More walkers hit by cyclists than cars in royal parks
Cyclists are more likely than motorists to hit and injure pedestrians in London's parks, new data reveal.
Nine pedestrians were struck by cyclists in the capital's Royal Parks, which include Hyde Park, Regent's Park and Richmond Park, between January 2024 and April 2025. There were a reported 18 similar near misses across the eight outdoor spaces.
In contrast, no pedestrians were struck by cars and there were only two reported near misses involving vehicles, accident logs held by the Royal Parks show.
The data was obtained after the London Cycling Campaign (LCC) responded to a parks campaign encouraging cyclists to obey 20mph speed limits by insisting: 'The biggest cause of road danger to anyone inside a Royal Park remains drivers.'
The only motorised vehicle to hit and injure someone over the 16-month period was a motorbike, according to accident logs released through a Freedom of Information response.
Meanwhile, nine cyclists collided with other cyclists and two cars collided with other cars.
On eight occasions, cyclists rode into moving or parked cars, including one who hit a vehicle after ignoring a red light.
In total, seven cars hit cyclists in incidents where the motorist appeared to be at fault. There were a further three near misses between cars and bikes.
Cars also struck trees, walls and lampposts on seven occasions. And cyclists were logged as running over and killing a squirrel, and hitting two dogs and a deer.
In April, the Royal Parks charity launched a 'considerate cycling' campaign after Hilda Griffiths, 81, died after being hit in Regent's Park by Brian Fitzgerald, a Credit Suisse director who admitted he was travelling at 29mph in the park's 20mph zone in a 'pace line' formation with other club cyclists.
An inquest heard he could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bikes. Mrs Griffiths died from her injuries two months after the collision in 2022.
Tom Fyans, the LCC chief executive, responded to the campaign by saying: 'While cyclists riding too fast are annoying and can undeniably be dangerous, the biggest cause of road danger to anyone inside a Royal Park remains drivers.'
Gerard Griffiths, the son of Mrs Griffiths, who has campaigned for a review of cycling laws, said the latest data show bikes put people at greatest risk in parks.
'The attitude of some cyclists – whose need for speed and bragging rights on GPS fitness apps like Strava – needs to change,' he said, referring to YouTube films of cyclists in Regent's Park exceeding 30mph.
'It's about time that sections of the cycling community realise that riding at excessive speed is dangerous.'
An LCC spokesman said 'historically' through roads in the Royal Parks have had 'significant issues' with speeding and dangerous driving.
He added: 'Many of the Royal Parks have no or few motor vehicles but lots of people cycling. That is likely to explain some of the data presented here.
'Regardless of that, no one should be injured walking or crossing the road in a park, and as we've hopefully been clear on, every single park user – cyclist or driver – should behave sensibly, legally and pay close regard to others, their surroundings and their speed.'
A spokesman for the Royal Parks said it welcomed considerate cyclists, adding: 'Unfortunately, we have seen too many collisions and near misses between speeding cyclists and pedestrians or wildlife, which is why we recently launched a 'considerate cycling' campaign, asking cyclists to slow down, stay within the maximum 20mph vehicle speed limit in the parks and respect others.'
The parks' new code has already been mocked on social media by some cyclists, who suggest that it unfairly targets them.
