Or indeed, a question that the person asking it couldn't figure out for themselves without asking a bunch more dumb questions.
should all civilians be up to speed on police procedure? if so i hold my hands up to my unbelievable ignorance.
i`m still shocked that a risk assessment will have been carried out and the officers will have decided that the road was a safe place to leave a drunken person.
should all civilians be up to speed on police procedure? if so i hold my hands up to my unbelievable ignorance.
i`m still shocked that a risk assessment will have been carried out and the officers will have decided that the road was a safe place to leave a drunken person.
You sure are ignorant, if you believe the police should arrest or call back up for everyone who acts a pain in the jacksy.
should all civilians be up to speed on police procedure? if so i hold my hands up to my unbelievable ignorance.
i`m still shocked that a risk assessment will have been carried out and the officers will have decided that the road was a safe place to leave a drunken person.
It's manifestly not. Only on DS would you get individuals arguing that it's OK to leave alcohol intoxicated individuals lying in the road.
Was she personally well known to the specific two officers dealing with her ?
Would they have known whether or not she had lost consciousness when they left her lying in the road ?
Would they know how much alcohol she had consumed on the day ?
Would they know what precise effect that alcohol would have on her body/mind on that day ?
Could they be certain she wouldn't continue to lie there and get accidentally runover ?
Would they know any more than Jack down the road about what she would do next ?
If the answer to any of the above is NO, then I'd suggest any knowledge they had of Bridget Mongan was irrelevant to the circumstance on the day.
What precisely does that prove when she's subsequently lying in the road ?
.
A few of those questions can only be answered with NO but that's the same with every single drunk person they come across. It seems that you want every drunk person to be treated as though they might be incapable. That means forcing every single one to a hospital until they have sobered up again do you think that's going to work?
A few of those questions can only be answered with NO but that's the same with every single drunk person they come across. It seems that you want every drunk person to be treated as though they might be incapable. That means forcing every single one to a hospital until they have sobered up again do you think that's going to work?
No, I just don't want them left lying in the road, if the police move them.
No, I just don't want them left lying in the road, if the police move them.
Not a difficult concept to get your head round.
The officers were only responsible for her safety from when they took hold of her until they left and during that time no harm came to her I really don't see what else you can expect of them. If they left her on the pavement and she continued to lie there and eventually came to some harm would that be wrong too?
If she was on the path and of her own volition she subsequently decides to run into the road and gets runover, then it's down to her not to the police.
If they leave her lying on the road, and she fails to move (for whatever reason) and gets runover, then it's the clear fault of the police officers who left her there.
This is so basic it's totally non arguable.
This is rubbish. If she is not under arrest, and is not incapable, which you accept she wasn't, then she is responsible for her own actions.
If she was responsible for them if she was on the path, then she was if she was in the bus lane.
If she was incapable, she shouldn't be left anywhere.
This is rubbish. If she is not under arrest, and is not incapable, which you accept she wasn't, then she is responsible for her own actions.
If she was responsible for them if she was on the path, then she was if she was in the bus lane.
If she was incapable, she shouldn't be left anywhere.
Not rubbish at all. If after leaving her lying in the road she had been runover and killed, there would have been merry hell for the PSNI. It would be assumed she was left incapable, and no-one could prove otherwise. To believe otherwise is idiotic in the extreme.
If, conversely, she had been left on the pavement, and then run back into the road and been killed, the police could not be held responsible, as it would have been solely down to her actions. The same if they had taken her home and she had taken an overdose.
Not rubbish at all. If after leaving her lying in the road she had been runover and killed, there would have been merry hell for the PSNI. It would be assumed she was left incapable, and no-one could prove otherwise. To believe otherwise is idiotic in the extreme.
If, conversely, she had been left on the pavement, and then run back into the road and been killed, the police could not be held responsible, as it would have been solely down to her actions. The same if they had taken her home and she had taken an overdose.
Yet again your knowledge is non existent. In any of those scenarios, the Officers would have been subject to a full IPCC, death after police contact enquiry.
You would be creating merry hell about lack of care etc, but as it is, nothing happened.
She was just another drunk moved on, but a convenient film clip showed it looking a lot worse than it was, and everyone got excited.
Not rubbish at all. If after leaving her lying in the road she had been runover and killed, there would have been merry hell for the PSNI. It would be assumed she was left incapable, and no-one could prove otherwise. To believe otherwise is idiotic in the extreme.
