Police accuse cyclist of public order offence because he swore at an unmarked police car parked in a bus line - his swearing could have upset his children and it could have led to him being stabbed

[cakeorwine]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11474195/Moment-cyclist-swears-unmarked-police-car-officer-accuses-public-order-offence.html

This is interesting

Cyclist with children on the back had to swerve to get out of the way of a vehicle parked in a bus lane

He swore at the occupants.

Turns out to be an unmarked police vehicle.

Advised not to swear in public with his children as it could cause them upset. So that's a public order offence.

And also it's dangerous to swear at people in Wandsworth because he could get stabbed.

So I admit that I have sworn at vehicles on the road who don't seem to understand the Highway code. With DS present.

And it probably is dangerous to swear at people because you don't know how they would react.

Police in making laws up shocker 🤣

The video is interesting. Policeman comes out straightaway and went into full challenging mode.

What kind of example is he setting to the children about the way the police act?

He's right about Wandsworth though..

Macho Dickhead meets 2 other Macho Dickheads who have the power of a Law to misuse against him 🤷‍♀️

That's pure comedy . If I were the copper I would have wanted to arrest him for being an arrogant pompous twat.

You kids are probably more upset they have a parent that reads the daily fail than the swearing but swearing in public can be deemed a public order offence so can see why he was pulled up on it

Interesting

Public order offences
1.
These offences contrary to the Public Order Act 1986 relate to threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or display of visible representations, which:
Are likely to cause fear of, or to provoke, immediate violence: section 4;
Intentionally cause harassment, alarm or distress: section 4A; or
Are likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress (threatening or abusive words or behaviour only): section 5.

It is a defence to section 4A and section 5 for the accused to demonstrate that their conduct was reasonable, which must be interpreted in accordance with the freedom of expression and other freedoms. If these freedoms are engaged, a justification for interference (by prosecution) with them must be convincingly established. A prosecution may only proceed if necessary and proportionate.

Is it reasonable to swear at a car blocking you when you are a cyclist when you have children with you?

I think it's reasonable, particularly given the fact they clearly shouldn't have been there as they weren't responding to an emergency if they could go straight after him. It's a busy road in bad weather. They behaved much more dangerously than him.

These "officers " do seem to like throwing their weight around and quoting laws that have a lot of nuance to them. That cyclist should be grateful he's not a woman as I'm sure that officer would have wagged his finger even more.

Meanwhile, in cities all over the country, stabbings are rife, burglaries go uninvestigated, and so on. Was this the Met (again)?🙄

The policeman wasn’t wrong though, was he? The cyclist doesn’t know how a stranger will react to being sworn at. He absolutely could have been physically attacked if he’d have done it to someone else, especially in Wandsworth. What he did posed a risk to himself and his children, and I don’t see any issue with that being pointed out to him.

If the cyclist had an issue he could have got off his bike and approached the policeman calmly, instead of swearing at him.

If the person you're approaching is the kind of person who'll attack you with or without children you're best staying on the bike and at least having a chance of a getaway.

The person could have been Ronnie Pickering

I swore at a marked police car that completely cut me up going into a parking space outside a coffee shop on a high street. Braked so hard my bike swerved and I came off (I was not going fast, I’m pregnant so I’m careful)

tbh I think the police didn't like the fact it was pointed out they were parked in a stupid spot so use attack is the best form of defence tact.

He wasn’t forced to swerve though, was he? He had plenty of time to slow down, and merge into the main body of traffic, without getting his knickers in a twist.

Quite possibly they had just responded to an incident

You don't know either way

Ahh yes, Roehampton village really is a crime ridden hell hole, notorious.

I mean, that’s if you know the type of person they are. The point is you don’t, so generally it’s a good idea not to start off with hostility.

Probably best to keep your mouth shut and just not swear at or approach them at all though tbh.

@meloonhead ah yes, quite right, notorious shit hole

Quite possibly they had just responded to an incident

If they could go straight after the cyclist there was no reason at all for them to be sat in that lane.

@girlmom21 which force do you work for?

Are we only allowed to comment on police officers being parked where they shouldn't be if we're police officers? 😂

They were allowed to park there, the cyclist should be riding in a bus lane anyway as there was a cycle path on the pavement. These bloody cyclists think they can swear at drivers who are often doing nothing wrong. Very aggressive and unnecessary especially if he had kids with him. The police can charge someone with a public order offence for swearing in public, they weren't making the law up.

Quite common on cycling twitter. Swearing is often a shock reaction after nearly being sideswiped. But it's seen as an act of aggression by some others regardless.
Context: haven't ridden in years but distinctly remember swearing like a navvy when an HGV continued to proceed out of a filling station the wrong way bewilderingly wondering why I was there (segregated cycle path junction).