Neil Smalley

Is it me, or is the guy who's landrover slide off the road, causing the selby crash getting framed/stitched up?

It was a terrible ACCIDENT, and now the media are treating the poor guy as though he was Harold Shipman.
They are trying to say that he fell asleep at the wheel? Can they prove that? No.

Then today they're saying that he was having an affair with some woman on the internet and that caused him fall asleep to crash, can they prove that? No!

And also they are blaming him SPEEDING as a cause of the accident, he was in a landrover for F's sake. Your lucky if you can do 70 in it.

Why can't people accept that sometimes, in spite of all the precautions we put in place accidents happen. In this case it was a horrrible, tragic chain of events. But why do we insist on blaming someone everytime something like this goes on???

I await the end results of this show trial with interest.

SWRTWannabe

Couldn't agree more. It certainly was a tragic accident, but at the end of the day that's all it was.

If the driver can be proved to have been driving illegally, then he should be prosecuted for that. But only that.

At the time of the crash, I'm sure some investigation determined that the bridge walls weren't designed right to prevent cars veering off the motorway and onto the railway tracks. Maybe all the money that has been spent bringing this case to court could have been better spent on trying to make sure that a terrible tragedy like this is less likely to happen again.

Nigel H

I basically agree with the sentiments above.

The fault lies with the Highways Agency or Local Authority for not protecting the railway line from this type of incident. There had been numerous cases of this before elsewhere. And waht happened? SFA.

Now if had been caused by the railway, it would have been a completely different kettle of fish.

BTW I work in the rail industry

DavidBrown

He's a witch ! Burn him !!

Definitely being made a scapegoat of.

Scooby-Doo

He's not a scapegoat, they've found footage of him making love to a goat all night, and that was after two bottles of vodka, a poker game, an internet chat room, speaker with his lover on the phone, making love to his wife, cleaning the house.....bla bla bla.

Can't he just say it was the wrong kind of tarmac, or leaves on the road ?

The Zohan

IMHO
I understand that this chap had been up all day working then all night on the internet (his phone records/computer internet logs confirmed this) - driving after being up for 24 hours is not a smart move!No skid makrd on the road, no signs of a problem with the vehicle! looks like driver error.

However there should have been barriers in place to prevent this sort of thing happening.

I feel the chap was irresponsible and neglegent - and the local council or would irt be Railtrack are at fault - this could so easliy been avoided.

What a tradgedy!

andrew6321

I'm no lawyer, but I am assuming that the CPS wouldn't prosecute the guy for dangerous driving without some sort of evidence to prove their case.

The burden of proof lies with the prosecution - if they can prove it, then he deserves to be punished. If they can't - he'll walk - and rightly so.

As for it being a show trial - blame the media and the way they report this case as though it has some 'entertainment' value.

BTW - Neil - if you're so sure it was an accident, then maybe you should present yourself as a witness.....

Andrew

[Edited by andrew6321 - 11/29/2001 9:18:41 AM]

Gordo

I agree entirely - these are the same newspapers that rant on about speed cameras because that's what their unwashed readership want, yet at the same time demonstrate rediculous hypocrisy in relation to some poor sod whose landrover fell on a railway line. He should be done for driving related offences (due care & attention etc) but not in relation to the deaths - you have to ask what would have happened to him had the train stopped in time?

We need to be pragmatic and accept that all forms of transport will generate a level of fatalities every year. That is the price we pay for the benefits to our quality of life. The last stats I saw re cars, for example, showed that the number of road related deaths has not changed considerably since the early 60s - despite the huge car volume increases and changes in car technology (faster/safer). Canada recently scrapped speed cameras because they recognised this fact and proved that speed cameras do not affect the number of deaths on the road at all. And yet our socialist government panders to the uninformed and keeps sanctioning more cameras.

Blaming an individual in a case like this might ease aspects of the social conscience but it neither feels just nor moral.

Rant over!
Gordo

Neil Smalley

I'm sure it was an accident. The guy did'nt do it on purpose

RoShamBo

iTrader: (1)

They can more or less prove that he was asleep at the wheel.
Though I agree no-one can prove it 100%
Lack of skid marks on the road indicates he was asleep.
Crash investigators see this day after day & therefore can be pretty sure.

Therefore he was completely to blame.

Ro.

pwebb

isn't there a monetary issue here? - in that if he can be proved negligent then the victims of the crash can seek damages via his insurance company, whereas if there is no proof then it is unlikely they will ever see any compensation from the guy himself ( I think this is what I read) - put yourselves in the shoes of the relatives and it becomes clearer why this is such an important case. Threw away the guardian article on this one so not sure which way round it was.
PW

ARRON BIRD

agreed.

nom

He fell asleep at the wheel - his fault.
His car went through the barrier - the barrier's fault (or the people who were meant to produce a working barrier's fault anyway) when the barrier should have stopped him.
Because the barrier failed, the accident was compounded to the point of what he is being taken to court for.

So, if they want something to blame, it's the barrier's authorities. Which, presumably, routes back to themselves eventually. I imagine they aren't very happy with this & are so looking for, ooo, let's see, I wonder if it could be a scapegoat?

RoShamBo

iTrader: (1)

The barrier wasn't to fault (as far as I know - correct me if I am out of date here)
I thought the barrier was the right type & length - complying to all known regulations.
The fact that it failed in its purpose is not the barriers fault or the people who erected it. As they were working to the "correct" guidelines.
The guidelines will have to be changed to make them longer I guess.

Ro.

fast bloke

Say he had fallen asleep at the wheel, mounted a pavement and killed your entire family - do you think a careless/reckless driving would be appropriate then, and have most of the blame on the people who built the pavement for not making it high enough?
I do agree that there is a media witch hunt going on, but maybe in the minds of those who lost loved ones it could be justified?

