By user12625760 on Jan 27, 2007
As a colleague of mine said:
Finally some sense....
This is the case I mentioned the case of the cyclist who was convicted of “holding up the traffic” back in August 2006. The case was retried rather than appealed. As I understand it the retial was orderd as he was found guilty of an offence that does not really exist (like being found guilty of walking on the cracks in the pavement).
Now I hope that the Police will have to explain why they even stopped him and why they did nothing about the cars that overtook the cyclist by crossing the double white lines.
The best bit about this is that this case caused £25,000 to be given to the Cyclists Defence Fund in support of Daniel.