Safe Speed Forums

Police were accused of being 'heavy handed' today after four officers were dispatched to deal with a 84-year old World War Two veteran - because he was riding his bicycle on the pavement.

Great grandfather James Gresty was chased into a bank by two police community support officers after they said he was cycling on the path outside.

The pair ordered Mr Gresty to come outside for a ticking off but when he refused they called for 'back-up' from two other regular officers in a nearby police van.

They promptly drove over the pedestrianised street outside the Halifax bank in Sale, Greater Manchester, to reach him and issue him with a £30 fixed penalty for an offence of cycling in a pedestrianised area.

Today widower Mr Gresty, who won several war medals during his three year service as a private with the York and Lancaster Regiment, said: 'I was shocked at the attitude of these two officers who wanted to speak to me.

'They were carrying on as if I had been guilty of committing a serious criminal offence.

'They were being aggressive, rude and heavy handed, all over an in issue of whether I was cycling on the pavement.

'I wouldn't mind but they didn't even get that right either. I had got off my bike before I got on the pavement. God knows why four police officers had to be involved.

'You would have thought they would have something better to do with their time. I'm an 84-year-old man, not some teenage hoodie.

'And it's all rather galling that that their "back"up drove across a pedestrianised area, which I think is far more dangerous than riding a bike across it.

'It seemed that these two PCSOs were young people who put on a uniform and thought they owned the place. Obviously the power had gone to their heads.'

Does being 84 years old old, having fought for your country fro six years and having won medals for gallantry put you above the law then?

'I wouldn't mind but they didn't even get that right either. I had got off my bike before I got on the pavement

Does being 84 years old old, having fought for your country fro six years and having won medals for gallantry put you above the law then?

No, of course not, but proportionality and appropriate targeting are important in law enforcement, and appear to have been completely disregarded in this case.

And should being 21 years old, not having had a shave for several days, never having served in the forces, and never having had a job in your life, put you above the law?

No, of course not, but proportionality and appropriate targeting are important in law enforcement, and appear to have been completely disregarded in this case.

And should being 21 years old, not having had a shave for several days, never having served in the forces, and never having had a job in your life, put you above the law?

And as I've mentioned before , Mrs B was almost a victim - in our local pedestrian area- she'd had an eye op the day before , for cataract removal , and was out and about ,in what we thought was a safe area - to get a near miss from a yob on bike .

Having seen the amount of yobs on bikes when I'm in park ( and incidentally it's a NO CYCLING ZONE)- I'm persuaded to start carrying walking stick -TO ENFORCE THE NO CYCLING THING .

No. Nor should it make the law take a specially interest in you.

Actually, I would suggest that matching that profile would make it much more likely that someone might act in an antisocial manner, in comparison with an 84-year-old war veteran, and so the law quite properly might take a special interest in them.

I consider, that my son getting a well paid job was a greater achievement than him getting a first class degree.

Bicycles are, in law, carriages ( Taylor v Goodwin 1879) and as such are not allowed on the pavement, whether ridden, pushed or parked. Similarly a wheeled bicycle should be on the left side of the road (though the pusher may be on the footway) and should show the appropriate lights at night

And they wonder why cycling isn't popular in the UK.

Because they cannot legally be ridden on the pavement? That seems to be a bit of a non sequitur

WHY??????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!! Surely this has to be one for the current government's push to get rid of nonsense laws.

My understanding is that the common sense approach to policing of cycling on the footpath is that it is ignored unless it is causing a nuisance or distress.

Seeing someone cycling on the pavement causes distress to a lot people.

Only because they have an obsession with OMG he's breaking THE LAW!!!!!!!!!!