You emboldened the wrong part.


They cannot and never were going to prosecute under criminal law.


Where have i stated about being prosecuted for a road traffic accident? Nice try at twisting words around but it hasn't worked.

I posted a quote taken from a DVLA website. Not my words or opinion. Theirs.


The DVLA is the licencing authority throughout Great Britain. Scotland and it's citizens don't have any kind of special exemption clause when it comes to the DVLA prosecuting licence holders.

If the council self insure, they will now have to make some big payouts to the families of the deceased, with no prospect of being able to recover much, if any, from the driver. Or could they say "not our problem, we don't have to pay for his mistakes as he lied to us".

He's not out of the woods by a long chalk.

http://www.thenational.scot/news/law...ime=1438842753

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/1...n_lorry_crash/

I think it's usual to complete criminal enquiries and actions before any coroner's enqiry. I wonder if any future prosecution might be compromised by having the Fatal Accident Inquiry first.

This sad case similar didnt seem to get anywhere even with the parents of the dead girls trying to prosecute the driver sadly.. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-30096803

I'm not twisting anything. This is what you quoted from the DVLA


That supports my contention that the worst he can expect from the DVLA is a £1,000 fine and 6pts on his licence. For some reason you are not accepting that.


Well there were always going to be big payouts however they insured, And no they or an insurer can't not meet 3rd party claims in the circumstances you describe.

They are the licensing authority, but they don't conduct prosecutions in Scotland - they report offences to the Procurator Fiscal in the same way as the police would, so ultimately it's still the Crown Office who decides whether to prosecute.

I imagine that to be the case involving a criminal prosecution, but this isn't. Either way they will prosecute Clarke. They have little alternative but to do so! DVLA won't let it drop otherwise every tom, dick and harry might just as well lie in order to get a driving licence.

If this is the case isn't it very sad that these family members cant get financial help..if they do in fact want to start a private prosecution.




Now legal experts say that a private prosecution could be possible.

Fraser Simpson, a partner at law firm Digby Brown, said: “The private *prosecution is always open. But any family or individual in that situation are faced with the problems of resource and expense. Private prosecutions in Scotland are rare for that reason.

The families are not happy about the enquiry being a whitewash and the driver not being prosecuted in articles today in the Sunday Mail in Scotland and I agree with the points they have made. Intentionally misleading your employer and the DVLA about the severity of your health problems is inexcusable. If I did it I would deserve to go to jail.

Why is it a whitewash? The council / doctors etc have admitted to not knowing about the driver's health problems?

It was the correct part. We knew they weren't going to prosecute under criminal law as he was unconscious and it was an accident. Not being able to prove he knew he was going to be unconscious at that time is why they wouldn't proceed.

"THE family of Jacqueline Morton fear the Fatal Accident Inquiry is being used to justify the decision not to prosecute Clarke who misled employers about his medical history."

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/sc...driver-6221473

Low-level DVLA offences are what a QC called them. They are small potatoes.

"The aim of a Fatal Accident Inquiry is to try and establish the cause of death, the circumstances which led to the death occurring and to find ways in which to prevent the death in question happening again. A Fatal Accident Inquiry is described as an inquisitorial court hearing, where information is provided through the oral and written evidence of witnesses. The Sheriff ingathers the evidence presented during the hearing and delivers his judgement known as a determination. A Fatal Accident Inquiry is not a criminal trial and therefore, no fault or blame is apportioned to anyone, but is rather a fact finding exercise."

I still don't see the Inquiry as being a "whitewash" as the facts are / have been given.

It seems these families of the victims have heard enough...they were sympathetic towards Clarke originally, I wonder just how they feel now..

It seems he wanted to get behind the wheel again only four months after the accident.


And why not? You can lie with impunity these days.

I'm staggered at the blase attitude of some folk. I suspect they'd feel very different if a driver who had lied in order to obtain a driving licence and then gone on to kill one of their own family members.

In England and Wales the decision could be overturned with far more ease did the Scots authorities really change their laws in a such a way to make things like this so difficult to overturn ?


Far from being a whitewash the enquiry has led to many unanswered questions being answered with people now having a far clearer idea of what happened.

It's awful. I was like most people and had total sympathy for the victims' family and the driver. But as the inquest goes on, I'm more and more disgusted at the lies and attitude of the Mr Clarke. Him lying yet again to get his licence back four months after the deaths of six people is just unbelievable. Does anyone still have any doubts about the character of this man?

Interestingly one of the Scottish lawyers who has spoken out, Aamer Anwar, represented the parents of 20 year old Aqsa Mahmood who led a double life and went off to Syria to join IS.

Obviously Mr Anwar is well qualified and will be familiar with Scottish law. He's also not the only lawyer to have spoken out either.

Yes, he seems an unpleasant Glesca chancer. A working life full of , hypochondriacal or otherwise, ailments that have given him many long term paid absences from work, the more serious ailments he has conveniently forgotten to mention in subsequent job applications.

Prosecuting him for low level DVLA offences would console you?

I'd suggest you put that question using the same wording to the families of the six people killed.

Would it console you?