CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 15years old!
Well done to ALL posters
It soon became useful and entertaining. There are regular posters, people who add useful info occasionally and plenty more who drop by to watch. That's fine. If you want to add news/comments it's easy to register and become a member.
RULES No personal insults. No swearing.
This is important -
"
RoadPolicingScot (@polscotrpu)
15/05/2017, 5:03 pm
Edinburgh officers continuing to influence road user behaviour through education & enforcement. Recent footage? Phone 101 quoting #OpClosePass
http://pic.twitter.com/a0UuRbUwwf
"
Hope 101 has been suitably briefed.
Wonder what they say about how to send footage.
You show it to an officer in person. If they intend to prosecute, rather than just educate, they'll ask for a copy on a CD.
@chdot - 101 have been briefed! However that's why we're doing the 'pilot' before considering a national rollout. If it works in Edinburgh it will work anywhere in Scotland.
I've got some reporting guidance ready to post, I was waiting for 'helmet-gate' to subside first so that the advice didn't get lost.
As my last comment on that topic, I'll put this out there; whilst I personally agree that helmet wearing is no substitute/consideration for road safety (and the decision to wear one or not is entirely an individuals), the Highway Code does offer different advice? The tweet came from a national account from someone unconnected with the Close Pass project. For sometime there has been little public consideration of vulnerable road users and the fact that the thought (although potentially misguided in the bigger picture) of cyclists is in their head and now a consideration can only be a positive step forward. As many have previously said 'what are you doing to change officers' attitudes?' I'm still working on the 'evidential bakery runs'.
I have fed back the general feeling and they are now very well aware. I have also asked them not to make mention of 'campag v shimano' or 'factory v hand built wheels'.
I'll get the reporting guidance up shortly (although this malware attack from downloaded links is problematic at present).
Shimano and hand built if you were wondering!
Safe cycling.
"I have also asked them not to make mention of 'campag v shimano' or 'factory v hand built wheels'."
You trying to be controversial?
Think you need to start a new thread.
Very useful insights into the workings of PS.
I hope you have cause to be optimistic about 'culture change' within and also with 'the public'.
You'll be aware of other issues -
http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10940&page=18#post-250211
@ Dom D have you come across our isolated padded cell?
@Dom D - you should probably add "share the road" to the prohibited list of police-used terms.
Sharing by Bikeyface, on Flickr
http://bikeyface.com/2014/11/13/sharing/
Robert
Yes.
I don't know who I am quoting, but:
To a driver, "Share the Road" means "Get out of my way".
To a cyclist, "Share the Road" means "Please don't kill me".
@chdot - 'You'll be aware of other issues'
Very.
@chdot 'Dom D have you come across our isolated padded cell?'
Seems the perfect place for 'that' debate!
"
NorthEastPolice (@NorthEPolice)
16/05/2017, 08:52
@ABZ_Cyclecam #OpClosePass was being trialled by @polscotrpu in Edinburgh and any decision on future roll out of the scheme will be decided by them.
"
"
Dan Dilloway (@straywasp)
16/05/2017, 08:59
Hey @PompeyPolice , you wanna lend me one of those helmet cams for #OpClosePass? I'd get you loads of hits
"
@Dom D
One of the great things about the WMP operation is that when they pulled people over for close passes they often discovered a multitude of other easily-prosecutable sins, e.g. no MOT, no insurance, no tax, faulty tyres, headlights, plates, etc.
That acts as a real deterrent, especially when "how many are caught" and "what for" is publicised (the WMP did this via Twitter, blogs, etc.)
I remember when "I were a lad" I used to advise boy racers to always make sure they never had faulty brake/head lights, as this would give good reason for the police to pull you over and potentially discover other things (or at least delay you by breathalysing, asking awkward questions, etc.)
Therefore, it would be good if you could publicise some info about drivers caught/referred/prosecuted/educated for "other things" via social media (or your media of choice), and on here if possible.