If, conversely, she had been left on the pavement, and then run back into the road and been killed, the police could not be held responsible, as it would have been solely down to her actions. The same if they had taken her home and she had taken an overdose.
More ifs, and would have beens. Neither of those scenarios happened.
So exactly what's the issue? that it 'looked bad' for the PSNI?
I did a year backpacking in Australia and settled for a time in the Sunshine Coast. One night I was walking home to the hostel a little worse for wear and a squad car pulled up beside me. They asked me where I was going and I told them the name of the hostel, which wasn't too far away. They asked me to get in the car and I was like "your grand, it's not too far away". In the nicest way possible they said (a female and male police officer) that they didn't feel comfortable leaving me. I got in the car and they dropped me at the hostel. I thought that was really nice. I was definitely merry but not as drunk as the girl in the video.
I can't believe that officers would basically dump someone who is comatose in a bus lane WTF were they thinking? If she was that bad then it would be better to put her in the cells where she isn't a danger to herself or others. In that state, she could've got ran over or walked in front of a bus. I think that people should be responsible for how much they drink but if the police put someone in their car who is clearly beyond the stage of even standing up on their own, then the police should hold them in the cells for their own protection and then charge them the following day so that they learn a lesson.
I can't believe that officers would basically dump someone who is comatose in a bus lane WTF were they thinking?.
She wasn't anything like comatose before or after, she was being a stupid, belligerent drunk who was being deliberately obstructive..
It also wasn't a bus lane, iirc it was a bus stop.
If the police were expected to give every idiot drunk who lay down in the road or on the pavement a lift home or a night in the cells on an average weekend in most towns, the police would need to have about four times as many officers, no leave, and probably ten times as many cells as they actually have.
I actively avoid my local town centre at weekends (Fir-mon) in the evening as there are always idiots thinking the road or the pavement is a great place to rest for a few seconds/minute or doing similarly retarded things.
If the police had to deal with them they'd run out of officers and probably cells by about 11pm (if not earlier, our town apparently has a grand total of about 5-10 general officers for a population of about 30-40k, most on duty on a weekend and they can be called away to one of the other local towns at short notice).
So assuming two officers per drunk they'll run out after the 5th.
Assuming absolutely nothing else comes up.
Personally I quite like the idea of the old drunk tank and public humiliation for idiots who get drunk and disruptive/violent in public. Unfortunately that requires staff and facilities that most forces don't have any more.
I did a year backpacking in Australia and settled for a time in the Sunshine Coast. One night I was walking home to the hostel a little worse for wear and a squad car pulled up beside me. They asked me where I was going and I told them the name of the hostel, which wasn't too far away. They asked me to get in the car and I was like "your grand, it's not too far away". In the nicest way possible they said (a female and male police officer) that they didn't feel comfortable leaving me. I got in the car and they dropped me at the hostel. I thought that was really nice. I was definitely merry but not as drunk as the girl in the video.
I can't believe that officers would basically dump someone who is comatose in a bus lane WTF were they thinking? If she was that bad then it would be better to put her in the cells where she isn't a danger to herself or others. In that state, she could've got ran over or walked in front of a bus. I think that people should be responsible for how much they drink but if the police put someone in their car who is clearly beyond the stage of even standing up on their own, then the police should hold them in the cells for their own protection and then charge them the following day so that they learn a lesson.
With respect, it helps to read the thread past the first post. A second video emerged shortly after the first that shows her running around like a yob trying to stop the police arresting her boyfriend, followed by her dropping to the floor as they drag her away. She wasn't comatose by any stretch of the imagination.
A police cell isn't appropriate for somebody who is drunk and incapable either.
If the police had to deal with them they'd run out of officers and probably cells by about 11pm (if not earlier, our town apparently has a grand total of about 5-10 general officers for a population of about 30-40k, most on duty on a weekend and they can be called away to one of the other local towns at short notice).
So assuming two officers per drunk they'll run out after the 5th.
Assuming absolutely nothing else comes up.
Personally I quite like the idea of the old drunk tank and public humiliation for idiots who get drunk and disruptive/violent in public. Unfortunately that requires staff and facilities that most forces don't have any more.
are you saying that they will have assessed the risk of leaving her lying pissed in the road and decided it was safe?
She was running around in the road only seconds before. They actually moved her off the main carriageway (where she put herself) and left her in a bus stop area, a much safer place. She had full control of her body, but chose to act like a yob.
