Bicyclist assaults NYPD officer

[BillC]

Can I see a picture of what you are talking about? It's really quite illogical because weaving through traffic with cars is generally not the safest thing to be doing with cars and yet it is with bicycles. More often than not weaving through traffic and running read lights only puts the bicyclists in position to hit a pedestrian who unlike the bicyclist has the right of way. Also, I realize that this has nothing to do with the op. I just got really annoyed to hell at the "protest group" that this guy is a part of after reading the wikipedia article.

Certainly: here is one from London. The cyclists' stop area is the green area at the front. Cyclists should not weave their way through the stopped traffic, but must instead make their way to the front area via the cycle lane to the left. This arrangement is considered safer, allowing the cyclists to move off across the traffic light-controlled area while traffic is still travelling at a relatively slow speed.

Source and explanatory text: City of London Police.

Can you explain what you meant when you told Geni that you would let that one slide because he is British?

 

[Tony]

The cop is guilty of assault plain and simple. He should lose his job and be charged with assault tomorrow, if not, the NYPD should be sued.

 

[Vic Vega]

The cop is guilty of assault plain and simple. He should lose his job and be charged with assault tomorrow, if not, the NYPD should be sued.

Agreed. Not to mention that he lied about the incident. How anyone can look at this video and not think that the cop needs to both be fired and go to jail is absolutely beyond me.

 

[196]

How anyone can look at this video and not think that the cop needs to both be fired and go to jail is absolutely beyond me.

Here is one person who thinks the police officer was just doing his job:

A rookie cop under investigation for violently knocking a cyclist to the ground was backed Tuesday by his union, which insisted he was protecting the public from an out-of-control rider.

"This officer observed the reckless actions of a specific individual weaving in and out of traffic and creating a hazardous condition for the public and took action," Policemen's Benevolent Association President Patrick Lynch said in a statement.

Actually, Patrick Lynch is the president of the Patrolman's Benevolent Association. Here is his press release on the incident. In my opinion, this is turning into a Dead Parrot defense.

 

[often mrunderstood]

A most pleasing video for me.

1. A piece of cr** cop will likely lose his job for an incident that may have been swept under the rug had it not been caught on tape. LEO caught lying about it too. Precious.

2. Masshole gets exactly the kind of treatment they dish out. Doesn't happen often enough because the people they assualt tend to be law abiding citizens that can't stand, but tolerate, these jerk's behavior. (Despite what others claim in this thread, they cause more than just a delay in peoples schedules. They assualt non-riders with a gang metality and do thousands in damage to people's property).

Looks like win, win in my book.

BTW, the actions of the officer would actually be typical in the US for apprehending a person who had just assualted someone or commited another serious crime. If another officer up the street saw him break a motorist's mirror or window (or assaulted a senior citizen like they do) he may have tried, and failed, to stop him. In which case he is resisting/fleeing, and a call ahead for others to wait in the middle of the road to catch him riding by would be normal. If he had already been told to stop by another officer, this one could take him down as seen in the video, legally (remember he is resisting arrest). I am not condoning the behavior, and if it happened that way in this case, the officer should still be fired for lying in the report. I am just pointing out that there could be circumstances outside of the video that would legally justify a rightous take-down like this one.

 

[Ian Osborne]

I am just pointing out that there could be circumstances outside of the video that would legally justify a rightous take-down like this one.

Unlikely - after all, if there were, they would've been outlined in the report instead of the pack of lies that was offered.

 

[Bikewer]

We've not heard any follow up on this; the only conceivable justification I could think of is the officer witnessing the fellow performing an "arrestable" act off-camera.

 

[billydkid]

Yeah, because THEY are entitled to everything, and everyone else is entitled to nothing. These are the sort of people who run cyclists off the road rather than slow down until it is safe to pass, because someone being injured is less meaningful to them than the inconvenience of having to move their foot a few inches, and lose a few seconds out of their day.

Motorists who run bicycle riders off the road are committing an assault in my opinion, but I have been stuck behind bicyclists who sole intention was apparently to interfere with my driving down the road - deliberately staying in the middle of the road when there was plenty of shoulder with oncoming traffic so I couldn't pass and forcing me to go for several miles at 8 or 10 mph. They were doing this specifically to inconvenience me which I suppose they justified to themselves by virtue of their moral superiority just as those who destroy people's SUV's or throw paint on people wearing fur are certain of their moral superiority. Not a big fan of self righteousness - either that of the right or of the left. I see these people as identical - those who want to impose their sexual more's on others and those who want to impose their self-righteous "progressiveness" on others.

