Incident in Glasgow - 6 feared dead :(

[swee'pea99]

No doctor in his right mind would pass him fit to drive

It shouldn't be down to a doctor. As Adrian says, it's simple:

a suspended prison sentence with a clear understanding that it kicks in if he is ever caught behind the wheel of a vehicle.

And as with 'life means life', 'ever' should in this case mean ever.

 

[Joey Shabadoo]

Won't be still be unlicenced through medical unfitness?

Has that ever stopped him before?

 

[glasgowcyclist]

So he gets back on the road in three years then?

For all he cares about road safety and rule of law, he could be back on the road tomorrow.

 

[GGJ]

I still dont understand why he wasnt prosecuted and even more why they werent allowed to bring a private prosecution.

I spoke to two of my clients regarding this, the are bigwig Glasgow lawyers and their reply was

"He can't be prosecuted because he was unconscious at the time of the incident, if he's unconscious then he can't be held responsible for his actions"

 

[Inertia]

I spoke to two of my clients regarding this, the are bigwig Glasgow lawyers and their reply was

"He can't be prosecuted because he was unconscious at the time of the incident, if he's unconscious then he can't be held responsible for his actions"

wow, thanks, that seems to be a bit of a loophole and I didnt think that was the case. That seems to be similar to if you fall asleep at the wheel, people have been prosecuted for that

IMO he commited the offence both when he lied and when he got behind the wheel in the first place. He was definatly conscious for that.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I still dont understand why he wasnt prosecuted and even more why they werent allowed to bring a private prosecution.

For the Crown's decision not to prosecute, see post #129 where I posted this link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-34085444

 

[GGJ]

It certainly is nonsense but there's nothing that can be done... The law's the law

 

[snorri]

I spoke to two of my clients regarding this, the are bigwig Glasgow lawyers and their reply was

"He can't be prosecuted because he was unconscious at the time of the incident, if he's unconscious then he can't be held responsible for his actions"

Insurance companies seem to take a similar view, I know of a situation where a car left the road and damaged roadside property, the driver has openly admitted to falling asleep at the wheel. The insurance company has not paid out to compensate the property owner claiming the crash was an act of god or somesuch, leaving the property owner to claim against their own insurance.
Presumably the drivers' no claim bonus remains intact.

 

[raleighnut]

I spoke to two of my clients regarding this, the are bigwig Glasgow lawyers and their reply was

"He can't be prosecuted because he was unconscious at the time of the incident, if he's unconscious then he can't be held responsible for his actions"

 

[jefmcg]

I spoke to two of my clients regarding this, the are bigwig Glasgow lawyers and their reply was

A good lawyer will not give a legal opinion outside their speciality. Are they experts in criminal or motor vehicle law?

I think the suggestion made by the two solicitors was nonsense...

My guess is the conversation happened after lunch on Friday.

 

[ufkacbln]

Presumably the drivers' no claim bonus remains intact.

Not neccessarily

Neighbours of ours clipped and damaged a wall whilst reversing and reported it to their insurance

Although they sorted it out themselves, the insurance company had a record and an inquiry counts as a claim

There are similar cases with household insurance

(Edited from acclaim to a claim)