Was she personally well known to the specific two officers dealing with her ?
Very possibly. Also note that before the video recording started (yes there is such a thing!) they were dealing with her partner and very probably her. They more than likely saw her behaviour escalate (if it hadn't been up there already) for a number of minutes.
Would they have known whether or not she had lost consciousness when they left her lying in the road ?
When they let go of her and she drops to the ground they would certainly have had a better idea than you or I what state she was in that point. For all we know she could have still be giving them abuse and may have clearly been perfectly conscious.
Would they know how much alcohol she had consumed on the day ?
Probably not. Why, should they?
Would they know what precise effect that alcohol would have on her body/mind on that day ?
Probably not. Why, should they?
Could they be certain she wouldn't continue to lie there and get accidentally runover ?
No, but the risk would have been tiny and they can't babysit her all afternoon.
Would they know any more than Jack down the road about what she would do next ?
More ifs, and would have beens. Neither of those scenarios happened.
So exactly what's the issue? that it 'looked bad' for the PSNI?
That's the issue entirely. It looked bad, terrible in fact. Which is precisely why I believe they shouldn't have left her on the road. It would look particularly bad to those who have only seen the first video. I very much doubt that had the second video been the only video of the incident, there wouldn't have been half the uproar that there was, it would have been a non story. The first video look appalling and is where most people formed their opinions (including me).
Yet again your knowledge is non existent. In any of those scenarios, the Officers would have been subject to a full IPCC, death after police contact enquiry.
Precisely + the resultant media shit storm wouldn't have been confined to Northern Ireland.
I'm not sure how that makes my knowledge non existent.
It also wasn't a bus lane, iirc it was a bus stop.
It was the road. In fact if you watch the video in this link you can quite clearly see a car pull into the exact spot in which she had been lying, seconds after people pull her to safety.
If the police were expected to give every idiot drunk who lay down in the road or on the pavement a lift home or a night in the cells on an average weekend in most towns, the police would need to have about four times as many officers, no leave, and probably ten times as many cells as they actually have.
All they needed to do was to have put her on the pavement. Then none of this would ever have seen the light of day.
Personally I quite like the idea of the old drunk tank and public humiliation for idiots who get drunk and disruptive/violent in public. Unfortunately that requires staff and facilities that most forces don't have any more.
She was just another drunk moved on, but a convenient film clip showed it looking a lot worse than it was, and everyone got excited.
A clip of what the Chief Constable said can be seen here
PSNI Assistant Chief Constable George Hamilton has described video footage that appears to show police officers leaving a incapacitated woman in a bus lane as "horrendous".
Mr Hamilton said the police service exist to keep people safe and that video showing officers leaving the woman in a bus lane "does not look good".
The Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) said it would refer the matter to the Police Ombudsman.
Given your constant rubbishing of his views on this topic, I'm assuming that you think the converse, and that in fact it "does not look bad" to have left her in the road.
Very possibly. Also note that before the video recording started (yes there is such a thing!) they were dealing with her partner and very probably her. They more than likely saw her behaviour escalate (if it hadn't been up there already) for a number of minutes.
So you think if they did know her, it should influence the way they deal with her as a drunk person ?
In other words, acting on their prejudices.
When they let go of her and she drops to the ground they would certainly have had a better idea than you or I what state she was in that point. For all we know she could have still be giving them abuse and may have clearly been perfectly conscious.
She may, and then she may have lapsed into unconsciousness. But even if that were not the case, her mental state at that point might mean she would not seek a place of safety off her own bat.
Probably not. Why, should they?
They wouldn't.
All the more reason not to take any chances in leaving her at such a potentially dangerous spot.
Probably not. Why, should they?
They wouldn't.
All the more reason not to take any chances in leaving her at such a potentially dangerous spot.
No, but the risk would have been tiny and they can't babysit her all afternoon.
The risk is not tiny. All it needed, for example, was for the innattentive owner of a car parked further down, to reverse from the car parked in front of that, to get out, and in so doing, reverse straight over her prone body.
Who knows? What does it matter?
It matters, because in not knowing whether or not she would continue to lie there, they have placed her in a position of potential danger.
Precisely + the resultant media shit storm wouldn't have been confined to Northern Ireland.
I'm not sure how that makes my knowledge non existent.
Indeed, including the concerns of the Chief Constable, whose opinion you are so quick to rubbish because it doesn't fit your specific view.
