries on the case. Many...others...just give up and go away.
Mark R
Posts: 643
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 7:41pm

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

Post by Mark R »

Unbelievable

The investigating officer used the quality of RS's video as a rationale for not collecting up the other cctv footage from the area.

She failed to notice that the video didn't identify the driver. Seems pretty negligant to me :(
User avatar
Paulatic
Posts: 7804
Joined: 2 Feb 2014, 1:03pm
Location: 24 Hours from Lands End

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

Post by Paulatic »

Paulatic wrote:
Vorpal wrote:
Paulatic wrote:Reading comments elsewhere they say they are a mixed race couple...

what does that have to do with anything :? ?

Perhaps with the enhanced pics the difference in skin colour can be detected?

Vorpal wrote:So, assuming there is a detectable difference in skin colour, it's potentially significant to police and witnesses, but not us?

Not sure what you are trying to say there.
If you mean if they are, and I've no idea as Reginald hasn't said so AFAIK, a mixed race and it has no relevance to us then you are quite right.
If it's the case that the information could have been used for further identification as to determining which of the two were driving then I believe it is relevant to us. Further evidence of the weekness of the CPS.
Last edited by Vorpal on 7 Feb 2016, 7:33pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: fix quotes (no more than three quotes can be nested)
Whatever I am, wherever I am, this is me. This is my life

https://stcleve.wordpress.com/category/lejog/
E2E info
Postboxer
Posts: 1929
Joined: 24 Jul 2013, 5:19pm

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

Post by Postboxer »

He also makes no mention of whether the vehicle was ever located, inspected, whether it had damage or if it had had any repairs. I can't believe how long it took to locate the driver, if he had been killed, I'd hope that they would find out who should have been driving it the same day. It seems they treated it like someone accidentally crashing into a parked car and driving off, rather than treating it as an attempted murder.

I still think if both drivers admit that they drive without due care and attention that they may have nearly killed someone without noticing they had, they should both be banned for driving without due care and attention. Then there's no need to prove who was driving.
Grandad
Posts: 1451
Joined: 22 Nov 2007, 12:22am
Location: Kent

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

Post by Grandad »

It's a pity that the Joint Enterprise rules cannot be used - or could they?
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

Post by Flinders »

Mark R wrote:
Flinders wrote:Just watched the video again; it's clear from watching the other vehicles etc. that the car accelerates into the cyclist.
That's odd.
The cyclist was clearly visible, and the car stayed well behind it for some time (i.e., it's not like a car between pulled out to overtake and the driver of the car behind only saw the bike at the last moment.
I still think there is something odd about this. Even if the driver decided to answer the phone, or text someone, I can still only see why it would maintain speed, not why it would accelerate.



Have you watched the update video? He explains why he believes this was a deliberate attack in a very articulate way.


I only watched part of the new one, it being rather long, and haven't seen any of the four promised, so thanks for that, I will watch them all the way through when I have time.
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

Post by Flinders »

Mark R wrote:Unbelievable

The investigating officer used the quality of RS's video as a rationale for not collecting up the other cctv footage from the area.

She failed to notice that the video didn't identify the driver. Seems pretty negligant to me :(


On the little I know so far, I said before that the fundamental fault seems to me to lie with the police investigation. The cyclist was lucky not to be killed in this hit-and-run. It should have been investigated from the start as a potential attempted murder.
If it really is the case as you say, it is outrageous that cyclists get told on the one hand their videos aren't good enough for an investigation, and on the other they find they are so 'good' that essential other collaborative evidence doesn't get collected.
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

Post by Vorpal »

Paulatic wrote:Not sure what you are trying to say there.
If you mean if they are, and I've no idea as Reginald hasn't said so AFAIK, a mixed race and it has no relevance to us then you are quite right.
If it's the case that the information could have been used for further identification as to determining which of the two were driving then I believe it is relevant to us. Further evidence of the weekness of the CPS.

The part of this that is potentially significant is the two people in the car might look different enough to be distinguished, perhaps by CCTV. It doesn't matter at all that they are a mixed race couple.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

Post by Flinders »

I've just watched more of the videos. I have to say I think the police investigation was a total mess. All that business of 'they have x weeks to respond' was ridiculous. The cyclist was the victim of a hit and run that could have killed him. It ought to have been treated like attempted murder. If anyone had done the same with a gun rather than a car, or anyone had stolen something valuable from someone important, the police would have found out who they were in about ten seconds flat.

As it was, they went about it as if someone had had their wing mirror broken whilst parked. It's hardly surprising the CPS felt there was not much they could do- evidence not collected, suspects not contacted until months afterwards when they could bleat 'I can't remember which of us was driving' (not that that is any defence in this case if you listen to the other evidence). You can't weave without weft.

If the police had wanted (for some reason) the suspects to get off, they couldn't have done a more thorough job of making sure they would. I've often defended the police, my own uncle was a copper and he was a good man, but this time there just isn't anything to defend- not one shred.
irc
Posts: 5192
Joined: 3 Dec 2008, 2:22pm
Location: glasgow

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

Post by irc »

Not impressed with the priority given to this investigation. The postal 172 notices (with a 28 day limit to respond) to a keeper to identify a driver are appropriate for volume offences like speed cameras. Not for a hit and run with serious injuries.

