Cycling UK Forum

Jdsk wrote:What's your authority for that please?

I don't need one. It's patently obvious in that situation that the verdict in the civil case may not imply that the verdict in the criminal case was wrong. A serving judge who said or implied that the jury was wrong to convict or acquit in a criminal case over which they were not presiding, would inevitably be subject to disciplinary action because it would undermine confidence in the justice system. The only circumstances in which a serving judge is permitted to do so is if they are a more senior judge hearing an appeal, and when appeals are successful the appeal judges are scrupulous in detailing the errors in law made by the lower court that justify their decision to overturn the original verdict.

The last time I can recall a judge stating that a criminal verdict was wrong, was Denning commenting in an interview that the Guildford Four "were probably guilty" shortly after their convictions had been been quashed. Denning was retired by then and so could not be subject to disciplinary action, but he was still excoriated by the senior judiciary and forced to apologise.

If he had retired any apology would be entirely voluntary,as he would no longer be bound by contractual obligationj.A civil judge when choosing not to award damages need not make any reference to criminal proceedings.As said before the burden of proof is very different-all juries must find a verdict beyond reasonable doubt is in an 80/20 split the latter wins.I should add | did Law in my third year.

mumbojumbo wrote:I do not think the career of a civil judge could be influenced by the criminal division given two systems are kept separate.

The judicial disciplinary system is the responsibility of the Lord Chief Justice and applies to all judges.

mumbojumbo wrote:If he had retired any apology would be entirely voluntary,as he would no longer be bound by contractual obligationj.

Precisely my point. No serving judge would dare make such a statement, and even though he was retired and safe from disciplinary action, Denning realised he had been foolish to say it and apologised. (And the disciplinary system for judges is not governed by contract law.)

mumbojumbo wrote:A civil judge when choosing not to award damages need not make any reference to criminal proceedings.As said before the burden of proof is very different-all juries must find a verdict beyond reasonable doubt is in an 80/20 split the latter wins.I should add | did Law in my third year.

The standard of proof is different, and it is precisely because the standard is higher for criminal convictions that a civil action for the same offence must find for the plaintiff if the defendant has already been found guilty of the criminal offence.

The judge can agee with crim verdict and award peanuts,and make plaintiff pay all costs if minded to.Remember I studied Law in Year 3.

mumbojumbo wrote:The judge can agee with crim verdict and award peanuts,and make plaintiff pay all costs if minded to.Remember I studied Law in Year 3.

I got an 'O' Level in the general principles of English Law in 1976, is my opinion worth anything?

mumbojumbo wrote:The judge can agee with crim verdict and award peanuts,and make plaintiff pay all costs if minded to

The judge can only do that if it is reasonable and appropriate to do so. If the award is manifestly unreasonably low or costs are awarded against the plaintiff without adequate legal grounds, the decision would be overturned on appeal. Even if an individual such decision was not appealed, if the judge made a practice of such capricious, arbitrary or perverse decisions they would soon come to the attention of Lord Chief Justice and potentially find themselves and their decisions under the scrutiny of the judicial disciplinary system.

As Flanders and Swann might have sung, had they not been worried about upsetting somebody like Judge Pickles

It all makes work for the learned friends to do...

All very interesting legal stuff but it’s looking like with no witnesses I am going to struggle to get anywhere with this.
You know, it’s just occurred to me that after he made the close pass I got about another 100 yards up the road and looked back. The driver had stopped at the harbour about 50yds beyond where the incident occurred. Why did he not go back up the road then and stop me? Because it was bustling with people and it was possible that a pedestrian or motorist would have seen his close pass and backed me up if he started an argument. Just ahead of me, visible from where he stopped, was a junction of two ways out of town. Once he knew which way I was going he could find somewhere quiet to confront me.
It’s a long drag up to there and he probably thought I would be out of breath. That aside, the road he appeared from was a direct way back to the harbour so he should have got there a long time before me and if his search was entirely random he would have carried on down from where I had come to take the other road out of town and continue his search. But no. He had seen me go that way and stayed at that junction on a nice quiet road with no witnesses visible waiting for me to appear.

I have a camera running the entire time I'm out, have done for about three years now. Considering the mindset of some drivers it gives me some comfort that I will have recourse if I do encounter a nutter. It always has about my last 4 hours riding.


Out of curiosity was the driver old younger bigger littler ? just trying to picture what you are telling.

Younger, yes. Other than that I cannot say. I made sure not to stare directly at him when we exchanged views so didn’t get a memorable look at him. I am not confrontational by nature and enjoying a leisurely ride, for a change, my blood wasn’t up either. That said, I am of very light build. Perhaps he fancied his odds.
I know my previous comments include a great deal of speculation but if he really believed I had attacked his van for no reason or swerved into his path (or whatever) he had a perfect opportunity, with next to no traffic, to turn around there and then and confront me within yards of the incident on the off-chance that a pedestrian had seen me do it too and would back him up.

sounds particularly unpleasant, loosing his temper at the scene of the incident would be one thing, but coldly stalking and planning an attack takes it to a whole new level. It is a real shame you don't have evidence and get him locked up for everyone else's sake, I doubt this will be his first or last such incident.

seriously get a camera and descent battery fixed to the bike, I only need charge mine up every 20 hours riding - gives me a little peace of mind. we're very vulnerable out there esp if you ride by yourself like I do - and sadly ther are a lot of nutters driving who don't like us getting in their way.

Pebble wrote:sounds particularly unpleasant, loosing his temper at the scene of the incident would be one thing, but coldly stalking and planning an attack takes it to a whole new level. It is a real shame you don't have evidence and get him locked up for everyone else's sake, I doubt this will be his first or last such incident.

seriously get a camera and descent battery fixed to the bike, I only need charge mine up every 20 hours riding - gives me a little peace of mind. we're very vulnerable out there esp if you ride by yourself like I do - and sadly ther are a lot of nutters driving who don't like us getting in their way.

I will. And as for nutters yes, looking at this nation as a whole, it’s a fact of life. However, as for this far western part, consideration and patience is the rule rather than the exception.

Right again peetee, avoiding eye contact

Pebble wrote:I have a camera running the entire time I'm out, have done for about three years now. Considering the mindset of some drivers it gives me some comfort that I will have recourse if I do encounter a nutter. It always has about my last 4 hours riding.


Out of curiosity was the driver old younger bigger littler ? just trying to picture what you are telling.

Could you please share the make and spec if your camera? I'm thinking of buying one soon.

matt2matt2002 wrote:

Pebble wrote:I have a camera running the entire time I'm out, have done for about three years now. Considering the mindset of some drivers it gives me some comfort that I will have recourse if I do encounter a nutter. It always has about my last 4 hours riding.


Out of curiosity was the driver old younger bigger littler ? just trying to picture what you are telling.

Could you please share the make and spec if your camera? I'm thinking of buying one soon.

+1