That was kind of the thread topic, if you look back to the OP.
Are you a copper by any chance ?
It was the road. In fact if you watch the video in this link you can quite clearly see a car pull into the exact spot in which she had been lying, seconds after people pull her to safety.
All they needed to do was to have put her on the pavement. Then none of this would ever have seen the light of day.
Figures.
Blueblade why do you think that a physically and mentally capable person remains the responsibility of the policeafter they have finished dealing with her? If she was incapable (physically or mentally) then it would be wrong to do what you suggest and leave her on the pavement it would be just as wrong as leaving her in the bus lane because incapable people need to go to hospital. If she was capable then the police were only responsible for her safety during the time they were dealing with her which took a matter of seconds and throughout that they carried out that duty of care and she didn't come to any harm.
Blueblade why do you think that a physically and mentally capable person remains the responsibility of the police is the responsibility of the police after they have finished dealing with her? If she was incapable (physically or mentally) then it would be wrong to do what you suggest and leave her on the pavement it would be just as wrong as leaving her in the bus lane because incapable people need to go to hospital. If she was capable then the police were only responsible for her safety during the time they were dealing with her which took a matter of seconds and throughout that they carried out that duty of care and she didn't come to any harm.
axtol, you just don't get it do you - whether it would technically be correct to leave her on the pavement or not, it would still be orders of magnitude safer than leaving her in the road.
This fact is so concretely obvious, I'm astounded it has to keep being repeated.
Do you imagine that if they had left her on the pavement, it would ever have made the news ?
A clip of what the Chief Constable said can be seen here
Given your constant rubbishing of his views on this topic, I'm assuming that you think the converse, and that in fact it "does not look bad" to have left her in the road.
Did the chief know she wasn't in fact incapacitated, when he said that?
Did he know the officers at the scene had a potentially dangerous prisoner in the car, that they had to leave unattended to deal with this troublemaker.?
He calls the bus stop a bus lane.
So I does look like he has just prematurely shot his load without looking at the facts.
axtol, you just don't get it do you - whether it would technically be correct to leave her on the pavement or not, it would still be orders of magnitude safer than leaving her in the road.
This fact is so concretely obvious, I'm astounded it has to keep being repeated.
Do you imagine that if they had left her on the pavement, it would ever have made the news ?
I think leaving her in the bus lane was orders of magnitude safer than leaving her in the road. It meant that in the immediate future she was relatively safe. If they had left her lying on the actual road itself that would be quite bad. If the police officers saw a bus about to pull in then it would be wrong to leave her there. Like Deep Purple and Somner said though they had a prisoner with them and each second they spent dealing with her their prisoner could be trying to escape or getting a weapon he had concealed so if every second counted they maybe didn't have time to put her on the pavement even though it would look better.
I am keen on knowing why you think she is still their responsibility once they have gone. If she is capable then she is responsible for her own safety once they go and if she's incapable then the officers were wrong to leave her anywhere. A police officer leaving someone who is drunk and incapable on the pavement would be viewed as bad as leaving them on the road because they are incapable and need to be in hospital.
Precisely + the resultant media shit storm wouldn't have been confined to Northern Ireland.
I'm not sure how that makes my knowledge non existent.
Indeed, including the concerns of the Chief Constable, whose opinion you are so quick to rubbish because it doesn't fit your specific view.
.
Because you said it wouldn't have been the fault of the Police had anything happened to her if they had left her on the path. If anything had happened to her, anywhere after that incident, they would have been subject to a full enquiry.
However, you cant think like that with everyone you deal with, and put a protective cover around them for 24 hours.
Nothing did happen to her, and it was unlikely to, because she was not unconscious on the motorway for goodness sake.
The first film clip looked bad, and that's all that can be said, and that is what the ACC commented on, and he shouldn't, because he came to the same conclusion as everyone else.
Most people have realised such an initial reaction was wrong, having seen the full circumstances, including the fact she wasn't at all incapable, and revised their opinion. I wouldn't expect you to. You cant put yourself in that situation, and try to understand what it's like, and you thoughts are all about awareness of what a film clip might look like. Those that are in the middle of these incidents don't have the time to think like that, they have to get on with what is happening, and if they do what they think is right at the time, that's all you can ask.
Comments
should all civilians be up to speed on police procedure? if so i hold my hands up to my unbelievable ignorance.
i`m still shocked that a risk assessment will have been carried out and the officers will have decided that the road was a safe place to leave a drunken person.
