I don’t understand how both drivers are denying guilt. One driver two times over the limit and another piles into the back and doesn’t even attempt to brake. In my view they should be hanging their heads and just appealing for mercy and forgiveness.
Driving commercially under the influence of drink should mean the end of your driving career. He wasn’t just over after a shandy in the pub. He was twice the limit.
Sent from my SM-J510FN using Tapatalk
P Stoff:
I don’t understand how both drivers are denying guilt. One driver two times over the limit and another piles into the back and doesn’t even attempt to brake. In my view they should be hanging their heads and just appealing for mercy and forgiveness.Driving commercially under the influence of drink should mean the end of your driving career. He wasn’t just over after a shandy in the pub. He was twice the limit.
Sent from my SM-J510FN using Tapatalk
good question.If drivers car see any obstruction in the road that he must try stop or avoid hitting.We near every day can see broken down vehicle in motorway line.And we need not hit them.
Well if that account is true then fed x driver is screwed.
When you make that slight bend prior to that junction it’s Clear.
So how he didn’t see the hazards on (as claimed) is madness.
Does this mean a end to all these Bluetooth Ear pieces?
P Stoff:
I don’t understand how both drivers are denying guilt. One driver two times over the limit and another piles into the back and doesn’t even attempt to brake. In my view they should be hanging their heads and just appealing for mercy and forgiveness.Driving commercially under the influence of drink should mean the end of your driving career. He wasn’t just over after a shandy in the pub. He was twice the limit.
Sent from my SM-J510FN using Tapatalk
The poles hanging his head
buses:
Well if that account is true then fed x driver is screwed.
When you make that slight bend prior to that junction it’s Clear.
So how he didn’t see the hazards on (as claimed) is madness.Does this mean a end to all these Bluetooth Ear pieces?
Of course Bluetooth not so safety.Llus problem who drivers talk so long by phone.Sone drivers speak 1 hours or more.
buses:
Well if that account is true then fed x driver is screwed.
When you make that slight bend prior to that junction it’s Clear.
So how he didn’t see the hazards on (as claimed) is madness.Does this mean a end to all these Bluetooth Ear pieces?
Hands free kits are better than holding a handset, however I believe that even with a headset, in the event of an accident it is still classed as undue care and attention. I have a personal dislike of the many, many drivers I see with headphones in their ears. In my view it is very dangerous. You cannot be aware of surroundings or vehicle noises.
Sent from my SM-J510FN using Tapatalk
Speaking on Bluetooth is no less distracting than holding it to your ear imo. And that’s the reason I don’t answer when on the move.
Mr Wagstaff is knackered quite frankly a cording to the detail in that report.
He hasn’t done himself any favours at all stuck on cruise control on the phone and clearly wasn’t paying attention.
And most likely an experienced driver for many years.
Just goes to show it can to any of us by not being attentive.
Wonder why it is being heard at Reading?
Miles away from the incident.
Ken.
simcor:
Mr Wagstaff is knackered quite frankly a cording to the detail in that report.He hasn’t done himself any favours at all stuck on cruise control on the phone and clearly wasn’t paying attention.
And most likely an experienced driver for many years.
Just goes to show it can any of us by not being all.
Very true
Sent from my SM-J510FN using Tapatalk
Quinny:
Wonder why it is being heard at Reading?Miles away from the incident.
Ken.
Probably because it’s the jurisdiction of Thames Valley Police.
complete crucifixion about to be forthcoming for the fedex dude…
the pole will have good mental health personal issues to mitigate his circumstances so he might not get just as much,also due to the fact the media wont want to crucify him as much as the fedex man.
being on bluetooth in a fleet spec poxy night trunk job just means catatonic boredom for the driver hence the 1000 yard stare and zombie outlook in front of him.
id have thought if the minibus dude was paying attention he should have got out of the way when it was obvious mr fedex wasnt stopping,but there will be no blame going his way for obvious reasons.
if the minibus was paying attention then he wouldnt have been stuck behind the stopped truck anyway as the previous 10 mins of traffic seemed to manage to get round it easily enough.
the media coverage will decide the penalties though.