That could be particularly good for mobile phone use - the number of drivers you can spot while walking or cycling seems very high.
a multitude of other easily-prosecutable sins
I think people can invalidate their insurance if they don't have a current MOT or VED or have made an illegal customisation. That might explain why it's so common.
Michael O'Reilly (MichaelOReilly_)
9:46 AM - 13 May 2017
Cyclists know - and fear - this, because from a bike saddle it's easy to see what people are doing in their cars ...
https://twitter.com/MichaelOReilly_/status/863314606353031168
VED does not have any insurance related implications as far as aware, modifications may but unlikely to picked up by a police officer, more likely to be found by an assessor after a crash. As it would be up to the insurance company to decide don’t think someone likely to be prosecuted for no insurance without an incident and a company refusing to pay. With no MOT insurance can be invalidated
Reporting:
It’s fair to say, reporting has been hit and miss in the past and probably largely dependent on which officer attended. Same problem with video footage, some people view it and wince and others can’t see what the fuss is about.
However, Road Policing management has instructed that all close pass (careless driving against vulnerable road user) type offences in Edinburgh will be investigated by Edinburgh RP officers. In reality they’ll probably land on my desk!
How to report…
If you’re involved in a collision, call the Police straight away, depending on the circumstances, officers will generally attend and deal with the incident there and then.
For a careless driving (no collision) offence to stand any chance of success you really need video footage to corroborate your report.
We use the term ‘close pass’ as a general heading. In reality we are looking at careless and inconsiderate driving. Distance alone is not sufficient. There has to be other elements. Speed, making you wobble, exclaim, brake heavily, change route, cause oncoming traffic to take evasive action, three lines of traffic in two lanes at the same time, not using a second lane when available, overtaking and turning left immediately that type of thing in addition to the distance is what we’re looking for.
You’ll know it’s worth reporting because when you get home you’ll still be mad about it. I don’t want people cycling for 40 minutes and then watching 40 minutes of footage looking for examples. Cycling is not about that. You’ll know when it warrants reporting.
IF YOU HAVE NO FOOTAGE
If you witnessed a particularly poor piece of driving and want to tell us about it for intelligence purposes or for location selection for future activity please use the ContactUs option on the PSOS website. We’ll talk to you about what happened and decide the best course of action based on the circumstances.
IF YOU HAVE FOOTAGE
The footage must be high quality, show two minutes before and two minutes afterwards.
You have two options;
1) Post it to a media sharing site and have your 15 minutes (+) of fame. Tag the vehicles registration number in the footage (it’s not unbeknown for a quick google search of a registration number when someone tells me ‘this is the first time I’ve ever done that officer’). You can still email ContactUs and tell us about it for intelligence/site selection but we will not formally progress it.
2) Call 101 and report the incident, They’ll ask if the incident was within 48 hours, do you have video footage and are you prepared to go to court? If you can’t answer yes to all these questions we can’t progress it and it will be for intelligence purposes only.
If the incident occurred out with Edinburgh, a diary appointment will likely be offered and a regular officer will attend (they will have support). If the incident occurred within Edinburgh you will be given an incident number and the report will be sent to my office. My colleagues or I will pick up the report and contact you. We’ll have a chat about what happened and work out a way of viewing the footage. DO NOT POST PUBLICLY ON SOCIAL MEDIA.
It’s no secret that our IT systems have significant failings when it comes to modern technology, however if I waited for a competent IT platform before launching this operation we’d all be riding hover bikes. Your cameras are better than most shops CCTV systems and I’ve successfully presented them to a court so we’ll find a way to work with you.
You’ll also get sent a self-reporting form to complete. This is basically a statement template where you tick boxes and write down what happened and your thoughts prior to an officer attending. This makes collating your formal (court) statement much simpler.
Once we've read your report and seen your footage we’ll decide what action to take (the report asks for your thoughts on appropriate action as well).
This is still an on going work with the Procurator Fiscal and is subject to change, but for now it hopefully offers an improved way of reporting with some consistency.
Generally evidence of provocation, poor riding standards or disproportionate reaction will result in no action being taken.
