So it is OK to faint while driving .....

[spikebadd]

slf

....or if you put your faith in the brit ish 'j ustice' system

jake burns top bloke

 

[Plax]

I think they should certainly take her licence off her on medical grounds for the time being, and if she hasn't fainted in X amount of time let her have it back, or however the DVLA works things like this. I suspect she hasn't been banned from driving so that would be better than nothing.

I find it hard to believe that she didn't know whether she fainted or not. I've become quite adept at fainting after giving blood and I have always felt it coming on, and usually have sufficient time to say something like "I think I'm going to faint" to the nurse before I do.

 

[GrasB]

How would it be any different? It could have been that a little old lady walked out in front of me. Would i then deserve to lose my license

In a situation like that if it's a viable defence I'd expect a suspension of the driving licence on medical grounds for a medically reasonable period, certainly not something which should be seen as a black mark on the persons driving record. IMHO it'd be a tragic accident & one that would be very hard to avoid.

I seem to remember being told something like 1 in 5 people have a one time unexplained blackout or seizure in their life, happens once & never happens again.

 

[thomas]

I find it hard to believe that she didn't know whether she fainted or not. I've become quite adept at fainting after giving blood and I have always felt it coming on, and usually have sufficient time to say something like "I think I'm going to faint" to the nurse before I do.

It's probably a bit different after ending up going into a lamp post. I'm sure that alone would knock you back for a minute.

 

[Tollers]

In a situation like that if it's a viable defence I'd expect a suspension of the driving licence on medical grounds for a medically reasonable period, certainly not something which should be seen as a black mark on the persons driving record. IMHO it'd be a tragic accident & one that would be very hard to avoid.

I seem to remember being told something like 1 in 5 people have a one time unexplained blackout or seizure in their life, happens once & never happens again.

Hasn't happpened to me in 4 years! If i'd had my license suspended, i'd almost certainly have lost my job within the week. Unexplained things DO happen and the british (or any) medical system isnt quick to diagnose.

I'm with you that i think it's a tragic accident and i wouldnt condemn without medical advice.

 

[Crankarm]

It seems bizarre the vehicle travelled along a verge for 50m before hitting Mrs Corless, then Mr Corless, then a Peugeot and then a lamp post on the roundabout and at no time did witnesses see brake lights at the rear .

Maybe she Tracy Johnson was using or texting on her mobile, looked up, hit what she thought was the brake pedal hard, but was actually the accelerator , ploughing into the two cyclists, car and lamp post, finally coming to a stop, jumping out and saying "What was that all about?" Or she did faint and her foot froze rigid down on the accelerator and she woke up just as the car came to rest. Hmmmmmm......convenient.

At the very least her license needs to be temporarily revoked preventing her driving pending further investigation. There is sufficent doubt in her fitness to drive.

And she's admitted using a mobile phone whilst driving..............surely Johnson should have been found guilty of this and fined heavily, shouldn't she ?

I hope her Range Rover was tested to see if it could have been faulty causing the collisions?

You would have thought if Tracy Johnson were fully fit, at some point, when either the vehicle's path become erratic or on colliding with the cyclists or the other car, she would have applied the brakes hard as a reflex action? Bizarre ....

I don't know. These types of cars are pretty powerful so if the accelerator was floored by mistake how far would the RR travel before the brakes could be applied? Far enough to take out 2 cyclists, crash into another car and drive onto a roundabout colliding with a lamp post. I would have thought a RR Sport would demolish a lamp post. Frightening.

I don't think TJ will now get insurance to cover her unless she fronts by driving on another policy as "any driver" such as on a company policy. Could prove very expensive for her insurer.

RIP Mrs Corless and sympathies to the Corless family. Truly terrifying.

Johnson should have at least been fined ££££££ for admitting using a mobile phone whilst driving. Awful awful.

There is no justice so bad as in the UK where it is held up to be a model of fairness to other imperfect judicial systems.


In an unrelated incident I saw an exact same vehicle this evening a RR with huge alloys being driven in a total tw*tish manner negotiating some tight S-bends as the snow has almost gone here. The tw*t at the wheel must have been travelling at about 45-50mph the RR leaning right over as if it was going to topple. Ice was forming on the road surface making it rather slippery as temp was -1C. I suppose he thought I have 4WD so can drive like a total c**t.

So owners of huge 4x4s return to their old ways now the snow has almost gone .

 

[Crankarm]

Hasn't happpened to me in 4 years! If i'd had my license suspended, i'd almost certainly have lost my job within the week. Unexplained things DO happen and the british (or any) medical system isnt quick to diagnose.

I'm with you that i think it's a tragic accident and i wouldnt condemn without medical advice.

Well medical advice has been sought and the medical alternative profered by Tracy Johnson has been accepted by CPS as the likely reason for this dreadful series of collisions and thus the prosecution is dropped. Had this medical opinion not been provided or not believed then Tracy Johnson would be looking at being tried for causing death by dangerous driving. As the CPS has dropped the case against her because of the medical evidence this surely then casts doubts on Tracy Jonhson's fitness to continue driving. She shouldn't be able to have it both ways - avoid being prosecuted for causing death by dangerous driving and keep her license having claimed the cause of the collisions was due to her fainting. This is totally outrageous if this is the case.