Remember reading the comments of some on here just after the accident. Especially one poster who seemed adamant the fedex driver was innocent for some strange reason.
As per usual the cause is human error and highlights the dangers of cruise control and talking on a phone whilst driving.
Complete lack of concentration on the road ahead.
Quite frankley if he was that far over the limit that he fell asleep on the motorway the driver wants putting away so he doesnt see the light of day again. There’s just no excuse in the world- it’s pre meditated murder, pure and simple.
wonder what he was talking on the phone about, to a mate, at 3am. that must be awful to be listening to the crash at other end
shaunandco:
Quite frankley if he was that far over the limit that he fell asleep on the motorway the driver wants putting away so he doesnt see the light of day again. There’s just no excuse in the world- it’s pre meditated murder, pure and simple.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
pre meditated in your dreams.
the pole had personal issues and at the end of the day he was stopped in lane 1…
plenty of reasons to be stopped apart from being off his nut.
for the preceeding 15 mins everyone else drove round him apart from the indian who obviously wasnt hardly paying anymore attention than the fedex as he was stopped behind him.
if he was paying attention then he would have driven round him like everyone else.
the flipflop is guilty of drunk in charge and itl be a good debate in court depending in his brief.
never judge a flipflop till youve walked a mile in his shoes bud…same for mr fedex.
just a normal dude bored off his skull on a night trunk.
dieseldog999:
shaunandco:
Quite frankley if he was that far over the limit that he fell asleep on the motorway the driver wants putting away so he doesnt see the light of day again. There’s just no excuse in the world- it’s pre meditated murder, pure and simple.^^^^^^^^^^^^^
pre meditated in your dreams.
the pole had personal issues and at the end of the day he was stopped in lane 1…
plenty of reasons to be stopped apart from being off his nut.
for the preceeding 15 mins everyone else drove round him apart from the indian who obviously wasnt hardly paying anymore attention than the fedex as he was stopped behind him.
if he was paying attention then he would have driven round him like everyone else.
the flipflop is guilty of drunk in charge and itl be a good debate in court depending in his brief.
never judge a flipflop till youve walked a mile in his shoes bud…same for mr fedex.
just a normal dude bored off his skull on a night trunk.
Being bored off your skull… We all suffer from that at some stage, we all have had moments when we’ve thought “■■■■ that was close”
Being twice over limit… No excuse, none, nada, nowt. End of.
Sent from my SM-J510FN using Tapatalk
for the preceeding 15 mins everyone else drove round him apart from the indian who obviously wasnt hardly paying anymore attention than the fedex as he was stopped behind him.
if he was paying attention then he would have driven round him like everyone else.
You were not there so you are only surmising the situation like many others were doing immediately after the accident on this forum.
Not really wise as you could certainly be very wrong and could easily offend if certain people read your views.
Rick W:
for the preceeding 15 mins everyone else drove round him apart from the indian who obviously wasnt hardly paying anymore attention than the fedex as he was stopped behind him.
if he was paying attention then he would have driven round him like everyone else.You were not there so you are only surmising the situation like many others were doing immediately after the accident on this forum.
Not really wise as you could certainly be very wrong and could easily offend if certain people read your views.
Given that there was a lorry in lane one for around ten minutes and no one else had struck them, I think it’s fair to say that everyone else went round the obstruction.
I also think that the only difference between the minibus driver and the Fed ex driver is that the bus driver stopped. Given the position of the bus when it was struck, that can’t be in doubt either.
In ANY incident, there is a chain of events that lead up to it. Break that chain at any point, and the incident doesn’t happen. Now I’m not defending either lorry driver here, but the bus driver made a mistake and found themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time, and that contributed to the collision.