The dot in ... --- ...
Chris Gerhard's Weblog
Saturday January 27, 2007
Cyclist not guilty of inconsiderate cycling for not using a cycle path As a colleague of mine said:
Finally some sense....
This is the case I mentioned the case of the cyclist who was convicted of “holding up the traffic” back in August 2006. The case was retried rather than appealed. As I understand it the retial was orderd as he was found guilty of an offence that does not really exist (like being found guilty of walking on the cracks in the pavement).
Now I hope that the Police will have to explain why they even stopped him and why they did nothing about the cars that overtook the cyclist by crossing the double white lines.
The best bit about this is that this case caused £25,000 to be given to the Cyclists Defence Fund in support of Daniel.
The full story is on the BBC and on the CTC website.
( Jan 27 2007, 01:10:36 PM GMT ) Permalink
Friday January 26, 2007
UK statute Law On line Dave has prompted me to post where you can actually find the definitive statue law or the U.K. on line.
It is here: http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/
Interestingly, to me, searching for "road traffic act" in google still does not find it on the first page.
Sunday August 20, 2006
Cyclist convicted for "holding up the traffic" I've just returned from holiday to find three messages in my inbox around this incident.
The cyclist has been fined for using a road rather than using a cycle path. Since using cycle "facilities" is supposed to be voluntary I'm wondering what law he actually breached. He is appealing and being supported by the Cyclists Defence Fund. Cheque is in the post.
If this was to stand it would make my journey to work illegal or impractical.
( Aug 20 2006, 08:59:51 PM BST ) Permalink Trackback
Except where otherwise noted, this site is
licensed under a Creative Commons License 2.0
This is a personal weblog, I do not speak for my employer.