You sure are ignorant, if you believe the police should arrest or call back up for everyone who acts a pain in the jacksy.
you sure are worse if you think the alternative they opted for is in any way acceptable.
It's manifestly not. Only on DS would you get individuals arguing that it's OK to leave alcohol intoxicated individuals lying in the road.
A few of those questions can only be answered with NO but that's the same with every single drunk person they come across. It seems that you want every drunk person to be treated as though they might be incapable. That means forcing every single one to a hospital until they have sobered up again do you think that's going to work?
No, I just don't want them left lying in the road, if the police move them.
Not a difficult concept to get your head round.
me neither. someone mentioned drunk tanks earlier, that`s not a bad idea.
The officers were only responsible for her safety from when they took hold of her until they left and during that time no harm came to her I really don't see what else you can expect of them. If they left her on the pavement and she continued to lie there and eventually came to some harm would that be wrong too?
This is rubbish. If she is not under arrest, and is not incapable, which you accept she wasn't, then she is responsible for her own actions.
If she was responsible for them if she was on the path, then she was if she was in the bus lane.
If she was incapable, she shouldn't be left anywhere.
Not rubbish at all. If after leaving her lying in the road she had been runover and killed, there would have been merry hell for the PSNI. It would be assumed she was left incapable, and no-one could prove otherwise. To believe otherwise is idiotic in the extreme.
If, conversely, she had been left on the pavement, and then run back into the road and been killed, the police could not be held responsible, as it would have been solely down to her actions. The same if they had taken her home and she had taken an overdose.
Yet again your knowledge is non existent. In any of those scenarios, the Officers would have been subject to a full IPCC, death after police contact enquiry.
You would be creating merry hell about lack of care etc, but as it is, nothing happened.
She was just another drunk moved on, but a convenient film clip showed it looking a lot worse than it was, and everyone got excited.
More ifs, and would have beens. Neither of those scenarios happened.
So exactly what's the issue? that it 'looked bad' for the PSNI?
I can't believe that officers would basically dump someone who is comatose in a bus lane
That would have been awful if they'd done that.
She wasn't anything like comatose before or after, she was being a stupid, belligerent drunk who was being deliberately obstructive..
It also wasn't a bus lane, iirc it was a bus stop.
If the police were expected to give every idiot drunk who lay down in the road or on the pavement a lift home or a night in the cells on an average weekend in most towns, the police would need to have about four times as many officers, no leave, and probably ten times as many cells as they actually have.
I actively avoid my local town centre at weekends (Fir-mon) in the evening as there are always idiots thinking the road or the pavement is a great place to rest for a few seconds/minute or doing similarly retarded things.
If the police had to deal with them they'd run out of officers and probably cells by about 11pm (if not earlier, our town apparently has a grand total of about 5-10 general officers for a population of about 30-40k, most on duty on a weekend and they can be called away to one of the other local towns at short notice).
So assuming two officers per drunk they'll run out after the 5th.
Assuming absolutely nothing else comes up.
Personally I quite like the idea of the old drunk tank and public humiliation for idiots who get drunk and disruptive/violent in public. Unfortunately that requires staff and facilities that most forces don't have any more.
With respect, it helps to read the thread past the first post. A second video emerged shortly after the first that shows her running around like a yob trying to stop the police arresting her boyfriend, followed by her dropping to the floor as they drag her away. She wasn't comatose by any stretch of the imagination.
A police cell isn't appropriate for somebody who is drunk and incapable either.
5-10 for only 40k population? Wow!
She was running around in the road only seconds before. They actually moved her off the main carriageway (where she put herself) and left her in a bus stop area, a much safer place. She had full control of her body, but chose to act like a yob.
Very possibly. Also note that before the video recording started (yes there is such a thing!) they were dealing with her partner and very probably her. They more than likely saw her behaviour escalate (if it hadn't been up there already) for a number of minutes.
When they let go of her and she drops to the ground they would certainly have had a better idea than you or I what state she was in that point. For all we know she could have still be giving them abuse and may have clearly been perfectly conscious.
Probably not. Why, should they?
Probably not. Why, should they?
No, but the risk would have been tiny and they can't babysit her all afternoon.
Who knows? What does it matter?
