AIBU to think that driving at 97 is a tad unreasonable?

What is the theory easy I would be interested to read it.

I don't agree that it is such a theory which is being discussed simply because the people who are saying it wasn't an accident have not made that claim. I have repeatedly asked them why they say it was not an accident and they have failed to sensibly respond. Perhaps you have now given them an excuse to wriggle out of what they said? It won't change anything, people have been very unpleasant and judgmental which they would not have been if any of us had been responsible for such an accident.

When discussing legal matters, it’s legal not dictionary definitions that matter. Easy is right. Bloody stupid comment about whether English is our first language - grow up.

marye as you have consistently failed to accept that your accusation was inaccurate what was I supposed to think? You clearly don't understand the word.

Please give me the legal definition of an accident. I think you will find that the law now uses simple language which normal people understand but you of course might be a lawyers who specialises in vehicle accidents.

Is swearing permitted by the guidelines? I was always told that it was people with poor vocabularies who resorted to swearing but things may have changed or be different in different circles.

There isn’t A legal definition of the word - all the circumstances of the particular case are examined to decide if there is any fault to be attributed and contributory negligence on behalf of the injured party. That’s for s civil case for damages. With the criminal courts, the behaviour of the people involved will be investigated from the point of view of the appropriate criminal legislation. Eg with driving there’s various levels such as careless, due care and attention, dangerous etc.

marye so it was an accident then but you won't admit it. All that guff about 'legal matters' was just to avoid admitting you were simply being nasty about the driver. We all make mistakes but the adults amongst us admit it and apologise.

For goodness sake Nonnie . If he pulled out and he admits he couldn’t see ( which some witnesses are reported as saying he said) then he could be charged with the appropriate level of driving offence. Not meaning to hurt someone doesn’t mean that it was an accident if you do hurt them - it all depends on the circumstances, what was reasonably foreseeable etc .

Actually marye "it may be that she is hard up and been given a lot of money by the tabloids." does mean its an accident as I have already shown you but you don't believe the OED so I have no chance of convincing you.

Of course he could be charged but then I didn't say he couldn't. You are twisting things again, either because it is deliberate or because you don't understand the written word, unless you can tell me another reason you don't understand. I don't think it likely that the police would bring charges against a normal member of the public in these circumstances and I hope this witch hunt won't push them into treating him in a different way. I think the police would write a report and then leave it to the insurance companies to sort out. I have had one accident,I was stationary at the time, DH has had one and DS one, in none of the cases did the police do more than write a report. I still maintain that the police and the courts have more important matters to deal with and that they would normally leave it for the insurance companies to sort out.

As for 'goodness sake' what about the sake of the truth?

eazybee
My grandchildren’s school had parents driving up a short road which only led to the school and the teachers car park. But this was also the main way in for children on foot.,As the teachers were in well before the children they didn’t present a hazard, but lazy parents, started driving up there too despite letters home. One day a police car drove up behind them thus blocking their exit and caught about 6 parents.

Had to laugh witnessing their faces ???

Decisions to prosecute are not made overnight. The police may well decide to prosecute the Duke of Edinburgh, but that decision may not be taken for several months.

I witnessed an accident where someone was killed. It took the police about a month to make a decision about prosecution, with good reason, I shan't waste your time explaining all the ins and outs.

Does anyone seriously think Philip is going to be prosecuted for this? I would imagine the police are busy trying to find someone senior who will deal with the whole thing. I suspect if it had been any other 97 year old a discrete word would have been had with their family and next of kin advising they should give up driving and perhaps not have a new car. But I don't think the local copper will be nipping round to have a word with HRH.

I don't know if this should be on this thread or the other one:
DH made the observation that people were criticising the Duke for not contacting the other family after the accident (apparently), although he was most concerned to make sure they were OK at the scene.

DH made the point that it is not normal for anyone involved in an accident (even if it is clearly their fault) to contact the other parties afterwards. It is down to the insurance companies to sort it out and the police if involved.

