Australian Cycling Forums - Bicycles Network Australia

Great work Oxford!

That should make something that could be very daunting and overwhelming for people much easier.

Good layout and wording too, especially for the purpose. Not 100% convinced on using the word arrogant as whilst technically correct (generally these people are indeed showing that they believe they are more important than other road users) it can sound emotive and commenting on thought/personality rather than action which is best avoided. Even selfish might work in that spot (selfish and aggressive are terms oft used to describe actions especially driving, arrogant is more commonly directed at a person). That's a personal opinion though, and the only thing I could find in the entire document!

Thanks heaps for this. I still have a fair few things on my wish list ahead of a PVR but good to see people standing up for themselves. More correctly good to see that happening in a measured and pragmatic way.
Got to pick your battles (which I think you do) but when you pick them always good to have a well reasoned battle plan!

Nice template mate well done glad you have found and refined something through experience that works.

Nice one Ox, I'd be editing bits and pieces to fit the individual circumstances but on the whole, it's gold.

Shaun

From a mod point of view, methinks this thread deserves to be stickied, I'll recommend it to admin.

Thanks Oxford, this will come in very handy.

Thanks for putting in the effort to help others

Graeme

Fantastic work Oxford!!!

I had a lot of fun yesterday at the Newtown police station reporting this incident http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ggFFZSjWFU
I found that although they had a SD card reader, there was a lot of problems finding a computer that had enough processing power to play they HD video.
Might I suggest taking the video in on a CD in a couple of different formats (wmv and mov?) and perhaps a notebook to play it on.
One comment they did make (apart from drooling over the quality which is much better than anything they have) is that audio is not admissible as only the police have a legal right to record the audio.

Hi

Looks good Oxford and you have some points/language I hadn't consider.

I think it is very important as you suggest to make sure the points being made are in a similar format to a formal statement.

A couple of adds to consider: I have also learnt that I can get a different reaction/action from different police stations so being prepared to follow-up with the Commissioner/Minister of Police/Local MP/Opposition Spokesperson is helpful, i.e., write to the Commissioner of Police and cc the other parties.

Secondly I also now am keeping copies of the Commissioner's media statements on road safety ... helps to be able to quote him back in the letter

Andrew

I have a garmin 500 but I might upgrade the contour for the new one that has a built in GPS.
I'll ask a solicitor i know about the audio and thanks for the document. There are a few good memory jogs in there.

Audio cannot be recorded in NSW, unless you have a warrant, it comes under the listening devices act.

Sometimes in the press such as a current affair etc, there is a get out clause of "In the public interest" in which sound is recorded.Prior to doing that however i would imagine their legal eagles have looked at it .Tim

Oxford when you say you have had some success reporting incidents I was wondering what that meant?

Thanks for the explanation.

The template combined with video evidence is a great idea and is to be applauded.What must be realised however is it requires more than that. Once the Police take your evidence and charge somebody, then put them before the courts, they then require your prescence as a witness at court.Unfortunately this is where the system can fail, as not many people are keen to go the extra mile and be a witness for the Police in court.Some do, many don't.End result if they do not, matter is thrown out and costs are awarded against Police.As i said in my opening it's a great idea, as long as people who report the incidents are prepared to follow the matter to the end as a witness for the prosecution.Tim

TimW wrote:T... they then require your prescence as a witness at court.Unfortunately this is where the system can fail, as not many people are keen to go the extra mile and be a witness for the Police in court.Some do, many don't.End result if they do not, matter is thrown out and costs are awarded against Police.

Hi

I believe Oxford makes this very point and reinforces in this in the template, i.e., there is a clear statement of commitment to appear in court. I note that in WA the WA Police's Traffic Complaint Form also requires the complainant to indicate their intentions with respect to attending court.

Regards
Andrew

Oxford wrote:Absolutely and that is why it is in the template. You should only ever use this approach and even bother if you are willing to go the whole way and I mean all the way to court if required, otherwise do not waste the police's time or your own for that matter.

Great stuff, i'm impressed.Tim

I'd change

I would parallel it to speeding offences...

to

This is akin to speeding offences...(or something similar)

Other than that great effort. Must have taken you ages to write it!

I like this and when I get my camera hooked up I will be using it.

What options do cyclists have if a motorist does actually hit them?
Today I was hit from behind by an angry motorist who was in a hurry (by the sound of his honking). I have pictures which clearly show my bike wedged under the front of this guy's car and the police don't seem to want to book this guy. What can I do? Is this negligent driving or malicious driving or is there some other rule? (Surely you must have broken some rule or law if you hit someone from behind?)
Can I upload a picture?

