Police Vs Cyclist

Cornucopia

Iceweasel wrote: »

I wouldn't presume that at all.

So... what is the situation? It sounds like there are motor-propelled vehicles, and carriages (which includes bicycles and presumably ox-carts and gypsy caravans).

There's also electrically-propelled bicycles and electric trikes, which are a different class, with different rules.

https://www.gov.uk/electric-bike-rules

Anything else? Or are unicycles, skateboards, etc. banned from the roads?

Iceweasel

Cornucopia wrote: »

So... what is the situation? It sounds like there are motor-propelled vehicles, and carriages (which includes bicycles and presumably ox-carts and gypsy caravans).

There's also electrically-propelled bicycles and electric trikes, which are a different class, with different rules.

https://www.gov.uk/electric-bike-rules

Anything else? Or are unicycles, skateboards, etc. banned from the roads?

I'm unsure of the situation re skateboards, but unicycles are very trendy at the moment - I can't say the streets are full of them - but they are not an uncommon sight.

I noticed one unfortunate unicyclist was trapped under a double-decker only a couple of days ago.

Amazingly passing members of the public LIFTED the bus off him.

You just can't make this kind of headline up:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/05/29/london-crowd-lifts-double-decker-bus-injured-unicyclist_n_7467698.html

It's on a par with 'Freddy Starr ate my Hamster'.

Dr._Shoe

Car_54 wrote: »

Not quite all. Pedestrians and horse riders do not require to obey traffic lights.

Actually they are. Walking in the road without due cause is an offence and horse riders are supposed to comply with the road traffic act as much as a cyclist does in that they are compelled to ride on the left [in the UK] and should give appropriate signals (BHS Riding and Road Safety). Moreover, horse riders should ensure due dilligence that their horses are sufficiently schooled for normal road traffic.

Apart from all that it is basic safety. You do not want to be crossing a busy junction on a horse with the lights against you!:eek:

shaun_from_Africa

Car_54 wrote: »

The DVLA's answer is correct. "Vehicle" is not defined in the Act, and does not need to be. If the question arises, the courts will look to the dictionary definition.

That's fine providing that there is only one dictionary. As there isn't, which one would you use
This one:

Vehicle
B1 [C] formal a machine, usually with wheels and an engine, used for transporting people or goods on land, especially on roads:

which implies that vehicles usually have an engine
or this one:

The definition of a vehicle is a type of transportation or a way that something is conveyed.

which means that as a horse is a type of transportation, it must class as a vehicle.

It is for this reason that UK legislation generally has an interpretation section in the acts to avoid definition problems.

Iceweasel

Dr._Shoe wrote: »

Actually they are. Walking in the road without due cause is an offence

Where did you find that? And what be classed as 'due cause'?

Even in the Highway Code is just says should use a pathway or pavement if provided - not a must.

If we are going to have walking, running or jogging in the road deemed illegal then the courts will be jam-packed in no time.

Car_54

Dr._Shoe wrote: »

Actually they are. Walking in the road without due cause is an offence Really? Under what legislation? and horse riders are supposed to comply with the road traffic act If that were they case, the Act would say so. It doesn't. as much as a cyclist does in that they are compelled to ride on the left [in the UK] and should give appropriate signals (BHS Riding and Road Safety). The BHS may well give excellent advice, but they don't make the laws.

Note that I am not suggesting that horse riders should jump the lights, just that it would not be an offence. There may be some other obscure offence (dangerous riding?) the rider could be charged with.

matttye

Wig wrote: »

Ok,

So what about some of the cyclists video captions?

1. Is he (cyclist) obliged to take the paperwork?
A. I would think not

2A. Is he (cyclist) required to identify himself?
A. I would think not.

2B. Can he be arrested for failing to provide identification or failing to identify himself?
A. I would think not, but he can be arrested in order to determine his identity, as he suspected of commiting an offence. These might sound like the same thing but I think there is a subtle difference.

2C. After being arrested as such, when at the station is there any obligation on him to identify himself? If he refuses to identify himself how long can he be detained by the police?
A. I don't know.

3A. I don't think a policeman has to quote verbatim what any section says.
But I do think that a policeman has to know what section they are arresting someone under.

3B. Does a constable have to say it as part of their arrest? i.e. "I am arresting you under S24 PACE to determine your identity, because I saw you go through a red traffic signal"
or
do they merely have to state "You are under arrest, you have the right to remain silent etc..."

3C. And if they do not say under what law you are being arrested, do they have to tell you if you then ask them to do so? And do they have to say so there and then or can they say "I will tell you when we get to the station."?

1. No, not at all. If he refuses a fixed penalty he's more likely to end up with a summons, will have to appear in court and will receive a higher fine, prosecution costs and criminal courts charge (if offence committed after dd April 2014 - I can't remember the exact date).

2A. If the officer can't establish his name and address the "necessity" criteria for an arrest is fulfilled. There are other reasons that make it necessary to arrest, but not know the suspect's name and address is one of them.

2B. See 2A.

2C. Once at the police station, the police will check his fingerprints (with or without his consent -- they can be taken by force) and if he's ever been through the system before, they'll be matched to the database unless his records have been deleted for whatever reason. Police often catch out people who have given a false name by running their fingerprints. Suspects can be detained for a maximum of 24 hours initially, but that can be extended to 36 hours by a superintendent and all the way up to 96 hours by a magistrates' court. Different timings apply to suspected terrorists. Failure to identify yourself is likely to result in a charge of obstructing police in the execution of their duty, so will just make matters worse.

3A. s.28 PACE confirms the information that needs to be given on the arrest - it is the fact that the suspect is under arrest and the grounds for the arrest. That can be as simple as "I'm arresting you on suspicion of theft" PACE Code G says the suspect should be given the police caution at the same time. Officers usually say the reason why the arrest is considered necessary as well, although I don't think they actually have to do that. Not 100% sure on that.

3B. See 3A.

3C. See 3A.

matttye

Car_54 wrote: »

Note that I am not suggesting that horse riders should jump the lights, just that it would not be an offence. There may be some other obscure offence (dangerous riding?) the rider could be charged with.

There's an offence of obstructing the highway - that's about all I can think of.

matttye

RS2000. wrote: »

It never had to be necessary to arrest, hence arrestable offences.



Pity the person who puts their hope in you to help them at a police station.

Why they ever let legal advisors attend instead of qualified solicitors is beyond me. Oh yes not being a solicitor saves the firm money.

Still if you !!!! up your firm still earns at court, non of it is about actually protecting your clients rights is it?

s24(4)-(5) PACE 1984 states that the statutory power of arrest by a constable is only exercisable if the constable has reasonable grounds for believing that one of a number of necessity criteria are fulfilled.

s24(5)(e) is used most commonly.

I'll ignore the rest of your rude post. What's with the attitude?

Guest101

You dont have to say anything. - The police even tell you this.

They make it clear.

So why say anything. Write down your name, DOB and address on a piece of paper, hand it to the officer and stay quiet.