Jalima I read online that the injured woman was saying she expected some sort of contact but that was never going to happen. As you say, down to insurance companies and police.

In Phillip's age group there is a 40% chance that someone has dementia. Most in his age group would, if in sound mind, be so rattled by an accident in which they nearly killed 2 women and a baby, they would certainly not be leaping back behind the wheel, without a seatbelt, in well under a week. They would be thinking "Time I gave up". www.dementiastatistics.org/statistics/prevalence-by-age-in-the-uk/

Well, I would probably think so too JessM. However, I would ask my GP first.

Sparklefizz the only time we had to contact someone after an accident was when a young girl went into the back of my car when DD was driving and the girl refused to contact her insurance company. However, as she still refused we had to go through the insurance company.

Allegedly Prince Philip was dazzled by the sun, I'm not making excuses for him, but I hate driving when there is a low sun in the winter, I just can't see where I'm going. I hated driving the children to school when they were they were in the juniors at such times, now I don't have to go out early in the morning, I avoid it like the plague.

I really dislike wearing sunglasses when driving.

I really dislike not wearing them Jalima

I have reactalite ones but even so, I find them too slow to change when changing from sunlight to driving through a wooded area.

I live on a hill, my house is just before a gentle bend to the left. During the winter, the sun can blind you without warning as you drive around the gentle bed. It's fine driving up the hill, no warning then the sun suddenly blinds you. I've had to stop without warning the cars behind me in order to ensure I don't hit the cars parked along the side of the road. I've lived near this area for almost 50 years, it's always been an issue during the winter. We are all extremely careful but on a couple of occasions this winter, I've been caught out. Luckily we haven't had accidents as the side roads are well before and a distance after the lethal spot.
I'm not defending Prince P, none of us know what really happened but I don't find myself able to dismiss his claim to have been blinded by the sun as a big fat fib. It may be one but witnesses seem to support him.
Of course he can't contact the people in the other car. He can't apologise even if he wants to. His insurance company and the police are investigating so he can't compromise or interfere with that.
Of course he shouldn't have been driving the following day, with or without his bliddy seat belt - stubborn chap isn't he.

I think I mentioned previously (on one thread or another) that someone had an accident near here recently because of the sun - she was trying to pull down the sun visor at the time. No-one else involved but her car on its roof and a bollard totally demolished.

Just wondering how this has affected Prince Philip. His car rolled over several times . He must have been extremely shaken up.

In gung-ho fashion he may have got behind the wheel straight away (nice that a brand new 4x4 vehicle was available for him to drive ) and then failed to wear his seat belt. Now the police are onto him.

I am only wondering because I have known three elderly people die very shortly after a traumatic experience. One was a very independent and fit (for her age) 90 year old lady, who was badly bruised after missing her step when getting off a bus.

I couldn't possibly say whether Prince Philip's conscience troubles him or not but I imagine very few 97 year olds would have driven a car so soon after such a serious accident.

I agree with Iam, low lying sun is a real problem especially when it hits you going round a bend etc. However, if PP was going to join the road and the sun was a problem, surely he should have been extra cautious before emerging.

By getting back in a car immediately after an accident he is doing everything that is recommended, if you wish to return to driving. After the one bad accident I was involved in and with my (company's) car badly damaged, I got into DH's car first thing the following morning and went for a good long drive.

The sun was low and strong on Thursday, because I had great difficulty driving home after the weekly shop that day, because I was driving into the sun for all of the journey

This man, with seventy years of driving experience, really should have noticed that the sun tends to be very low and dazzling on winter afternoons. If he was blinded by the
sun, he should not have pulled out
into fast flowing traffic. He had personal, professional drivers at his disposal, and if his appointment was urgent, he could have called on one of them.
If he couldn't see to drive, he should never have left the palace grounds.
We have all been caught out by unexpected dazzle when driving on public roads; but he had plenty of chance to change his mind before leaving the palace grounds, and risking it.

Leonora if we have all been caught out by unexpected dazzle why is it different for him ? We don’t know the speed of the car which hit him