 

[geni]

Motorists who run bicycle riders off the road are committing an assault in my opinion, but I have been stuck behind bicyclists who sole intention was apparently to interfere with my driving down the road - deliberately staying in the middle of the road when there was plenty of shoulder with oncoming traffic so I couldn't pass and forcing me to go for several miles at 8 or 10 mph. They were doing this specifically to inconvenience me which I suppose they justified to themselves by virtue of their moral superiority just as those who destroy people's SUV's or throw paint on people wearing fur are certain of their moral superiority. Not a big fan of self righteousness - either that of the right or of the left. I see these people as identical - those who want to impose their sexual more's on others and those who want to impose their self-righteous "progressiveness" on others.

Depends on the width of the road and junctions. Generaly if you cycle in the middle of the road cars wil treat you like a car. Anywhere else they will try to squeeze past you. On some road layouts this is a problem.

 

[often mrunderstood]

Unlikely - after all, if there were, they would've been outlined in the report instead of the pack of lies that was offered.

If I thought it were likely that off camera actions were the reason for the assault, I would not be cheering his likely termination. He lied during the investigation, fire him.

If the cop assaulted him for being a random rider, the victim will cash in. If the rider's bags contain the typical inventory of the more radical riders, things get blurred quickly.

 

[ponderingturtle]

We've not heard any follow up on this; the only conceivable justification I could think of is the officer witnessing the fellow performing an "arrestable" act off-camera.

The problem is that does not fit with the charges filed. The charges filed do not fit the video(the biker did not run into the cop, the cop ran into the biker).

So while the video alone is not damning, that the charges filed do not at all fit the video is pretty damning.

 

[geni]

charges droped:


http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/05/charges-dropped-against-shoved-cyclist/?hp

 

[Rasmus]

Is what critical mass does actually illegal?

Fine, so they blocking traffic, but they do that as part of being the traffic. Is it now illegal to be in a traffic jam?

ETA: I missed two pages of the thread and didn't see that this was already being discussed.

Here's what I saw in the video:

A street with surprisingly many bicycles going by.
Two cops standing in the middle of the street, between the bicycles for no apparent reason whatsoever. Everything pretty peaceful so far.

One of the cop then begins to move off the street, and accelerates. You finally see a bike trying to avoid the cop. The cop tackles the bike and the biker to the ground.

I see nothing that looks like an attempted arrest, and I see nothing that looks like the cop was trying to avoid the bike.

 

[Smackety]

I would wait for the rest of the story. Do we know what this guy did before, off camera? What if this was a take down, as in he was observed doing something illegal and this was the only way the cop could stop him. Did he punch someone? Did he vandalize a car? Who knows?

No chance - that would involve the cop turning to face the biker, waving his arms and shouting for the bicyclist to stop. You cannot charge someone with resisting if you havent ordered them to comply first. The other cop is likewise not attempting to arrest the cyclist, I think he was surprised too.

 

[Jeff Corey]

Motorists who run bicycle riders off the road are committing an assault in my opinion, but I have been stuck behind bicyclists who sole intention was apparently to interfere with my driving down the road - deliberately staying in the middle of the road when there was plenty of shoulder with oncoming traffic so I couldn't pass and forcing me to go for several miles at 8 or 10 mph. They were doing this specifically to inconvenience me...

We have those types around here, too. Sometimes they ride next to eachother so they can converse. I have no problem with using my horn to remind them of NYS traffic law.
Section 1234. Riding on roadways, shoulders, bicycle or in-line skates lanes and bicycle or in-line skates paths.

(a) Upon all roadways, any bicycle or in-line skates shall be driven either on a usable bicycle or in-line skates lane or, if a usable bicycle or in-line skates lane has not been provided, near the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway or upon a usable right-hand shoulder in such a manner as to prevent undue interference with the flow of traffic except when preparing for a left turn or when reasonably necessary to avoid conditions that would make it unsafe to continue along near the right-hand curb or edge. Conditions to be taken into consideration include, but are not limited to, fixed or moving objects, vehicles, bicycles, in-line skates, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards or traffic lanes too narrow for a bicycle or person on in-line skates and a vehicle to travel safely side-by-side within the lane

 

[Bikewer]

Critical Mass was intended to be an activist organization which would forcefully draw attention to the plight of urban cyclists by staging "Mass Rides" which had the stated purpose of disrupting traffic.
Civil Disobedience, protest....Call it what you will.

