“Let's take a closer look at the police response:

Update 3pm Tuesday 14 April.
Avon and Somerset police spokeswoman Catherine Foster said: ¿Avon and Somerset police always try to seize CCTV footage if it can help with an investigation."

FALSE - Upon calling the accident team I have been told that unless you are in a coma or dead you stand no chance of the cameras being checked. Unlike somebody mentioned, this would not be logistically difficult - think about it!


¿However in this case it was not required as sufficient evidence was obtained from a number of witnesses. CCTV would not have added to our enquiries.

NONSENSE - I'm not a detective, but if you do not know the identity of the Mercedes driver, you do not have enough information. Shocking.

"It is thought an altercation occurred between the driver and the motorcyclist. With regards to this case no further action has been recommended".

GARBAGE - an altercation did occur - Mr Martin was knocked off of his bike. Is this spokesperson a detective or somebody who has been employed for their clever communication skills? This statement simply tries to imply that the driver might have been at fault but those with a GCSE in English language will realise that the 'altercation' refers to the accident itself.

BUT OF COURSE - the one certainty in this completely ridiculous statement "...with regards to this case no further action has been recommended".

CASE CLOSED

For the record, the driver of the Mercedes has not been caught and the case IS now closed. The police had the exact time and location of the accident, will they bother to phone through and check 5 minutes of camera footage? This is not logistically difficult - it just confirms most peoples' belief into the level of investigative work into solving crime and confirms their disgust into the amount of work that goes into revenue generating crime.

Police complaints of a higher nature are in order me thinks!”

“We can but dream Steve..

Trouble is that would involve teaching people to drive, rather than teaching them to pass a test..”

“Oh if only everyone had to ride a bike before they drove a car.

You would then understand how vulnerable we can be to stupid and selfish drivers whilst on our vastly superior forms of transport.

They pollute less, take up less space, cause less congestion and (this is what drivers hate) they are a damn siight more fun.

Just don't try to kill us on purpose like in this case”

“> Got beeped at by some swearing goes here this morning for daring to do 30mph in a 30 zone and not getting out of his way, followed by a wonderfully dangerous overtaking manouver (nothing beats the brush of wingmirror on sleeve in the morning) <

Sorry to hear this James, but I assume using your motorcycle you have never undertaken or overtaken a car in your life? If at any point you have (which is normally the case) it is inane to suggest the car is a) wholly responsible for the danger in the overtaking manouver or b) it is reasonable for you to not get out of his way. To avoid the problem, adopt a position that allows the car to pass, in the same way you would to pass a car in a road of the same width.

This is what is so frustrating, you feel victimised because a car has tried to pass and (by the sounds of things) you've not moved across and allowed them any space to do so, yet the car is simply expecting you to adopt the same position you (or at least most motorcyclists) will adopt when it suits them (i.e. flush with the kerb or the centre of the road). I genuinely don't get it: what part of this gross hypocrisy do angry motorcyclists not spot?

I'll happily follow behind some doddering moped driver for an entire journey at 20mph as I at least know that they're being consistent in their positioning. But if a motorcyclist overtakes cars with a limited clearance, only to act as if providing any room for the reverse of this is physically impossible, is why a lot of these flare ups occur.

One other point James, since you seem to be a regular user of motorcycles and as pained about car drivers as I'm about motorcyclists: why is it okay for a motorcycle in moving traffic to pick their moment to pass on the outside and then pull into the breaking space a car is allowing between itself and the car in front (as per highway code). Our breaking space is not an invitation for bikes to car hop as it just leaves us either having to slow down to ensure safe distances are maintained or not do so and then incur the abuse of the motorcyclist for 'being up his backside' in spite of him choosing to pull in front of a moving car in the first place. Madness...”

“Sadly in the eyes of to many people the car is king, and woe betide anyone who dares use some peice of non-car transport.

Got beeped at by some *swearing goes here* this morning for daring to do 30mph in a 30 zone and not getting out of his way, followed by a wonderfully dangerous overtaking manouver (nothing beats the brush of wingmirror on sleeve in the morning) and the driver jumping out of his car at the next set of lights and threatening to kill me for not moving over at his request..

Some days I dispare.”