The Royal Parks spokesman added: 'We believe that reminding cyclists to watch their speed will improve safety in the parks for everyone and will give cyclists more time to react in the event of a possible collision.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Fact Check: Eddie Murphy didn't testify at Sean 'Diddy' Combs trial, honestly
Claim: Actor Eddie Murphy testified at rapper Sean "Diddy" Combs' sex-trafficking trial in May or early June 2025. Rating: A rumor that circulated online beginning in late May 2025 claimed actor and comedian Eddie Murphy testified at rapper Sean "Diddy" Combs' sex-trafficking trial. Users primarily spread this matter through the sharing of videos. Those videos claimed Murphy told the court at Combs' New York trial that Combs forced Murphy into engaging in sexual activity with him, and that Murphy said, "I left Hollywood because of 'Diddy.'" However, Murphy didn't testify at Combs' trial. Searches of Bing, DuckDuckGo, Google and Yahoo found no news media outlets credibly reporting that Murphy testified at the trial or made any such statements regarding sexual activity or leaving Hollywood. The rumor amounted to nothing more than attempts by online creators to earn advertising revenue. Those creators executed their plans by asking artificial-intelligence (AI) tools to create videos and inauthentic thumbnail images promoting the false rumor. Snopes contacted by email representatives for Murphy to request comment regarding the fabricated rumor, included about Murphy's alleged statements, and will update this story if we receive more information. For example, on June 8, 2025, a manager of the Undisclosed Realms YouTube channel posted a video (archived) displaying the title, "Eddie Murphy SHOCKS Court 'I Left Hollywood Because of Diddy!'" The creator of the clip labeled its content in the description as "comedic satire." As of this writing, the video received over 236,000 views. The video's thumbnail image featured an AI-generated, split-screen view, showing Combs in an orange jumpsuit alongside Murphy, both seated in front of microphones. The chyron read, "Diddy ruined my career." The video showed authentic visuals. At the same time, the clip also featured AI-generated editing, scripting and voice narration, meaning all its creator needed to do to make the entire clip was enter a brief text prompt into one of many different AI tools. The AI-detection website Sightengine found a 99.9 percent likelihood of someone generating the thumbnail image with AI. The narrator's voice matched that of the AI-generated "Bill" on the ElevenLabs AI company's website. Snopes added the red line due to the thumbnail image's inauthenticity. (Undisclosed Realms/YouTube) Days earlier, on June 1, a manager of the Red Carpet Rumors Facebook page posted a video with the title, "1 MINUTE AGO: Eddie Murphy Testifies, 'I Left Hollywood Because of Diddy." That video, also generated with AI, received over 4 million views, and featured the description, "In a stunning courtroom revelation, comedy legend Eddie Murphy has reportedly taken the stand and confessed the real reason he vanished from Hollywood for years — and it all leads back to Sean 'Diddy' Combs. With the world watching, Eddie declared, 'I left Hollywood because of Diddy,' sending shockwaves through the courtroom and beyond." The video's AI-generated thumbnail image showed a split-screen view of a tearful Murphy crying in court next to Combs, again wearing an orange jumpsuit. A fake photo displayed between the pair showed Murphy and Combs shirtless in a bed. The chyron referenced "breaking news" and a purported Murphy quote saying that Combs forced him into engaging in oral sex. The text read, "He made me suck it." Snopes also added the red line in this thumbnail image. (Red Carpet Rumors/Facebook) Other users shared this same false rumor far and wide on Facebook (archived), Threads (archived), TikTok (archived) and X (archived), as well as on many different YouTube channels. A Google search result also displayed a popular TikTok video with at least 162,000 views from user @ displaying the title, "P2. 1 MINUTE AGO: Eddie Murphy Testifies, 'I Left Hollywood Because of Diddy.'" As of this writing, an attempt to access the video showed the message, "Video currently unavailable." Additionally, at least one X post (archived) from May 31 linked to a removed YouTube video displaying the title, "1 MINUTE AGO: Eddie Murphy Testifies, 'I Left Hollywood Because of Diddy.'" Upon attempting to access the video (archived), YouTube showed the message, "This video has been removed for violating YouTube's Terms of Service." In other words, this false rumor about Murphy and Combs originated in May, most likely with a label about fictional content, as opposed to satire. While Murphy did not testify at Combs' trial, his name did receive a brief, albeit minor, mention. Referencing Combs' ex-girlfriend Cassie Ventura, NewsNation reported of Murphy and actor Bruce Willis: While reviewing text messages Ventura sent Combs in court, the defense team noted she asked the hip-hop mogul if they could have more than a sexual relationship, pointing to both Willis and Murphy as examples where they successfully co-parented with the mothers of their children. Ventura had expressed a desire to be in Combs' children's lives after he split with Kim Porter, and Combs' defense team was attempting to show that Ventura was jealous of the time Combs spent with the mother of three of his kids. For further reading, previous fact checks examined similar rumors about other celebrities allegedly testifying against Combs, including musician Usher and actor Jim Carrey. Another claim said the prosecution in Combs' case presented as evidence a secret recording of Prince exposing the music mogul. "AI Image Detector. Detect AI-Generated Media at Scale." Sightengine, "DuckDuckGo - Protection. Privacy. Peace of Mind." DuckDuckGo, Falzone, Diana. "Here Are the A-Listers Mentioned in the Diddy Trial so Far." NewsNation, 7 May 2025, "Free Text To Speech Online with Lifelike AI Voices." ElevenLabs, Google. Google Lens - Search What You See. Microsoft Bing. Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos.