In some areas, this idea has essentially taken a back seat and the organization existing more as a "let's have a nice Sunday ride with as many people as we can get" idea. That's all that appears to take place locally.

In Missouri, it's almost entirely the case that bicyclists operating on roadways must obey the same regulations that motorists do. They must stop at stop signs, obey electric signals, maintain lanes, keep right, etc, etc.
Now, it's also true that no police department in the area targets violations by cyclists, who incur the ire of motorists for ignoring signals and stop signs.

As a cyclist (as you might infer from my handle) I've done quite a bit of reading on the history and theory of the practice. It's the consensus of most of the "authorities" on the subject that the ideas promoted in "Effective Cycling" are overall the best for riders operating in traffic.
In essence, one behaves as a vehicle. The rider gets the most respect when operating as other vehicles on the roadway do.
The way to achieve parity with motor vehicles is not by the use of special bike lanes and off-roadway bike paths, but by integrating the bicycle into traffic. The more cyclists, the more motorists become used to them.
This seems to work well in Europe, for the most part.

Still, there are those that do not agree with this idea, and feel that bicyclists should be removed from motor traffic. There are also those who feel a moral superiority for the bicycle. Non-polluting, fitness-promoting....They are "better" than the car drivers.
I would surmise that most Critical Mass types are made up mostly of folks with the latter viewpoint.
As fuel prices go ever higher, we are seeing an increase in ridership. However, the bicycle is not a practical form of transportation for a large segment of the population, and in large segments of the country not practical at all for much of the year.

 

[zooterkin]

2. Masshole gets exactly the kind of treatment they dish out. Doesn't happen often enough because the people they assualt tend to be law abiding citizens that can't stand, but tolerate, these jerk's behavior. (Despite what others claim in this thread, they cause more than just a delay in peoples schedules. They assualt non-riders with a gang metality and do thousands in damage to people's property).

Any evidence whatsoever of this happening on this particular ride? And do you equate property damage (not that I condone it) with a vicious assault?

BTW, the actions of the officer would actually be typical in the US for apprehending a person who had just assualted someone or commited another serious crime. If another officer up the street saw him break a motorist's mirror or window (or assaulted a senior citizen like they do) he may have tried, and failed, to stop him. In which case he is resisting/fleeing, and a call ahead for others to wait in the middle of the road to catch him riding by would be normal. If he had already been told to stop by another officer, this one could take him down as seen in the video, legally (remember he is resisting arrest). I am not condoning the behavior, and if it happened that way in this case, the officer should still be fired for lying in the report. I am just pointing out that there could be circumstances outside of the video that would legally justify a rightous take-down like this one.

Again, if this was the case, that would have been mentioned in the charges, surely?

 

[often mrunderstood]

Any evidence whatsoever of this happening on this particular ride?

Doesn't matter to me. Simply having a Critical Mass event increasess the likelihood of vandalism and assualt. They earned their reputation, their proud of it. If they are looking for public cooperation, this is not they way to acheive it. I am not a fan of lawful skinhead protests either, and expect only trouble from those also.

And do you equate property damage (not that I condone it) with a vicious assault?

Didn't know people walked away from "vicious" assaults. If a CM rider breaks my window with my family in the car, the take down would be just the beginning (and yes I would be willing to accept whatever punishment comes with my vicious reaction). The people they terrorize are scared for their safety. That is why I called it "gang mentality". Act like thug, hang out with thugs, you'll get treated like one.

Again, if this was the case, that would have been mentioned in the charges, surely?

Some people were claiming that the officers actions were illegal under any circumstances. I was simply pointing out a scenario were those actions could be justified. Unfortunately, nobody bothers to read the part where I cheer the fact that he will likely lose his job for taking unjustified action. Especially the ones (zoot) who actually quote my position ("I am not condoning the behavior, and if it happened that way in this case, the officer should still be fired for lying in the report.") and still don't acknowledge that I am not supporting the officer in any way. I even went out of my way to say that even if was justified, he should be fired for a false report. In fact my exact words were: "piece of cr** cop".

Bottom line: neither get me sympathy

 

[Smackety]

bicycle terrorists...too funny

 

[often mrunderstood]

bicycle terrorists...too funny

Hilarious, in fact.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008078611_criticalmass29m.html

"But that's when, Mark said, he was mobbed by the cyclists, who shattered his windshield and rear window, dented the sides of his car, slashed his tires and tore off his driver's side mirror. As he stepped out of the Subaru, someone smashed something hard across the back of his head. He later learned it was likely a bike lock. Doctors stapled the wound closed."