Deny everything, demand proof, and always go for a jury. First lesson learned in comprehensive school. 
Prosecutor:
"We allege that you passed under the bridge, and it fell down - therefore establishing causality".
Defence:
“I argue that it was an act of God that it fell down, and I am not God, and have never said I was God so am therefore ‘Not Guilty’.” 
Winseer:
Prosecutor:
"We allege that you passed under the bridge, and it fell down - therefore establishing causality".Defence:
“I argue that it was an act of God that it fell down, and I am not God, and have never said I was God so am therefore ‘Not Guilty’.”
The fact that the bridge fell down because it was hit by the load on the defendant’s vehicle isn’t in doubt or denied.The bit that is denied is that the load was as high or higher than that expected of a motorway bridge.Remind us all again of the height of the bridge established by the defendant’s expert witness. 
Carryfast:
Winseer:
Prosecutor:
"We allege that you passed under the bridge, and it fell down - therefore establishing causality".Defence:
“I argue that it was an act of God that it fell down, and I am not God, and have never said I was God so am therefore ‘Not Guilty’.”The fact that the bridge fell down because it was hit by the load on the defendant’s vehicle isn’t in doubt or denied.The bit that is denied is that the load was as high or higher than that expected of a motorway bridge.Remind us all again of the height of the bridge established by the defendant’s expert witness.
“Not quite as high as the load”
Interesting one this. IF when the investigators measured the boom after the collision, and it was 16’ 6" (or lower), there is no case to answer. From memory I think that Tnet CSI deduced that the chap was accelerating along the shoulder to re-join.
Being as there is no bridge anymore, and it almost certainly wouldn’t have had any low bridge markings, I really cannot see how he would be found guilty.
I understand the driver has been inundated with offers of employment with Stobart’s.
Massive blame the driver culture going on .
Sad sad times.i hope he proves himself innocent .
eagerbeaver:
I understand the driver has been inundated with offers of employment with Stobart’s.
No doubt he has, Stobarts have won the BDR first prize again this year…
AndrewG:
eagerbeaver:
I understand the driver has been inundated with offers of employment with Stobart’s.No doubt he has, Stobarts have won the BDR first prize again this year…
BDR?..
Bridge destruction …?
“Overbridge of Mass Destruction”
I can’t see a problem.
Check the bridge Height*
Check the cargo Height*
Put two together. There it is. case closed.
What is dangerous driving?
[quote=
Dan ze Man:
I can’t see a problem.
Check the bridge Height*
Check the cargo Height*Put two together. There it is. case closed.
What is dangerous driving?
Two problems.
The bridge height was a bit difficult to measure, as it was laying on top of another truck.
The height of the cargo was a bit difficult to measure, as it had moved about.
the nodding donkey:
The bridge height was a bit difficult to measure, as it was laying on top of another truck.
The bridge height was still measurable from the intact post it had been resting on.But for some reason the Highways dept didn’t seem keen on allowing anyone to measure it.
While it’s only the question as to whether the bridge was lower than the minimum height required for a motorway bridge that matters.The fact that the load hit it isn’t in doubt. 
He may have had a bit of a case had he not already hit a bridge with that boom earlier that day