|
||||||||
Bin Lorry Crashes Into Pedestrians - Glasgow |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#2051 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 4,950
|
Quote:
he had bugger all wrong with him and tests done at the hospital after the accident found nothing, they only kept him in for two weeks out of the way till some things got sorted , how he has walked free is beyond me.... I think the men in the cabin with him know a lot more than what has been told.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2052 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 12,425
|
Quote:
It is me too (bib) and yes in regards to your other post point, i remember reading he was driving a car just weeks later.
Police used a phone code word, “Rudolph”, when they wanted to speak to him in hospital. But they did not take an official statement from him in all the time he was there. They turned up once to do the interview but were turned away because he was asleep. When Mr Clarke spoke about “throwing himself off a cliff”, he was asked if he actually wanted to do that. He replied: “A man who tells you he’s going to throw himself off a cliff won’t do it.” This is the man who some on here stood by slagging off others who were telling it how it was, the man is despicable lies lies lies, http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...expose-6972675 |
|
|
|
|
|
#2053 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 12,425
|
This will put you in the picture about this man.
Beyond belief' The QC said that it was "incredible and beyond belief" that following the bin lorry tragedy, Mr Clarke had pursued getting his licence back. She ended her cross-examination by saying that if Mr Clarke had told the truth "all this could have been prevented". Mr Clarke was then cross-examined by Mark Stewart QC, representing the bereaved McQuade family. He again refused to answer any questions about his medical history. The QC asked him to "take the risk" of answering questions, but Mr Clarke said he did not want to answer. Ronald Conway, the lawyer for the bereaved Tait family was next to cross-examine Mr Clarke. He questioned Mr Clarke about the 2010 fainting incident when he was a bus driver. He again refused to answer. Mr Conway said that if he had not been challenged by an inspector, who attended the scene having been notified by a passenger, Mr Clarke would have just driven on and not mentioned it. The witness did not comment.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-34016267 |
|
|
|
|
|
#2054 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,771
|
It really is sad that Harry seems to have got off scot free.
This is certainly not justice for the relatives of the deceased. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2055 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,555
|
Quote:
This will put you in the picture about this man.
Beyond belief' The QC said that it was "incredible and beyond belief" that following the bin lorry tragedy, Mr Clarke had pursued getting his licence back. She ended her cross-examination by saying that if Mr Clarke had told the truth "all this could have been prevented". Mr Clarke was then cross-examined by Mark Stewart QC, representing the bereaved McQuade family. He again refused to answer any questions about his medical history. The QC asked him to "take the risk" of answering questions, but Mr Clarke said he did not want to answer. Ronald Conway, the lawyer for the bereaved Tait family was next to cross-examine Mr Clarke. He questioned Mr Clarke about the 2010 fainting incident when he was a bus driver. He again refused to answer. Mr Conway said that if he had not been challenged by an inspector, who attended the scene having been notified by a passenger, Mr Clarke would have just driven on and not mentioned it. The witness did not comment.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-34016267 |
|
|
|
|
|
#2056 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 5,898
|
Quote:
It isn't really surprising that he declined to answer any questions whilst facing a potential private prosecution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2057 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 4,950
|
Quote:
The man has no shame or remorse, he has said that after this is all sorted, he will tell his side of the story, so what is that exactly, Fat man falls asleep at the wheel, climbs from cabins unaided, is sent to hospital as a time waster and taking up a bed for two weeks. walks out of hospital then gets fed up having to exercise and walk to the shops and decided to drive "without a licence", hes a law above is Harry. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...-harry-6924962 read part 4 it will make you sick at how no remorse was seen from this man, only for himself nurses stated
Police used a phone code word, “Rudolph”, when they wanted to speak to him in hospital. But they did not take an official statement from him in all the time he was there. They turned up once to do the interview but were turned away because he was asleep. When Mr Clarke spoke about “throwing himself off a cliff”, he was asked if he actually wanted to do that. He replied: “A man who tells you he’s going to throw himself off a cliff won’t do it.” This is the man who some on here stood by slagging off others who were telling it how it was, the man is despicable lies lies lies, http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...expose-6972675 The families of those killed have been treated appallingly. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2058 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The dark side of the moon
Posts: 51,356
|
The decision today is probably the correct one, given the law as it stands.
But it should never have got to this. It's staggering that the Crown Office didn't proceed with a public prosecution given what came to light. His deceit amounts to, at the very least, culpable and reckless conduct (if not culpable homicide). Edit: I notice the hearing was at the Court of Session. Does that mean it's classed as a civil matter and thus the decision is appealable to the Supreme Court? That would be interesting - the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (potentially) basically telling the Lord Advocate they were wrong not to pursue a criminal prosecution. That's a can of worms that would make the Brexit appeal look like something from Judge Judy. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2059 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Location: Location
Posts: 4,212
|
Quote:
Edit: I notice the hearing was at the Court of Session. Does that mean it's classed as a civil matter and thus the decision is appealable to the Supreme Court?
Second anniversary nearly upon us. The affected families must dread this time of year as it will always be tainted with those awful memories. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 13:56.