ChrisB

Has that been proved 100% with no trace of doubt what so-ever?

DavidLewis

Lack of skid marks only means he didn't lock the brakes. It doesn't prove he was asleep.

juan

According to reports it was the complete lack of change of direction as he slowly left the road as well as lack of skidmarks etc.

He would have to be asleep or mummified not to have made some attempt to correct direction etc.

He was irresponsible to drive in that condition, but we all drive when tired sometimes. You just don't think it will happen to you.

Also, if there was a barrier that failed then that is obviously a major issue. If both those are the case I'd have to say the barrier failed in its job and more of the blame lies there

RoShamBo

iTrader: (1)

Again - dont think the barrier "failed"
It was the right barrier & the "right" distance in length.
Even at the right length it still allowed the car to leave the road & end up on the rail tracks.
No doubt policy will be rushed through to extend the length of any barriers approaching rail tracks - horse/barn door/bolted etc etc.

Ro.

MichelleWRX1994

A lot of learning needs to come from this

The UK is not known for its learning from mistakes.......

The Highway Authorities and Rail Authorities really need to sit down and find a solution to improving safety.........and prevent this from happening again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Blame, blame, blame, so where is the solution???? Do we have one??? Er no!!!! They should get off their ***** and start looking at proactive ways to stop these tragedies from happening and we as the general public shoud start MAKING them do so........after all what if a relative or YOU was on that train??????? Different story then isn't it.

With reference to the guy himself he has irresponsible and has caused a terrible sequence of events leading to a fatal tragedy......lets hope his trial is fair and he gets what he deserves based on evidence and not what people think he deserves.......and I hope the victims get adequate compensation though nothing can ever compensate the loss of a life

Michelle

nom

Still think the barrier was at fault. Or rather it was under-designed. Probably quite easy as it would have designed for cars, not land-rovers & their interesting weight distribution... I wonder what would have happened if he had been 'driving' a Micra or something?

Nigel H

The barrier met the spec. True. The problem was in the spec.- the barrier should have been longer. There have been numerous similar incidents with this type of barrier. The HA should have learnt this and modified the spec. They did not and they should take some of the blame for the accident

We in the railways DO learn from mistakes. If this had happened to us we'd have been lengthening all the barriers where this could happen. Is this happening now? I think not.

Pls don't get me started on the Paddington and Southall crashes and why they happened. That's a different issue and I don't propose to bore you all with my views on that

MichelleWRX1994

Not a direct dig at anyone but it seems we learn VERY slowly from incidents like this..........

Out of interest are barriers being lengthened ALL over the country?

DavidRB

I seem to remember the total insurance for this claim being around £300 million when you add up the trains, damage to the bridge and all the lives that were lost. Hence, I can imagine the prosecutors will be very keen to pin it on the driver and hence, his insurance company.

Vate

This is all very simple it boils down to who pays not who's fault it really was. No fault? Probably Railway's insurers pay out. Blame the LR driver then his insurers can pay some. Blame the Highways agency then they can contribute a bit. Blame the designer of the crash barrier, the local authority, the bloke that put them up etc. etc. When everyone has established that the cost, financially, will not be too great they'll forget about it. The important issues of prevention of future accidents and remembrance of those who died will be cast to the backs of the minds concerned. Blame culture we inherited from the good old USA. It's largely nonsense and just shows the evil of money. Must stop before I get carried away....

Boost II

iTrader: (1)

I thought the guy was getting prosecuted for dangerous driving. This is a serious offence as it can kill people. I don't know how anyone can consider what he did (ie coming off the road with no explanaiton) as not dangerous - therefore I would expect him to be prosecuted. The crash barrier is irrelavent, as is the train track to a certain extent, this could have happened anywhere. The fact that the damage was so huge goes to show how seriously these things should be taken, but if he had come off the road and killed just one person on the pavement he'd be guilty of the same thing. How can anyone suggest he is not to blame??

logiclee

Just one point to add.

I often tow a large heavy trailer behind a Land Rover, a few times I have had the trailer snaking and throwing me about, there is not much you can do and braking is definatly out.
I don't know if he was asleep or not but if I had hit something the times when I've got into snakes there would not have been any skid marks or vehicle defects. Usually all you need is a wrongly loaded trailer, crosswind, load shift, swerve, trailer brakes grabbing on downhill stretches or any combination of these. Anyone remember the Caravan and 4x4 snaking on Police Camera Action, he dabbed the brakes and rolled it.
May have expected to see heavy braking once he was on the grass going down the banking but haven't heard this bit of evedence.

Lee

Roger The Cat

the best way to stop snaking is actually to speed up slightly. Of course you should not be exceeding the reccomending limits for towing anyway.

As for this chap, it's unfortunate of course but lets face it you should not climb into the car unless you are in a fit state to drive it - end of story. Its been said many times on this board, all things are dangerous in the wrong hands. You can be prosecuted for accidents on the grounds of failure to act responsibly even if your intention is not to cause harm. There is no excuse for irresponsibility.

KF

Fallacy: "the best way to stop snaking is actually to speed up slightly."
Not true at all. Any change in speed up or down will do it. You could argue that speeding up is going to make the result of the catastrophy worse.

I am saddened by the woolly thinking behind people blaming the barrier. If you can't control your vehicle and rely on a safety net then of course it is going to end in tears. You are mitigating against the consequences rather than the cause. Fair enough - but prevention is better than cure.
KF.

Mcbrun555

you talk of not enough barriers in place, how on earth can we cover every possibility of an accident?

look at the twin towers in america, ok in no way was it an accident but the chance of that occuring was so small it wasn't covered. (i understand that they designed it yo withstand a small plane)

this is a horrible chain of events but with such a large accident the media will always try to blame it on someone, that is just what a modern society is!