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
I've been caught by Britain's most prolific speed camera – it makes the road no safer
When careful motorist Norman Tate received a letter of intended prosecution for speeding, he could hardly believe it. It told the grandfather, who had had a clean driving licence for more than a quarter of a century before the incident last year, that he'd been caught doing 45mph in a 30mph zone in his Ford Mondeo by a speed camera on a busy junction on the A38 in Sutton-in-Ashfield, Nottinghamshire. 'I'm a straight-up person. My immediate thought was, 'I'm a senior citizen and don't do 45mph in a 30mph area,'' says Tate, now 80. 'I might creep over the limit by a few miles an hour, but not by that much. So I thought I'd investigate.' The chartered civil engineer, with experience of road and bridge design, analysed the signage along that stretch of road. He's concluded that it is 'not fit for purpose' – and argues that motorists should be given better warnings that they are about to enter a 30mph area. It is a view that others who have been caught by that speed camera share – and there are plenty of them. In fact, the little yellow box mounted on a pole is so prolific that it is said to be the 'most lucrative' speed camera in the country, according to a Channel 5 documentary due to be broadcast tonight at 8pm. Speed Cameras: Are They Out to Get You? says that one camera caught 17,498 speeding offences in nine months from when it was installed in August 2023 – at an average rate of 72 per day and potentially costing motorists more than £1.6 million. So, what, you might well ask, is going on with this camera in a Nottinghamshire market town to make it ranked the most prolific – and some claim the sneakiest – in the country? And what happens to all the money it generates? When we visit Sutton-in-Ashfield to meet Tate, from nearby Chesterfield, Derbyshire, he explains how, as you approach the camera from junction 28 of the M1, first there is a 70mph speed limit that suddenly turns to 50mph – with an average-speed camera overhead – then it goes to 30mph about 100 yards from the crossroads where the camera is. There is a 30mph sign as you approach on the dual carriageway and a smaller sign warning of the camera ahead and reminding you it's 30mph. But, Tate says: 'When I started looking into the signage, it became apparent that if there's a high-sided vehicle on the inside lane, there's no way you can see the 30mph sign. There is nothing on the road itself to say it's 30mph. I think there should be. It's too easy to think you're still in the 50mph zone.' Norman Tate | From Speed Cameras: Are They Out to Get You?, courtesy of Lion Television (When we stopped by at a busy 4pm, motorists appeared to be driving carefully, but it was hard to tell whether it was carefully enough – the camera uses infra-red light technology, which means it doesn't flash.) The figures in the documentary come from a survey by Legal Expert, a personal injury, compensation and accident claim solicitor company. To obtain them, the firm made a Freedom of Information (FOI) request to all 43 police forces in England and Wales asking for the number of speeding fines issued in the 12 months to April 5 2024, and the top 20 spots where drivers have been caught speeding. Only 23 replied. If the 17,498 figure for the camera on the A38 in Sutton-in-Ashfield is annualised, it would be 23,331, putting it ahead of the second-placed speed camera, which was on the M25 between junctions 7 and 16 in Surrey (21,989 offences, at a daily average of 60). With speeding offences resulting in a £100 fine and three points on your licence (if they result in a fixed penalty notice and are not contested), that would mean that £2,333,100 worth of fines would have been threatened in a year, using the annualised figure for the A38 camera. A separate FOI request, not mentioned in the documentary, about the A38 speed camera was later made to Nottinghamshire Police by Gary Eyre, a heating engineer from Huthwaite, near Sutton-in-Ashfield. He found the reply 'flabbergasting': it said 41,675 motorists were punished for travelling in excess of the 30mph limit in the camera's first 20 months. 