On Tue, 9 Feb 2016 07:50:31 -0800 (PST), Tom Crispin
wrote:


If the CPS have taken the correct legal decision not to further pursue the matter, then there is something wrong with the law.

Why? There is no evidence that this was anything more than an
unfortunate accident possibly caused by the driver being distracted.
Despite the lurid labels the video shows nothing more than that.
Crucially it does not show intent (as the video of a driver swerving
into the path of oncoming cyclists did) but a vehicle remaining on
track and hitting the cyclist without showing any obvious intent to do
so. The CPS had all the evidence (which we do not) and decided that
it was insufficient to give any reasonable prospect of a conviction
for even careless much less dangerous driving. They also decided that
the chances of a conviction for the lesser charges of leaving the
scene and failing to report were unsustainable because they couldn't
prove who of the two possible drivers was driving at the time (and we
don't know whether that was because they each blamed each other or
because they remained silent or whatever).

Now arguably this was little different and less serious than the
incident I mentioned earlier where many members of a cycle club knew
perfectly well which of their members had committed a wholly
unprovoked and quite deliberate assault on a pedestrian while out
riding with them but all refused to identify him. I saw no outcry for
the law to be changed then.

RTA s172 is already dangerous law, it introduces a presumption of
guilt (without the need for evidence), removes the right of silence
and requires the accused to prove their innocence. How much further
would you like it to spread? Should all the members of that push bike
club, both guilty and innocent, have been jailed for remaining silent?

The problem with calls for draconian penalties is that when they are
introduced they lead not to a fall in offences but to a fall in
convictions. In the past juries would rarely convict on charges of
causing death by dangerous driving as a result of a momentary failure
as many thought "There but for the grace of god go I". The result was
people getting charged instead with much lesser and often quite
inappropriate offences like careless driving. The solution was to
introduce a " lesser" charge of causing death by careless driving -
and conviction rates rose and more appropriate sentences were passed.

The law is always a blunt weapon, if it has failed in this case to
produce the result pushbikers want (and none of those squealing for
change know the full details of the case) that isn't necessarily a
reason to change it. Mob law is never good law.