The 28 days limit only applies to a 172 request by post. A verbal request face to face requires an immediate answer. Given the seriousness of this crime I would have thought a better course of action would be tel contact with the lease company to establish who was actually keeping the vehicle. In this case it would seem it was a garage which gave it to the suspect as a courtesy car. Thereafter police attend at the garage and speak to the appropriate person and make a verbal requirement under S172 for the identity of the driver. Result - user of the car identified in a day or two not a month or three. Get a statement from the garage employee then move the enquiry along.
tyreon
Posts: 936
Joined: 4 Oct 2012, 4:39pm

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

Post by tyreon »

What's "Joint Enterprise Rules"? When do they apply? When not? Are these the rules wherein at a murder scene when more than one person is in attendance and no murderer identified,all persons can and are charged with murder?...As in,5 youths going down for a stabbing wherein no one will say who killed X? Or police cannot identify said perpetrator?

Applicable in this case?
beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

Post by beardy »

When do they apply?


When it is "bad" people like gangs who are not entitled to the same level of "innocent until proven guilty" as respectable car drivers are.

Or less cynically when a group is involved in a crime and you cant prove which one actually had the murder weapon in their hand, they are all guilty (as they are deemed to have gone out with a joint mind to commit the crime) and cant all get off because the detail of who's hand is beyond proof.
Must say that the hat fits from the moment the cyclist was hit.
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

Post by Flinders »

irc wrote:Not impressed with the priority given to this investigation. The postal 172 notices (with a 28 day limit to respond) to a keeper to identify a driver are appropriate for volume offences like speed cameras. Not for a hit and run with serious injuries.

The 28 days limit only applies to a 172 request by post. A verbal request face to face requires an immediate answer. Given the seriousness of this crime I would have thought a better course of action would be tel contact with the lease company to establish who was actually keeping the vehicle. In this case it would seem it was a garage which gave it to the suspect as a courtesy car. Thereafter police attend at the garage and speak to the appropriate person and make a verbal requirement under S172 for the identity of the driver. Result - user of the car identified in a day or two not a month or three. Get a statement from the garage employee then move the enquiry along.


I'm relieved to hear that it is actually possible to do this- the video suggested that the investigating officer said it wasn't, and she had to follow the 28 day stuff. Clearly she didn't have to do it this way (as I suspected). Which just reinforces my feeling that the whole investigation was a mess. It certainly needs investigating. If the victim's allegations about what happened during the investigation are true, then the force itself ought to be investigated to find out whose decisions caused the whole mess - and the failure to convict someone of some very serious offences (not least of which was failing to stop).
User avatar
kylecycler
Posts: 1378
Joined: 12 Aug 2013, 4:09pm
Location: Kyle, Ayrshire

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

Post by kylecycler »

tyreon wrote:What's "Joint Enterprise Rules"? When do they apply? When not? Are these the rules wherein at a murder scene when more than one person is in attendance and no murderer identified,all persons can and are charged with murder?...As in,5 youths going down for a stabbing wherein no one will say who killed X? Or police cannot identify said perpetrator?

Applicable in this case?

If you read through the comments under the road.cc coverage of the incident, there's a fellow who posts as 'Dan S' - Daniel Sawyer, apparently - who appears to have extensive legal knowledge. He summarises the policing and legal aspects on Page 2 of the comments - he contends that it's the law that's the problem, not the police or the CPS (although the police investigation certainly seems to have been seriously inadequate) - and the answer to your question concerning Joint Enterprise is at the beginning of Page 3 of the comments:

http://road.cc/content/news/177519-vide ... prosecuted

Daniel Sawyer has also set up the petition linked to earlier in this thread by Vantage:

"My petition:

Increase the penalty for failing to provide driver details under s172 RTA 1988

Failing to provide details of a driver involved in an offence is 6pts and [up to] £1000. This can be exploited where the offence alleged carries a higher penalty than that above (e.g. dangerous driving). The penalty for failing to provide should match that of the offence allegedly committed by the driver.

An example is this case: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-no ... e-35472617 (link is external). A driver deliberately hit a cyclist and drove off. There were two possible drivers and they simply refused to say who was driving. The penalty was 6pts and £150. If the s172 penalty matched the index offence then witholding driver details would cease to be an attractive option. Alternatively, s172 could carry custody where it is wilfully committed."


As Vantage explained, you'll see the petition is awaiting approval.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petition ... ation-info

I don't know anything about this kind of stuff, but when you've got the law preventing justice being done you've got the tail wagging the dog. We need to do something, and hopefully if everybody keeps pushing, this case will be the catalyst.
Last edited by kylecycler on 9 Feb 2016, 10:50pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Paulatic
Posts: 7804
Joined: 2 Feb 2014, 1:03pm
Location: 24 Hours from Lands End

Re: Brutal hit & run - Nottingham

Post by Paulatic »

The petition has been pulled.
Being checked to meet petition standards, says to return in a few days.
Whatever I am, wherever I am, this is me. This is my life

https://stcleve.wordpress.com/category/lejog/
E2E info
Post Reply