'I go into about 10 houses every day and everybody knows someone who's been done,' he said, explaining what prompted him to make the FOI request. That means at least £4.1 million worth of fines will have been threatened during that period. Nottinghamshire Police has stressed to The Telegraph that 47 per cent of those offences were resolved with speed awareness courses as an alternative to prosecution, so no fines will have been paid for those. 'I don't disagree with having speed cameras,' Tate says, 'and this one is there doing the job it should be doing and is designed to do – if the signage was correct. This is a very dangerous junction and the camera is trying to save people's lives. But if there's 23,000 people a year going through there at the wrong speed, there's something wrong – and that's the signage.' His attempts to argue his case saw him locked in what he called a 'David and Goliath' battle with the authorities. In the end, after first electing to go to trial, he pleaded guilty to his speeding offence, committed at 11.09am on February 1 last year. He did not contest the 45mph recorded by the camera but argued that the advance warning signs from the 50mph to the 30mph zone are 'inadequate' and called for a review of those signs. Magistrates gave him four points, fined him £360, and ordered him to pay a surcharge to victim services of £144 and £150 costs to the Crown Prosecution Service. In the documentary, Tate is featured with his friend Brian Staples, 76, a retired auto electrician from Papplewick, Nottinghamshire, who runs a classic car club. Staples is more dubious of the camera's intent, telling the documentary: 'They're taking those motorists to court and making them look as if they're bad drivers, and they're not. Friends that I know have been caught there are in their 80s – they're not speeding, they've just been caught out.' Staples also claims that some speed cameras are there just to collect money rather than to slow people down. Patrica Harvey, 68, a retired office accounts manager from Pinxton, Derbyshire, told The Telegraph that she has been caught speeding by the Sutton-in-Ashfield camera twice in a year, the second time around a fortnight ago. Both times, she said her speed was in the mid-30s mph. 'I was specifically looking for the sign the second time but didn't see it,' she said. 'I'm really very cautious about my speed. But one minute you're in 50mph, then it's 30mph. There's not enough signs telling you what's happening.' Judy Gascoigne, 66, a PA from Matlock, Derbyshire, was warned by a passenger in her car of the camera ahead and was trying to slow down when she was caught doing 36mph. 'I didn't see the signage,' she said. 'I did a speed awareness course and there were four or five others on it caught at the same camera.' Another motorist said: 'I got caught twice in the same week. When there's tree branches in the way and large vehicles, the signs are difficult to see.' From Speed Cameras: Are They Out to Get You?, courtesy of Lion Television The documentary also raises the question of what happens to the money from speed camera fines, making the point that it is common misconception that it goes to the council. In fact, it goes directly to central government, to the Treasury, and is used towards general spending rather than ring-fenced for specific areas. Motoring journalist and transport campaigner Quentin Willson told the documentary: 'If the public saw that the revenue raised from speeding fines made a visible difference, then perhaps the public would be more behind them.' It is an issue that West Midlands Police and Crime Commissioner Simon Foster is campaigning on. He wants the money raised from speeding fines in his region to be spent on road safety schemes there. During a consultation in 2023, 93 per cent of the public agreed that money raised from fixed penalty fines should stay in the region. So far, however, his calls – to both this and the previous government – have not resulted in a change of policy. One argument against allowing the income from speed cameras to be retained locally is that it might incentivise regions to install cameras to make money. Nottinghamshire Police said around 37,000 vehicles go through the junction where the Sutton-in-Ashfield camera is every day, so only a very small percentage are exceeding the speed limit. There had been at least