Widow let down by police crash investigation

[thirdcrank]

This is about the death of a motorcyclist, but it raises issues similar to the investigation of the death of cyclist Michael Mason.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-b ... s-55062719

It used to be the case that a death in a road accident had to be the subject of a coroner's inquest with a jury. The whole system of coroners and inquests was reviewed and put on a statutory basis.

An inquest can no longer reach findings accusing somebody of an offence. The rationale for that is that decisions in criminal cases are now the responsibility of the CPS. But that doesn't cover the situation where the police decide there's nothing to prosecute so don't submit a file to the CPS.

In her summing up, (Senior Coroner) Ms Whitting said she could "understand why Mr Fudge's family have been unsatisfied by the police investigation".

She pointed at factors including the lack of coverage in interview over whether a lead motorcyclist in Mr Fudge's group might have alerted the car driver to the possible presence of more riders.

The coroner added: "The fact that he had not apparently checked his blind spot was not referred to at all."

Ms Whitting rejected the police conclusion that the crash "was simply caused by neither the driver nor Mr Fudge seeing the other when making the decision to carry out their manoeuvres".

"In my view... the collision occurred when the driver of the Hyundai turned into the path of Mr Fudge," she said.

It seems that after the Coroner's criticism, the police simply "marked their own homework" and no file was submitted to the CPS.

[atlas_shrugged]

I did not know that coroners courts used to have a jury. When was this?

In this neck of the woods the coroners court is effectively a secret court because they are delayed by three years and then held 50 miles away in another city with no advanced publicity.

It seems even motoring groups are not happy with the way investigations are carried out and are calling for reform:

"which suggests there could be a critical gap in the feedback cycle from the investigation of individual incidents through to the development of policies and strategies to reduce the incidence of crashes and mitigate the severity of those still happening".

https://www.racfoundation.org/collabora ... on-project

[reohn2]

Yet another example of police incompetence and cost cutting,deplorable.

[pete75]

This is about the death of a motorcyclist, but it raises issues similar to the investigation of the death of cyclist Michael Mason.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-b ... s-55062719

It used to be the case that a death in a road accident had to be the subject of a coroner's inquest with a jury. The whole system of coroners and inquests was reviewed and put on a statutory basis.

An inquest can no longer reach findings accusing somebody of an offence. The rationale for that is that decisions in criminal cases are now the responsibility of the CPS. But that doesn't cover the situation where the police decide there's nothing to prosecute so don't submit a file to the CPS.

In her summing up, (Senior Coroner) Ms Whitting said she could "understand why Mr Fudge's family have been unsatisfied by the police investigation".

She pointed at factors including the lack of coverage in interview over whether a lead motorcyclist in Mr Fudge's group might have alerted the car driver to the possible presence of more riders.

The coroner added: "The fact that he had not apparently checked his blind spot was not referred to at all."

Ms Whitting rejected the police conclusion that the crash "was simply caused by neither the driver nor Mr Fudge seeing the other when making the decision to carry out their manoeuvres".

"In my view... the collision occurred when the driver of the Hyundai turned into the path of Mr Fudge," she said.

It seems that after the Coroner's criticism, the police simply "marked their own homework" and no file was submitted to the CPS.

The driver in the Mason case was found not guilty by a jury after just 17 minutes of deliberations. This indicates that the initial police decision not to prosecute was the correct one. Why waste public money taking case to court if there's little chance of a guilty verdict?

[thirdcrank]

I did not know that coroners courts used to have a jury. When was this? ...

In certain circumstances they are still required to have a jury, but there is no longer a blanket requirement to have one if the death occurred as the result of a crash. See s7 Coroners and Justice Act 2009

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2009/25/section/7

One of my wider points is that once the police have decided to take no action, then that in itself is likely to lead to an acquittal if there's a private prosecution. In the days when Martin Porter used to do his cycling silk blog, one of his longer-running sagas involved a close-overtaking case where the police took no action and he undertook a private prosecution (with £££ from the CPS IIRC) Bearing in mind MP is a top lawyer - albeit with a civil practice - he wrote about his surprise at how much weight the court seemed to attach to the defendant's evidence about how the police had told him there was no offence (my words.) So, once the police have announced there's nothing they can do, the correctness of that decision has a tendency to be self-fulfilling.

