Todays R4's Law in action

[snibgo]

Radio 4 has just broadcasted "Law in Action" (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b016wzrn), including 10 minutes on cycling, mostly with the ukcyclerules chap.

[downfader]

"Sorry this program is no longer available"

[tramponabike]

R4's Law in action "Britain and human rights law" just finished. The HR stuff was interesting enough but there was also a bit at the end about cycling and the law.

"The programme also looks at cycling law. As the number of cyclists on our roads increases, so too does the conflict between them, motorists and pedestrians - but is the law keeping up with the change? Few people seem to think so, with pedestrians furious at 'lycra-lout' cyclists jumping red lights or cycling on pavements and cyclists frustrated at inconsiderate motorists. Law in Action goes for a ride with cycling law expert Jorren Knibbe for a taste of the road wars. And Joshua discusses proposed new dangerous cycling and driving offences with Andrea Leadsom MP."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b016wzrn

To be broadcast again - Thu 10 Nov 2011 20:00 BBC Radio 4

Should be available as a download here shortly - http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/law

[PRL]

"Sorry this program is no longer available"

But seems to be repeated Thursday at 8pm.

[snibgo]

The continuity announcer said it would be available to listen again or download. I think it takes some time (an hour?) for the technical stuff to happen.

EDIT: you can download it now from http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/law

[downfader]

The continuity announcer said it would be available to listen again or download. I think it takes some time (an hour?) for the technical stuff to happen.

EDIT: you can download it now from http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/law

Ahh cheers, will try later.

[Mick F]

Also, it's available to listen too.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b016wzrn

[Si]

Threads on same subject merged.

[CJ]

So... BBC are now giving the Dail Mail version of this one "hard case" apparently supporting this "bad law". The ridiculous notion that a cyclist hopped his expensive road racing bike onto the footway in order deliberately to run into Rhiannon Bennett is a figment of her teenage friends lager-fuelled imagination, which her parents quite understandably cling to and repeat ad nauseam.

The police believed Jason Howard's version of events, not because he's a nice guy, he isn't by all accounts, but because it makes better sense and is supported CCTV footage. Howard was riding on the road, at 17mph according to the Police (speeding, really?) and yelled at a bunch of teenagers to get out of his way. Seems like they mostly did get out of the way, but then Rhiannon stumbled back off the footway (or was she nudged by one of her friends, for a joke, we will probably never know), was clipped by Howard as he passed the group and fell onto the edge of the kerb. That is why there was not enough evidence to support a charge of manslaughter. Because it wasn't really like the Bennetts are telling it.

Apparently the BBC reported the abovementioned CCTV footage at the time, But corporate amnesia rules, and it wouldn't do to let the facts get in the way of a story now would it?

[downfader]

So... BBC are now giving the Dail Mail version of this one "hard case" apparently supporting this "bad law". The ridiculous notion that a cyclist hopped his expensive road racing bike onto the footway in order deliberately to run into Rhiannon Bennett is a figment of her teenage friends lager-fuelled imagination, which her parents quite understandably cling to and repeat ad nauseam.

The police believed Jason Howard's version of events, not because he's a nice guy, he isn't by all accounts, but because it makes better sense and is supported CCTV footage. Howard was riding on the road, at 17mph according to the Police (speeding, really?) and yelled at a bunch of teenagers to get out of his way. Seems like they mostly did get out of the way, but then Rhiannon stumbled back off the footway (or was she nudged by one of her friends, for a joke, we will probably never know), was clipped by Howard as he passed the group and fell onto the edge of the kerb. That is why there was not enough evidence to support a charge of manslaughter. Because it wasn't really like the Bennetts are telling it.

Apparently the BBC reported the abovementioned CCTV footage at the time, But corporate amnesia rules, and it wouldn't do to let the facts get in the way of a story now would it?

I read the same and followed the case as it had been reported at the time. Stories like this, where overly emotional use of hyperbole get used, tend to have a smack in the face for those who preach "look at the evil do-er!" It may take a few years but it could happen. Its hardly the Profumo Affair, but if people are basing proposed law on false reasoning its unsound and unethical.

[patpalloon]

programme on Radio 4 this evening debates cycling and the law:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0 ... ights_law/

go to 21 minutes.

[Hector's House]

Interesting. Worth a listen.

The nugget that it's an offence to open a car door if you injure someone was pretty interesting, though it wasn't clear whether the illegal bit was opening the door or injuring the person.

[thirdcrank]

Interesting. Worth a listen.

The nugget that it's an offence to open a car door if you injure someone was pretty interesting, though it wasn't clear whether the illegal bit was opening the door or injuring the person.

It's "Con and use regs"

105. No person shall open, or cause or permit to be opened, any door of a vehicle on a road so as to injure or endanger any person.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1986 ... n/105/made

[Gearoidmuar]

"a nugget?"

Everyone knows that..

[Guy951]

"a nugget?"

Everyone knows that..

A lot of motorists don't seem to.