Despite the obnoxious behavior of the two bicyclists in question (re: resisting a police officer), an Ohio court made exactly the right ruling:
The judge ruled:
- The bicyclists may have been rude for riding two abreast but were breaking no law in Ohio–not the law requiring bicyclists to ride as far right as practicable (the lane was of non-sharable width), nor the law against impeding traffic, nor the law about riding abreast (which, in Ohio, does not require bicyclists to single up when impeding traffic)
- There is no law at all that bans “operating a bike in the roadway”
- Because the bicyclists were not breaking any law, the police officer had no basis to stop, detain, or arrest them and therefore all other charges were dismissed.
I do not consider their holding the lane obnoxious or rude. They were legal vehicles on the road. They were traffic.
The judge cites the 4th Amendment re: the bicyclits’ choosing not to stop. Fine. I’m glad we have that right. I’m not so sure how smart it is to insist on it in certain situations. If a cop flashes his lights at me, I’m stopping. We can sort it out. I prefer not to be tasered or worse. I prefer not to end up in court if reasonable human beings can discuss the matter.
UPDATE: Be sure to check out the video linked in the comments. It seems there are at least two questions here: 1) whether or not to pull over, and 2) whether or not to talk to the police.
Comments 9
It’s noble of you to think you can have reasonable dialogue with a policeman. Only possible if you have a personal relationship with them.
But, even then, you run a big risk of having what you say distorted and used against you. They’re not trained in critical thinking and fact-finding. Not all of them are bullies – but most of them are.
Defense Attorneys will tell you “Don’t talk, don’t cooperate, don’t explain”. The two cyclists were correct and this is part of what helped them win against this absurd abuse of power.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik
Posted 03 Dec 2009 at 12:02 pm ¶Nick… I can accept your argument up to the point at which a cop pulls out a taser. Very interesting video, BTW. It gives one pause. Thanks for the link!
Posted 03 Dec 2009 at 12:47 pm ¶Next; the cyclists should sue the officer for assault with a deadly weapon.
Posted 03 Dec 2009 at 1:15 pm ¶I am with Nick and Nate. An innocently open and cooperative disposition towards law enforcement officers often ends up backfiring. The right to remain silent, the right to not allow police officers into your home without a warrant, the right not to stop – these are more important than many people realise. I have seen nightmarish things happen to several mild-mannered university intellectuals as a result of their friendly desire to cooperate and “explain”.
Posted 04 Dec 2009 at 5:54 pm ¶Folks this is a traffic issue, Mr. James Duane, Esq is criminal defense laywer. OK! Would you not stop in a car?
Yes, I would stop and talk with any law enforcement officer, learn how much they know cyclist rights, take notes and write note the supervisor with a critique or kudos! Courtsey promotes safety! Who are you going to speak with if someone else harasses you?
Yes, the officer and PD are being sued as civil right case.
Posted 05 Dec 2009 at 5:55 am ¶danc… Yes, a traffic issue. If you would stop in a car you should stop on a bicycle.
Posted 05 Dec 2009 at 7:55 am ¶I appreciate everyone’s desire for civility towards police officers, but as far as filing a complaint about behavior like that of the officer in this case, good luck, I guess? The best course of action is to just know your rights, and get a lawyer when you need to deal with the police.
Posted 05 Dec 2009 at 11:45 am ¶Nate… Again, there seem to be two issues here:
1. Do you stop when signaled by a police officer to do so?
My answer: Yes.
2. Do you talk to the police officer once pulled over?
My (non)answer: Hmmmm… I’m not as sure of this as I was yesterday.
Posted 05 Dec 2009 at 11:58 am ¶Andy asked: “If you would stop in a car you should stop on a bicycle.”
Yes, (both are vehicles?) the older cyclist telling the officer “no” was unwise but perfectly legal. Irregardless of all the name calling, epitaphs, etc, the situation escalated out of control, getting tazed is not what either party wanted or expected from the moment the officer passed the cyclists. The officer properly just wanted to warn them, which can possibly feel like harassment. Like I said before, listen (carefully), take notes, ask for clarification if something is not clear. Knowing your cyclist rights is important so you can answer clearly and write note the supervisor with a critique or kudos.
Posted 07 Dec 2009 at 5:37 pm ¶