That's the issue entirely. It looked bad, terrible in fact. Which is precisely why I believe they shouldn't have left her on the road. It would look particularly bad to those who have only seen the first video. I very much doubt that had the second video been the only video of the incident, there wouldn't have been half the uproar that there was, it would have been a non story. The first video look appalling and is where most people formed their opinions (including me).
Precisely + the resultant media shit storm wouldn't have been confined to Northern Ireland.
I'm not sure how that makes my knowledge non existent.
Indeed, including the concerns of the Chief Constable, whose opinion you are so quick to rubbish because it doesn't fit your specific view.
That was kind of the thread topic, if you look back to the OP.
Are you a copper by any chance ?
It was the road. In fact if you watch the video in this link you can quite clearly see a car pull into the exact spot in which she had been lying, seconds after people pull her to safety.
All they needed to do was to have put her on the pavement. Then none of this would ever have seen the light of day.
Figures.
A clip of what the Chief Constable said can be seen here
Given your constant rubbishing of his views on this topic, I'm assuming that you think the converse, and that in fact it "does not look bad" to have left her in the road.
So you think if they did know her, it should influence the way they deal with her as a drunk person ?
In other words, acting on their prejudices.
She may, and then she may have lapsed into unconsciousness. But even if that were not the case, her mental state at that point might mean she would not seek a place of safety off her own bat.
They wouldn't.
All the more reason not to take any chances in leaving her at such a potentially dangerous spot.
They wouldn't.
All the more reason not to take any chances in leaving her at such a potentially dangerous spot.
The risk is not tiny. All it needed, for example, was for the innattentive owner of a car parked further down, to reverse from the car parked in front of that, to get out, and in so doing, reverse straight over her prone body.
It matters, because in not knowing whether or not she would continue to lie there, they have placed her in a position of potential danger.
Blueblade why do you think that a physically and mentally capable person remains the responsibility of the policeafter they have finished dealing with her? If she was incapable (physically or mentally) then it would be wrong to do what you suggest and leave her on the pavement it would be just as wrong as leaving her in the bus lane because incapable people need to go to hospital. If she was capable then the police were only responsible for her safety during the time they were dealing with her which took a matter of seconds and throughout that they carried out that duty of care and she didn't come to any harm.
axtol, you just don't get it do you - whether it would technically be correct to leave her on the pavement or not, it would still be orders of magnitude safer than leaving her in the road.
This fact is so concretely obvious, I'm astounded it has to keep being repeated.
Do you imagine that if they had left her on the pavement, it would ever have made the news ?
Did the chief know she wasn't in fact incapacitated, when he said that?
Did he know the officers at the scene had a potentially dangerous prisoner in the car, that they had to leave unattended to deal with this troublemaker.?
He calls the bus stop a bus lane.
So I does look like he has just prematurely shot his load without looking at the facts.
I think leaving her in the bus lane was orders of magnitude safer than leaving her in the road. It meant that in the immediate future she was relatively safe. If they had left her lying on the actual road itself that would be quite bad. If the police officers saw a bus about to pull in then it would be wrong to leave her there. Like Deep Purple and Somner said though they had a prisoner with them and each second they spent dealing with her their prisoner could be trying to escape or getting a weapon he had concealed so if every second counted they maybe didn't have time to put her on the pavement even though it would look better.
I am keen on knowing why you think she is still their responsibility once they have gone. If she is capable then she is responsible for her own safety once they go and if she's incapable then the officers were wrong to leave her anywhere. A police officer leaving someone who is drunk and incapable on the pavement would be viewed as bad as leaving them on the road because they are incapable and need to be in hospital.
Because you said it wouldn't have been the fault of the Police had anything happened to her if they had left her on the path. If anything had happened to her, anywhere after that incident, they would have been subject to a full enquiry.
However, you cant think like that with everyone you deal with, and put a protective cover around them for 24 hours.
Nothing did happen to her, and it was unlikely to, because she was not unconscious on the motorway for goodness sake.
The first film clip looked bad, and that's all that can be said, and that is what the ACC commented on, and he shouldn't, because he came to the same conclusion as everyone else.
Most people have realised such an initial reaction was wrong, having seen the full circumstances, including the fact she wasn't at all incapable, and revised their opinion. I wouldn't expect you to. You cant put yourself in that situation, and try to understand what it's like, and you thoughts are all about awareness of what a film clip might look like. Those that are in the middle of these incidents don't have the time to think like that, they have to get on with what is happening, and if they do what they think is right at the time, that's all you can ask.