My rights as a supsect.......

Pate · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:07

Von Smallhausen said:
Have a friendly chat with a copper over a cup of tea.

It's a trap!

Energizer Bunny · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:10

I don't really see how you can be in any trouble here. It's only his word and you have a witness. How on earth would they ever pin anything on you? The worst case scenario is that this is the end of it, the best case is maybe they pull some cctv footage and this twonk driver gets done.

Even if it was only your word vs his, with no physical evidence they can never pin it on you in a million years. Don't get scared by the BS police procedures.

Heliospherez · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:12

Just to clear this up.

You said in the OP that you were hit by the car, but not injured. Are you saying the car ran over your foot and didn't injure you in anyway ? Or did you go to lift your foot (whilst moving forward) - then inadvertantly kick the side of his car (maybe making him think you did it on purpose) ?

And did he swerve to avoid you or swerve once he realised he had hit you / or made contact with you ?

For all we know, you may have kicked the side of his car genuinely as part of the colision (and not intentionally) and caused some considerable damage. Either way - he will be at fault if you were actually on the crossing. If you were actually just about to cross or a few meters up the road from the actual crossing - or even stepped onto the crossing and then went diagonally off it..... it can change many things.

But as was said - Get a lawyer. From the sounds of this guy - you will need it.

plasmahal · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:14

Elixir said:
So a zebra crossing? I'm confused as to how the road can be clear until you stretch your leg forward to go onto the crossing, and he can be travelling too fast yet his car hitting your leg didn't do any damage.

How do it damage his car and not your leg?

But these things aside if it was a zebra crossing then he was very much in the wrong.

This is what I have been thinking about.

My foot made contact with the car and was very brief. what I would call a glancing blow but there was an audible bang. I suspect my foot was hit by the weakest part of the door on the panel. Bur for all I know, any damage done was already there or has been created or exaggerated since.

I also feel that the whole truth has not been told and hence the stance of BTP in pursuing me for criminal damage rather that talking about my near miss with a car on a pedestrian crossing.

Elixir · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:15

But how can the road be clear when you started moving your foot forward, then presumably less than a second later a car be in front of you?

plasmahal · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:17

Heliospherez said:
Just to clear this up.

You said in the OP that you were hit by the car, but not injured. Are you saying the car ran over your foot and didn't injure you in anyway ? Or did you go to lift your foot (whilst moving forward) - then inadvertantly kick the side of his car (maybe making him think you did it on purpose) ?

And did he swerve to avoid you or swerve once he realised he had hit you / or made contact with you ?

As I was stepping forward the car door hit my foot, I think it was the back door and he swerved to avoid us as he crossed the crossing with us on it. As i remember he did not swerve after the impact nor did he stop. It all happened so quickly.

So it was this:

Or did you go to lift your foot (whilst moving forward) - then inadvertantly kick the side of his car (maybe making him think you did it on purpose) ?

Elixir · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:20

If you were already on the crossing then there's no way you could have been in the wrong. Sounds like a typical BMW driver.

icecold · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:21

It's quite easy to imagine a scene where the car didn't stop for you at the crossing so you kicked it. If I've thought of this, so will other people.

plasmahal · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:21

Elixir said:
But how can the road be clear when you started moving your foot forward, then presumably less than a second later a car be in front of you?

It was pretty much like that. One second it was clear then he crossed the crossing at what seemed hight speed (30-40mph) for the conditions. There is a corner before the crossing but a sensible person travelling at a sensible speed for an area with many pedestrians in the vicinity would slow down. I get the feeling it's not the first time he's used the station, so he must be aware of the 2 crossings outside the station. He was late for his train and didn't give a toss for anyone else but himself.

DiCe! · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:23

have you made contact with a lawyer yet? or just browsing the internet? CONTACT A LAWYER.

Moothead2 · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:23

Doesn't a car HAVE to stop if a pedestrian is using a zebra crossing? If you can prove this 'damage' was caused during that incident and no other seperate incident involving you which you can with witnesses and most like CCTV then you have nothing to worry about surely.