G'Day Simon.
Yes you can. Instructions are HERE.
Maybe the "Moron Motorists" thread in general discussion would be best.

Cheers
Shaun

A few issues are raised by this thread. re use of listening devices

Listening Devices Act 1984 No 69

5 Prohibition on use of listening devices

(1) A person shall not use, or cause to be used, a listening device:

(a) to record or listen to a private conversation to which the person is not a party, or

(b) to record a private conversation to which the person is a party.

(3) Subsection (1) (b) does not apply to the use of a listening device by a party to a private conversation if:
(a) all of the principal parties to the conversation consent, expressly or impliedly, to the listening device being so used, or
(b) a principal party to the conversation consents to the listening device being so used and:
(i) the recording of the conversation is reasonably necessary for the protection of the lawful interests of that principal party, or
(ii) the recording of the conversation is not made for the purpose of communicating or publishing the conversation, or a report of the conversation, to persons who are not parties to the conversation.

It seems that you just have to warn the other person you are recording the sound. If there is no objection, that looks like implied consent.

Alternately, if you are having a shouting match in the middle of King Street Newtown, you could hardly characterize that as a private conversation.

private conversation means any words spoken by one person to another person or to other persons in circumstances that may reasonably be taken to indicate that any of those persons desires the words to be listened to only:

(a) by themselves, or

(b) by themselves and by some other person who has the consent, express or implied, of all of those persons to do so.


I'm very curious about videos. Do people routinely film their rides?

I guess the video evidence is crucial because in my experience, the police do nothing at all unless there is an injury.

re court, yes you should be prepared to go to court. I'd love to get the chance to nail some driver. If your video evidence unambiguously shows some criminal behaviour, you may not be required to testify. The video speaks for itself. Only if the defence are being completely unreasonable will they demand that you testify to prove you are the maker of the video.

diggler wrote:A few issues are raised by this thread. re use of listening devices

Listening Devices Act 1984 No 69

Which jurisdiction does this Act apply to? This is pretty critical information given Australia's Federal structure.

Andrew

Deepest apologies. This was a NSW law. Sorry for being NSW centric.

Further apologies, it appears this law has been replaced by Surveillance Devices Act 2007 No 64 (NSW).

Same ideas though.

7 Prohibition on installation, use and maintenance of listening devices

(1) A person must not knowingly install, use or cause to be used or maintain a listening device:
(a) to overhear, record, monitor or listen to a private conversation to which the person is not a party, or
(b) to record a private conversation to which the person is a party.

(3) Subsection (1) (b) does not apply to the use of a listening device by a party to a private conversation if:
(a) all of the principal parties to the conversation consent, expressly or impliedly, to the listening device being so used, or
(b) a principal party to the conversation consents to the listening device being so used and the recording of the conversation:
(i) is reasonably necessary for the protection of the lawful interests of that principal party, or
(ii) is not made for the purpose of communicating or publishing the conversation, or a report of the conversation, to persons who are not parties to the conversation.

This appears to be the prevailing Qld legislation

INVASION OF PRIVACY ACT 1971 - SECT 43
43 Prohibition on use of listening devices
(1) A person is guilty of an offence against this Act if the person uses a listening device to overhear, record, monitor or listen to a private conversation and is liable on conviction on indictment to a maximum penalty of 40 penalty units or imprisonment for 2 years.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply--

(a) where the person using the listening device is a party to the private conversation


It looke like you can record the conversation if you are a party to it.

Note that this section applies to "private conversations" (defined in s4). I very much doubt that any conversation you recorded while riding your bike would meet the definition. Usual disclaimers.

Has anyone had any success with any other format besides MPEG2 DVD?

The template says "CD".

In my experience having to open any type of file is a good excuse for any government or council official to blow you off for technical or security reasons.

With BCC and the busses, they basically just tell you to encode it a different way 10 times because they can't play it.

With police, they "can't put that in their computer".

Oxford wrote:the really interesting thing is if you are having a conversation with the police and you tell them you are going to record it, they often get really temperamental about it, suddenly they have lost control of the process. I would urge anyone having a conversation with the police if they are the subject of police enquiries to record the conversation. keeps them on their best behavior.

Police hate being recorded. They hate accountability. A lot of them have no idea about the law. A lot of them remove their ID badges to avoid being identified. I've always had bad experiences dealing with the police.

In their defence, it is a really tough job. They deal with a lot of drunk, violent f'wits.