I'm commenting here against a background of plummeting police action after a crash. Here's a thread from a few weeks ago, where their was a prosecution and conviction but the police were criticised by the judge.

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=142483&p=1552925&hilit=fatal#p1552818

That's said to have been sorted out now, but one way to avoid criticism by a trial judge is not to have a trial.

[atlas_shrugged]

In the Mason case the SMIDSY defence was used and this was accepted by the jury presumably because wimin.

In Cranebridge we had a world renown botanist killed in the same way on his bike and the same defence mounted which was successful, probably for the same reasons.

Mason had moved to the outside lane as he was passing a bus stop and the driver hit him from behind.

Astonishingly our cretinous Cranebridge county council has just installed a series of pinch points along Mill Road because Covid. These pinch points are of no use to pedestrians whasoever and will put cyclist lives at risk IMHO.

What should happen in these fatal cases is that £10M is automatically deducted from the insurance of the driver. There should also be 3rd party insurance on fuel.

[Vorpal]

In the Mason case the SMIDSY defence was used and this was accepted by the jury presumably because wimin.

What does 'wimin' have to do with anything? Juries fail to convict drivers of anything on a quite regular basis, especially when they claim not to have seen the cyclist.

IMO, the biggest reason is the weird belief that dark clothing somehow makes cyclists invisible, and therefore contributing to whatever my befalls them. I think the outcome whould have been the same, whomever was driving, simply because he was wearing dark clothing and police believed that to be significant.

[atlas_shrugged]

@Vorpal we will have to agree disagree on this one. If you think the law is not biased then how come there are roughly 80,000 men in jail and only 3,500 wimin. Next you will tell me that this is because of sugar and spice - which is exactly my point.

My other point is that using the law is completely useless because it achieves nothing except enriching lawyers and companies like Serco and G4S.

[atlas_shrugged]

And the other point I would like to make is that the law does not help Widows. This group absolutely have all my sympathies.

[Vorpal]

@Vorpal we will have to agree disagree on this one. If you think the law is not biased then how come there are roughly 80,000 men in jail and only 3,500 wimin. Next you will tell me that this is because of sugar and spice - which is exactly my point.

My other point is that using the law is completely useless because it achieves nothing except enriching lawyers and companies like Serco and G4S.

I never said the law is not biased.

I just don't think that sexism has much to do with the outcome in this particular case.

[Cyril Haearn]

I am made of slugs, snails and the like
Many more males than females are in prison because the former commit much more crime, especially violent crime

[thirdcrank]

I intentionally started a separate thread to avoid reigniting the Michael Mason debate, although I referred to it as IMO a significant example of a police "no further action" decision after a fatal crash not being subject to any sort of official review. Whatever the reasons for the acquittal, they closed that investigation.

What I'm suggesting the case I linked here - involving the death of a motorcyclist - tends to confirm is that standards of investigation have further to drop.

Traditionally, prosecutions for serious offences have been conducted by "The Crown" on behalf of society as a whole, but we increasingly hear of the bereaved seeking justice for the deceased. The recollection of somebody who was in a - state of shock may not be 100% reliable, but in this case

His widow, Ms Montgomery, said after the crash she was told by a family liaison officer: "This is a clear-cut case of dangerous driving - you'll get justice for your husband."

It's not an assurance that can be given at an early stage of any inquiry, but it should be nailed-on that the investigation of a death will be of the highest standard. IMO, that's where organisations like cUk should be pressing for improvements, rather than waiting to act after the event when it's too late.

[Cyril Haearn]

Organisations like CUK should be demanding enforcement to stop the 'accidents' happening in the first place

[pete75]

@Vorpal we will have to agree disagree on this one. If you think the law is not biased then how come there are roughly 80,000 men in jail and only 3,500 wimin. Next you will tell me that this is because of sugar and spice - which is exactly my point.

My other point is that using the law is completely useless because it achieves nothing except enriching lawyers and companies like Serco and G4S.

Violent crime very often leads to a prison sentence. Women commit far less violent crime than men. The same goes for more serious thefts and the more serious motoring crimes. Women are less likely to commit those offences.

What is your point in using the spelling wimin for women?