You’ll not like every decision we make, but we’ve got to prove beyond all reasonable doubt.
Dom, that is very clear advice
cheers
Generally evidence of provocation
What exactly would constitute "provocation"?
It seems strange that we're talking about acts of (potential) violence and that the laws seems to be suggesting that the victim was asking for it.
It's all about presenting you as the perfect witness, so that the defence cannot cloud the issue of careless driving. Otherwise known as creating 'a reasonable doubt'.
DO NOT POST PUBLICLY ON SOCIAL MEDIA.
Happy to oblige - but wondering why this is? Police forces further south seem to be able to take action, but perhaps only in particularly egregious cases.
@Frenchy - it's geared towards the 'right to a fair trial'. Public postings attract views and comments and we would like to negate the argument that the trial would not be fair - like a self imposed media blackout if you will.
Once your report/case has concluded you can post away.
Makes sense. Ta.
Do you know who I should be prodding regarding bringing the operation to Midlothian/East Lothian? Councillors/MSPs/Stephen Innes...? The relevant police twitter accounts don't seem to be responsive.
@Frenchy - I'm pushing internally and CI Innes is very supportive within RP. Beyond that it all gets a bit political and I'm not best placed to advise I'm afraid.
Thanks!
It's all about presenting you as the perfect witness
Maybe I'm getting the wrong idea of what constitutes "provocation" from someone on a bicycle, but for some reason I'm reminded of police bringing up the length of rape victim's skirts...
Now, over the last 30 years, police seem to have decided that short skirts aren't justifiable "provocation" for rape.
But when it comes to endangering cyclists... it sounds like there might still be the sense that they were asking for it?
(By, for example, not riding in the gutter?)
Again, maybe I misunderstand what constitutes "provocation." Maybe there is something that cyclists do where they are asking for it?
Perhaps this 'provocation' might be where cyclist removes a wing mirror while under-taking followed by a 'punishment pass' captured on camera. There is lower hanging fruit for the police to deal with.
"You’ll know it’s worth reporting because when you get home you’ll still be mad about it"
THAT'S a good guide!
Clearly some people shrug at things that others wouldn't, but if more people are to feel it's safe to cycle, it's perhaps best that people report things that 'more experienced' cyclists may just regard as 'that's just the way it is'.
"maybe I misunderstand what constitutes "provocation" "
I'm sure we've all seen stuff done by people on bikes that might be regarded as 'foolish' (or worse).
I'm sure police won't regard 'taking primary' as "provocative" even if the driver behind does.
Taking primary and deliberately zigzagging might be seen as provocative (discuss).
@gibbo
I would say it is where police perceive the chance of a successful prosecution.
If they have spent a lot of time and resources on pursuing a series of prosecutions in the past which failed because a hotshot defence lawyer introduces sufficient doubt, they will recognise the warning signs and concentrate (dwindling) resources on what is likely to succeed.
It is more a reflection that the judiciary is behind the times and police approach is necessarily influenced by that.
Unfortunately IMO that leads to a race to the bottom where only those who can't afford a hotshot lawyer are worth pursuing...
Also there are many reported cases of officers saying SMIDGAF, but kudos to DomD for trying to change that. We all wish him luck.
It is more a reflection that the judiciary is behind the times and police approach is necessarily influenced by that.
Sure, but is there any reason why the police can't influence that politically?
I'd suggest that, once you get anywhere near the top, the police force is a political entity and, if it's being prevented (by the courts) from getting convictions, then there's no reason why it is unable to bring this up to the justice minister.
kudos to DomD for trying to change that. We all wish him luck.
We certainly do. But let's not forget the police are starting from a position of practically ignoring cyclists' rights.
It's nice that, it's improving. For example, that the police are no longer falsely pretending that bike cam footage can't be used in court.
But there's still a long way to go until we get to the point where dangerous driving around cyclists is something that has consequences.
You must log in to post.
Cycling in Edinburgh Flickr group
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
posts