Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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

162 replies

cakeorwine · 27/11/2022 13:58

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.

OP posts:
kierenthecommunity · 28/11/2022 20:37

*The woman concerned recorded the call, which she later put put into the public domain. On that recording the Sussex Constabulary refused to tell her, personally, what she'd been reported for saying.

Surely if they were were issuing her with a 'cooperate or you face arrest' ultimatum she had a right to know these very basic, fundamental facts*

Why on earth would she be told the circumstances of the offence before the interview? And possibly give her chance to think up a defence?

If you’re arrested you aren’t given the full circs until interview either, the difference being is you get to sit around in a cell for a bit, rather than come in when it suits you.

Kind of struggling to see why she’s being so hard done by here

Brefugee · 28/11/2022 20:44

So this happens and it's not a police car, and the cyclist gets stabbed. do the police rock up and say "your fault you got stabbed, you should always Be Kind"

Judging by interactions I've had on here with police officers (obvs we don't know for sure) - that wouldn't surprise me at all.

The police's reputation is in the toilet and getting worse. Why don't they engage their brains and try to do a bit of good PR work?

cakeorwine · 28/11/2022 20:50

quietnightmare · 28/11/2022 16:12

@Mia85

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.

The law is the law

Isn't there some guidance to that?

www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/public-order-offences-incorporating-charging-standard

The following types of conduct are (non-exhaustive) examples, which are capable of amounting to disorderly behaviour:

Causing a disturbance in a residential area or common part of a block of flats;
Persistently shouting abuse or obscenities at passers-by;
Pestering people waiting to catch public transport or otherwise waiting in a queue;
Rowdy behaviour in a street late at night which might alarm residents or passers-by;
be Causing a disturbance in a shopping precinct or other area to which the public have access or might otherwise gather;

Section 5 should be used in cases which amount to less serious incidents of anti-social behaviour. Where violence has been used, it is not normally appropriate to charge an offence under section 5, unless the physical behaviour amounts merely to pushing or undirected lashing out of a type likely to cause no more than a glancing blow, minor bruising or grazing. Such conduct may also be classified as disorderly and suitable for a charge under section 91 CJA 1967, if the suspect was drunk.

OP posts:
cakeorwine · 28/11/2022 20:53

quietnightmare · 28/11/2022 19:40

@Mia85

It is an arrest-able offence to swear in public. The police officer simply explained to the cyclist that swearing in public is a public order offence. It really is that simple

I wonder what would have happened if the person had asked to be arrested by the undercover cops who were waiting to catch a car that was probably going to pass them?

OP posts:
Diverseopinions · 28/11/2022 21:00

To me it's unbelievable that a cyclist would transport his vulnerable child along in some makeshift contraption, no doubt, on what is a main road, in fast moving traffic.

Of course the cyclist can ride properly, but he cannot predict what other foolish people/motorists/motorcyclists will do next. He doesn't want to consider his vulnerability, nor that of his poor children.

The least risky choice would have been to try to reach the pavement and dismount. If it is potentially dangerous to swerve or move our into the road, to avoid a vehicle, then you should do it as a last resort. But, it's obvious to me now that cyclists do not like to stop, once they have built up a momentum. It probably unbalanc s them, makes them feel less in control, and loses all that lovely momentum which makes them think they are flying . It conceivably would wobble the contraption to do slow it to a stop.

Cycling on main roads isn't illegal, but it ought to be and building safe and dedicated cycle paths ought to be prioritized by Councils.

Secondly, bikes and motorised scooters have spread their bad habits to motorists now. Motorists do not stop when somebody is on the crossing. The drive on through expecting pedestrians to second guess their plan. They put up a hand to acknowledge you, knowing they are in the wrong, but not wanting to break their speed and thinking, cyclists do this: why shouldn't I. It's terrible what cyclists have done with their selfish and entitled behaviour.

Devoutspoken · 28/11/2022 22:06

Diverse opinions, oh if only cyclists were that influential, but no, they are at the bottom of the vehicle food chain

cakeorwine · 28/11/2022 22:10

I wonder what the police reaction would have been if the cyclist had said " Ooo, poor little policeman, did you feel intimidated or distressed by a cyclist swearing at his parking?"

OP posts:
LydiaBennetsUglyBonnet · 28/11/2022 23:33

I bet if it was a marked car and uniformed copper he wouldn’t have said a word.

Which makes me think he’s the type of person who picks on those he deems lesser or unworthy.

No sympathy. I’m amazed that people are defending the cyclist. A child witnessing their parent being aggressive can be very scary, probably scarier when on a busy road.

NameChangedBecauseImHereALot · 28/11/2022 23:44

I think the officer dealt with it remarkably well. He had good character in how he spoke, didn't over do it and made a good point. You're trying to start one of those nasty threads about police that all end up a certain way Op. All the ignorant people who would never be brave enough to do that job themselves and think they can observe enough go comment pile in and before you know it you've achieved your goal :) Also admitting you've sworn at road users with DS present is appalling.

NameChangedBecauseImHereALot · 28/11/2022 23:47

LydiaBennetsUglyBonnet · 28/11/2022 23:33

I bet if it was a marked car and uniformed copper he wouldn’t have said a word.