Why o why have the CPS chickened out yet again preventing a jury from deciding on the evidence? Yet another very unsatisfactory case where a killer driver avoids prosecution.

 

[al78]

I know of someone at my bridge club that blacked out at the wheel and ended up in a ditch. She was told not to drive again for a certain period of time but she decided to stop driving permamently (although she went back to driving after a year or so).

 

[sheddy]

Do we know how long she was driving for before the crash ? - possibly fell asleep at the wheel ?

 

[al78]

And she's admitted using a mobile phone whilst driving..............surely Johnson should have been found guilty of this and fined heavily, shouldn't she ?.

No, she was using the phone up until 2 minutes and 44 seconds before the impact. It is entirely possible that she wasn't driving at this time, this is not stated in the article.

 

[Crankarm]

Do we know how long she was driving for before the crash ? - possibly fell asleep at the wheel ?

Yes, a possiblity. The guy who caused the Selby train crash in 2001 fell asleep at the wheel of his 4x4 towing a trailer, driving off the M62 motorway and down an embankment on to the railway line causing a train to collide with his vehicle killing 10 people . He had been driving for a rediculously long time and hadn't slept the night before as he had allegedly been talking and sending numerous sexy obscene texts to a lady he'd met on an internet dating agency 8 days before.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/uk/2001/selby_train_crash/default.stm

 

[irc]

It does happen. I know of one case where a driver had a heart attack at the wheel and the car went off the road and through a fence into a field.

In this case the coincidence of her "fainting" just after finishing a phone call raises doubts but for a criminal conviction the burden of proof is fairly high.

I'd be interested in how accurately the time of the accident was established. Was it by the time a 999 call was logged? Was it taking a guess by deducting a couple of minutes from the time of a 999 call?

Was she texting or looking for a phone number after her previous call finished?

It won't do anything for the cyclist here but I'd like to see automatic bans for anyone caught using a handheld mobile whilst driving. Given the risk of being caught is so low the penalty if a driver is caught needs to hurt and £60 and 3 pts doesn't.

 

[Crankarm]

No, she was using the phone up until 2 minutes and 44 seconds before the impact. It is entirely possible that she wasn't driving at this time, this is not stated in the article.

Are these times call times ie times actually on calls? A mobile phone can still used even if a call isn't being made.

Does a mobile actually record when it is being operated but NOT necessarily when it's being used to make a call or sending a text to some one? She could have been merely sorting through her messages/texts, but not necessarily sending a text or chatting to any one thus it may not record this as no call was being made or text being sent ?

If this is the case and she had made a call whilst driving then finished this but continued to use her phone sorting through her messages/address book then she may well have still been concentrating on it and not on the road ahead. There may have been a serious miscarriage of justice if this is the case and I believe a perverting of the cause of justice. She simply did not see the cyclists and the changing road layout and conditions ahead as she was looking and concentrating on her mobile, perhaps composing a text, which when she subsequently came to a halt and began to realise what she had done, she deleted. Would the phone necessarily record this latter type of usage? Could it be established whether the phone was on or not ie when you call a mobile phone that is off, you get a message saying the phone is off, leave a message or call later. Surely the phone network provider would confirm whether her phone was actually on or off, in addition to call times and frequencies, am I right?

 

[Bromptonaut]

Fullest sympathy to the bereived family but sometimes these things happen. The linked report is from the Daily Wail so objectivity and comprehensive reporting of the facts are out of the question.

Cannot see anything in the report about current situation with defendant's DL, but my expereince is that DVLA err on side of caution. Mrs Bromp's cousin passed out at work about 16 months ago. I don't know the full facts/results of medical tests, although there was some suggestion of epilepsy, her licence was suspended for a year pending a re-occurence. When I worked with people who'd had brain injuries the same safety first DVLA response was to be expected.

 

[Crankarm]

Fullest sympathy to the bereived family but sometimes these things happen. The linked report is from the Daily Wail so objectivity and comprehensive reporting of the facts are out of the question.

Cannot see anything in the report about current situation with defendant's DL, but my expereince is that DVLA err on side of caution. Mrs Bromp's cousin passed out at work about 16 months ago. I don't know the full facts/results of medical tests, although there was some suggestion of epilepsy, her licence was suspended for a year pending a re-occurence. When I worked with people who'd had brain injuries the same safety first DVLA response was to be expected.

Strange the DM is the only national I can find that has carried and updated this awful case. What ever vitriol the DM deserves it doesn't seem to be warranted in this case. The only other paper I can find carrying an update beyond the initial collision in September 2008 is the local Warrington Guardian which carries a tribute to Sharon Corless on the anniversary of her death.

http://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/news/4659250.Family_of_Sharon_Corless_say_her_memory_lives_on/


The BBC and Manchester Evening News carried it when it occurred.

So on this occasion it would seem all credit to the DM for updating the case. It doesn't seem too far off the mark in it's reporting.