one fatal collision and a number of serious injury collisions in the years before the camera was installed. But there have been no fatal or serious injury collisions since it was installed and the rate of offences have reduced to around 60 a day. The force also said work to cut back foliage to ensure all signage was visible was done before the camera went live, and the 'unusual step' was taken of putting out proactive communication to inform people of the new camera. Insp Simon Allen, of Nottinghamshire Police, said: 'While the 30mph limit around this junction is not set by the police, it is in place for a very good reason – including the very large number of children who use the pedestrian crossings to get to and from school each day. 'Like all safety cameras in the UK, this unit is in place to reduce speed and prevent road traffic collisions – not to catch people speeding.' A Department for Transport spokesman said: 'Fines from speeding offences help fund essential public services including health care, transport and policing in the West Midlands and across the country. 'While we keep the motoring offences and their penalties under review, we don't currently have any plans to change this system.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Lori Daybell Trial Day 5: Prosecutors rest case, 'Doomsday Mom' not testifying
The Brief Lori Vallow Daybell's second Arizona trial continues on June 11 in Phoenix. On Tuesday, a number of people took the stand, including a police detective from Rexburg, Idaho. Daybell is accused of conspiring with her late brother in the attempted murder of Brandon Boudreaux. PHOENIX - The second and final Arizona trial of Lori Vallow Daybell, the so-called "Doomsday Mom," resumed in a Phoenix courtroom on Tuesday morning. The backstory This is the second and final Arizona trial for Daybell. In this case, she is accused of conspiring with her brother, Alex Cox, in the attempted murder of Brandon Boudreaux, who once married Daybell's niece. Boudreaux was shot at outside his Gilbert home in October 2019. While Boudreaux was not hit, the incident is linked to a series of deadly events in Idaho, including the murders of Daybell's two children, Joshua "JJ" Vallow and Chad Daybell's first wife, Tammy. In April 2025, Daybell was also found guilty of plotting the fatal shooting of her fourth husband, Charles Vallow, in Chandler. Just like she did in her first Arizona trial, Daybell is representing herself. The trial kicked off on Thursday, June 5 with both sides presenting their opening statements. During Daybell's opening statement, multiple objections were made by the prosecuting attorney, Treena Kay. A day later, Daybell was briefly removed from the courtroom after an intense exchange with the presiding judge. What Happened Yesterday On June 10, Daybell continued her cross-examination of Gilbert Police Officer Ryan Pillar, who also testified on June 9. Pillar is the case agent who investigated the shooting at Brandon Boudreaux's home on Oct. 2, 2019. During Vallow Daybell's cross-examination, she questioned Gilbert's lack of testing to determine the type of gun used, why Boudreaux's Tesla vehicle was not kept in evidence, and the trajectory of the shooting. Prosecuting attorney Treena Kay later re-directed testimony to argument that evidence showed a clear shooting from a Jeep Wrangler that was allegedly driven by Cox, who died in December 2019. Later on, Lieutenant Ray Hermosillo from Rexburg, Idaho took the stand. Lt. Hermosillo was one of the detectives on the case against Lori and Chad Daybell, a crucial part of the investigation leading to the discovery of the remains of Joshua "JJ" Vallow and Tylee Ryan on Chad Daybell's property in June 2020. Daybell did not choose to cross-examine Hermosillo. During Tuesday's proceedings, we also saw photos of rifles discovered in Alex Cox's garage at his Rexburg apartment. In Other News... On the morning of June 11, we obtained legal documents related to a motion that Daybell filed that seeks the recusal of Judges Jennifer Green and Justin Beresky. Per the legal documents, a judge has dismissed Daybell's motion, stating that the motion can't be filed after a hearing or trial began. What you can do You can watch live coverage of the trial on FOX 10's YouTube channel.