Which makes me think he’s the type of person who picks on those he deems lesser or unworthy.

No sympathy. I’m amazed that people are defending the cyclist. A child witnessing their parent being aggressive can be very scary, probably scarier when on a busy road.

Completely agree! Likewise if any of the people here saying the officer was at fault ( he wasn't ) were sworn at by a cyclist for any reason who was in the presence of their children they would all run to Mumsnet and start a thread 'sworn at by cyclist infront of his DC aibu to have called 101?' and expect police to deal with it. It's like they think being in a uniform means you must tolerate every argumentative prat trying to make a fool out of you and you cannot say a word, you must just stand there in silence.

NameChangedBecauseImHereALot · 28/11/2022 23:51

Mia85 · 28/11/2022 16:37

No there is no offence, arrestable or otherwise, of swearing in public.

There are some circumstances in which swearing in public might be relevant to the commission of an offence but that would require you to fulfil all of the elements of the offence. This situation is not even close to doing so.

But the reality is that if a police officer wants to make life difficult for someone they can throw around suggestions of public order offences to get the other person to back down or comply. That's what's happening here.

What makes you say the officer wanted to make life difficult for someone? He was approached by the cyclist who swore at HIM not the other way around. What would you do differently in this situation if you were the officer?

NameChangedBecauseImHereALot · 28/11/2022 23:54

OneTC · 28/11/2022 11:37

The copper is the kind of arsehole that he's warning the cyclist about. Someone who will react disproportionately to the situation. It's not his experience as a police that tells him this it's his experience as an aggressive disproportionate reacting wanker

In what was was he disproportionate or aggressive? I feel like we've watched two different videos. How would you have reacted differently?

LydiaBennetsUglyBonnet · 29/11/2022 00:07

Just watched the video. Good on that copper!! He was very calm and reasonable and spot on in what he was saying. To cycle through a rough area with 2 kids and be provocative is fucking stupid and you can be your bottom dollar that if this was a MNer that had be sworn at by some tosser with a load of kids on the back they’d have been telling her to call 101. But the ACTUAL POLICE having a word is considered aggressive. Dear oh dear.

DrWhoNowww · 29/11/2022 00:11

Everyone’s shit here surely?

The police needed to do no more than flash their lights to let the cyclist know why they were stationary in a bus lane. He would have immediately assumed they were working and apologised (like he didn’t in the video)

Cyclist 100% wouldn’t have sworn at the car if it had been a marked police car and given the propensity of bus lanes to contain large stationary vehicles he should have had the skill and awareness to merge into the other lane in good time which would have made the whole thing a non-event.

No one comes out of this well.

DrWhoNowww · 29/11/2022 00:12

*like he did in the video, not didn’t!

LydiaBennetsUglyBonnet · 29/11/2022 00:14

The police needed to do no more than flash their lights to let the cyclist know why they were stationary in a bus lane. He would have immediately assumed they were working and apologised

I fear you misunderstand the purpose of an unmarked car.

DrWhoNowww · 29/11/2022 00:34

LydiaBennetsUglyBonnet · 29/11/2022 00:14

The police needed to do no more than flash their lights to let the cyclist know why they were stationary in a bus lane. He would have immediately assumed they were working and apologised

I fear you misunderstand the purpose of an unmarked car.

I have not misunderstood. I suspect it’s possible you have though?

I was outlining a choice between flashing your lights, pulling over the cyclist and engaging them in a discourse on what they have done wrong and simply flashing the lights for 5 seconds to achieve pretty much the same result given the cyclists immediate response.

Of course if they truly wished to remain unmarked then they wouldn’t have done either of those actions but they chose the first - so clearly they were not that bothered about remaining incognito.

Like I said, neither party comes out of this encounter well.

Shodan · 29/11/2022 00:38

I’m amazed that people are defending the cyclist.

Me too. So many people defending him like he's some poor misunderstood hero when he's actually nothing more than a foul-mouthed lout.

LydiaBennetsUglyBonnet · 29/11/2022 00:42

Shodan · 29/11/2022 00:38

I’m amazed that people are defending the cyclist.

Me too. So many people defending him like he's some poor misunderstood hero when he's actually nothing more than a foul-mouthed lout.

I wonder what his defenders would have thought of him had he not had a posh accent.

Ellessdee · 29/11/2022 01:34

I mean they both sound like idiots but you can clearly tell the cyclist is just fed up of people stopping in dangerous places and putting him at risk (hence the helmet cam) and the officer is a bit of a bullyboy. Too much testosterone all round. Nothing to see here.

Devoutspoken · 29/11/2022 06:52

Apparently, the met police have now said they were wrong

Brefugee · 29/11/2022 07:29

I fear you misunderstand the purpose of an unmarked car.

i fear you misunderstand the purpose of a bus lane

Devoutspoken · 29/11/2022 07:33

As do my posters on this thread

Devoutspoken · 29/11/2022 07:33

*many posters

Brefugee · 29/11/2022 07:34

Apparently, the met police have now said they were wrong

just as well cyclists use helmet cams, tbh.