But yeah, get a lawyer.

[TW]Fox · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:24

DiCe! said:
have you made contact with a lawyer yet? or just browsing the internet? CONTACT A LAWYER.

Yes, I hear they dont charge anything so you won't need to spend hundreds of pounds on legal advice you may or may not even need!

AndyCr15 · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:26

You must have a funny walk if you lift your feet high enough to kick a car door? Also, you think you kicked his rear door? He was on the actual crossing and you were still walking forward? Even a zebra crossing, you should be paying more attention than that, surely?

Sorry, it all sounds rather odd...

plasmahal · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:27

icecold said:
It's quite easy to imagine a scene where the car didn't stop for you at the crossing so you kicked it. If I've thought of this, so will other people.

I agree and from what happened in that split second, I don't remember making a concious decisions to kick a car travelling at high speed. All I remember is my right foot going out as I was crossing and the car hit it.

If the CCTV footage gives the impression that I kicked it, It then must show that we were on the crossing, the car coming down the road at high speed and nearly taking us out on the crossing.

For that reason, I feel the the BTP have not got the footage or they would be looking at charging him with dangerous driving and leaving the scene of an accident.

Elixir · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:30

AndyCr15 said:
it all sounds rather odd...

Indeed, I feel whatever happened you have painted the story slightly differently to make yourself seem entirely innocent.

I don't believe the exchange at the train station would be completely one sided either.

plasmahal · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:34

Moothead2 said:
Doesn't a car HAVE to stop if a pedestrian is using a zebra crossing? If you can prove this 'damage' was caused during that incident and no other seperate incident involving you which you can with witnesses and most like CCTV then you have nothing to worry about surely.

But yeah, get a lawyer.

I thought cars had to stop if you were already on the crossing.

I have a witness to the car hitting me whilst on the crossing.

The BTP want to question me about criminal damage before talking to the witness who saw the car hit me.

I am now thinking I will ask for legal representation when they interview.

I don't see why I have to travel to see them though.

they can meet me at my local police station and have a solicitor present for my interview. Depending how that goes, I will then ask about pressing charges regarding what happened to me. My witness is happy to talk to the police at any time and be on hand when I'm interviewed.

Scuzi · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:36

[TW]Fox;19821595 said:
Yes, I hear they dont charge anything so you won't need to spend hundreds of pounds on legal advice you may or may not even need!

When you have the possibility of a criminal conviction hanging over your head it is better to play it safe. Hey may not need any legal representation as there may not be any charges pressed against him but he is unlikely to know where he stands until he has spoken to the police, by which time they could have had him tongue tied enough to say something he didn't want to.

It's a terribly pessimistic view but having been in a similar situation I can only recommend treading very carefully.

plasmahal · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:37

Elixir said:
Indeed, I feel whatever happened you have painted the story slightly differently to make yourself seem entirely innocent.

I don't believe the exchange at the train station would be completely one sided either.

That's because I'm not a foul mouthed idiot like the BMW driver.

I remained calm because he looked like an idiot and I did not want to do anything with a large crowd watching that may make him look better.

We are all different.

A fellow passenger did say to me once the BMW driver had gone that I had handled that well, if it was him, he would have punched him in the nose.

[TW]Fox · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:38

Scuzi said:
When you have the possibility of a criminal conviction hanging over your head it is better to play it safe. Hey may not need any legal representation as there may not be any charges pressed against him but he is unlikely to know where he stands until he has spoken to the police, by which time they could have had him tongue tied enough to say something he didn't want to.

It's a terribly pessimistic view but having been in a similar situation I can only recommend treading very carefully.

I agree in principle but I'm a tad worried about this chap running up some sort of ridiculous legal bill because some guy reckoned he might have perhaps kicked his car :eek:

Reaper 392 · 13 Aug 2011 at 14:40

wait... i just realised he didnt stop after your foot supposedly damaged his car. that makes it a hit and run, so he will be in deep doo-doos