Friday night M5 accident

[wildfire]

Wheel Nut:

Winseer:
I don’t light a fire at the bottom of my garden if the wind is blowing in the wrong direction (towards neighbouring houses), so why wasn’t this simple precaution taken into consideration when lighting a fire next to a motorway at all? It’s not like it wasn’t there in the weeks leading upto the event… If anyone was worried about “the wind might be wrong on the night, but they were financially committed” then that goes a long way towards proving a corporate manslaughter charge doesn’t it?

Either someone did something lethal out of stupidity, or deliberately took risks because of costs.

As far as I know, insurance doesn’t cover people for killing others for the latter reason. How can it?

Even from a financial viewpoint, Lord McAlpine will probably get more compensation for being wrongly pointed at as a ■■■■■■■■■■ than all of the families of the M5 dead will get put together!

Some are more equal than others eh?

In my mind, there’s space in the dock for whatever pillock gave the rugby club permission to even BUILD a bonfire close to a motorway like that!
…Or did they decide on some guy called “Counsell” because it’s two bods for the price of one here? There should be someone else from the actual CounCIL in the dock as well I’m thinking!

No one lit a bonfire next to any neighbouring houses or a motorway

There was no bonfire at the Rugby club or anywhere near…

wheel nut is correct there has never been a bonfire at the rugby club!!! now having been to a lot of displays through the years, most display are airbourne. the only thing i can think of that would cause a great amount of smoke at ground level would be a display wall. now i have looked back over reports on this the display finished a full 15 mins before the accident which happened at 20.30, i think we are going to have to wait and see the outcome of the court case before to much speculation is put up

[anisboy]

wildfire:

Wheel Nut:

Winseer:
I don’t light a fire at the bottom of my garden if the wind is blowing in the wrong direction (towards neighbouring houses), so why wasn’t this simple precaution taken into consideration when lighting a fire next to a motorway at all? It’s not like it wasn’t there in the weeks leading upto the event… If anyone was worried about “the wind might be wrong on the night, but they were financially committed” then that goes a long way towards proving a corporate manslaughter charge doesn’t it?

Either someone did something lethal out of stupidity, or deliberately took risks because of costs.

As far as I know, insurance doesn’t cover people for killing others for the latter reason. How can it?

Even from a financial viewpoint, Lord McAlpine will probably get more compensation for being wrongly pointed at as a ■■■■■■■■■■ than all of the families of the M5 dead will get put together!

Some are more equal than others eh?

In my mind, there’s space in the dock for whatever pillock gave the rugby club permission to even BUILD a bonfire close to a motorway like that!
…Or did they decide on some guy called “Counsell” because it’s two bods for the price of one here? There should be someone else from the actual CounCIL in the dock as well I’m thinking!

No one lit a bonfire next to any neighbouring houses or a motorway

There was no bonfire at the Rugby club or anywhere near…

wheel nut is correct there has never been a bonfire at the rugby club!!! now having been to a lot of displays through the years, most display are airbourne. the only thing i can think of that would cause a great amount of smoke at ground level would be a display wall. now i have looked back over reports on this the display finished a full 15 mins before the accident which happened at 20.30, i think we are going to have to wait and see the outcome of the court case before to much speculation is put up

IF firework smoke was a factor, that would make sense due to the M5 being on an embankment at that point. What I can tell you is that fireworks, ground or air, make a huge amount of smoke which on a still night will hang for ages.

[anisboy]

bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-21024902

[kerbdog]

and that is the correct way to go. Ridiculous charging someone with manslaughter over that. Sad as it is and was.

[albion1971]

villa:
its not right that this bloke should get done for the pile up
ok he had a bonfire or firework display near the motorway
he done that for excited young kids not to make people die on the motorway
i was on the M5 that night 2 hours before the accident
and it was bloody foggy
i believe if it wasnt so foggy the smoke from fireworks or bonfire would not have affected visability on the motorway
in my opinion the main reason why he will not be convicted is
THE FOG SENSOR WARNING LIGHTS WHICH WOULD HAVE MADE DRIVERS SLOW DOWN WERE NOT SWITCHED ON
SO HOW CAN THEY BLAME HIM

Are you being serious with your last sentence.I certainly hope not.

[extrucker]

Common sense has prevailed. I cannot believe that 30+ vehicles collide and not one driver is at fault. I do not know any facts of this incident and I am not placing blame on any specific driver but I was taught to drive to the conditions.

Kerbdog:
THE FOG SENSOR WARNING LIGHTS WHICH WOULD HAVE MADE DRIVERS SLOW DOWN WERE NOT SWITCHED ON
SO HOW CAN THEY BLAME HIM

Drivers are constantly moaning on here that they do not need to be told it is foggy. Professional drivers drive to the conditions.

[martyh]

I’ll bet he still goes to jail though

[speedyguy]

extrucker:
Common sense has prevailed. I cannot believe that 30+ vehicles collide and not one driver is at fault. I do not know any facts of this incident and I am not placing blame on any specific driver but I was taught to drive to the conditions.

Kerbdog:
THE FOG SENSOR WARNING LIGHTS WHICH WOULD HAVE MADE DRIVERS SLOW DOWN WERE NOT SWITCHED ON
SO HOW CAN THEY BLAME HIM

Drivers are constantly moaning on here that they do not need to be told it is foggy. Professional drivers drive to the conditions.

Spot on Post

[albion1971]

schrodingers cat:
So on this basis, if a fatal accident happens on any of our roads due to standing water causing a car to aquaplane into whatever. At what government level will the court case for manslaughter be aimed.

We have thousands of deaths on our roads every year and surely a good amount of them are due to councils or the Highway authorities not looking after our roads properly. Maybe some of them should be prosecuted.

AND MAYBE DRIVERS SHOULD DRIVE TO THE ROAD CONDITIONS INSTEAD OF BLAMING OTHERS.

[albion1971]

Common sense has prevailed. I cannot believe that 30+ vehicles collide and not one driver is at fault. I do not know any facts of this incident and I am not placing blame on any specific driver but I was taught to drive to the conditions.

Exactly very well said.The chances are quite a few were at fault.Traveling too close to the vehicle in front,something unexpected happens and they wonder why they can’t stop.

[green456]

15 January 2013 Last updated at 16:13 Share this pageEmail Print Share this page

478ShareFacebookTwitter.Manslaughter charges dropped in M5 crash caseM5 crash scene Seven people died and 51 were injured in the pile-up involving 34 vehicles
Manslaughter charges have been dropped against the organiser of a fireworks display held on the night of a crash on the M5 in which seven people died.

Geoffrey Counsell, 50 and from Somerset, was arrested after the crash, which involved 34 vehicles and left 51 people injured, in November 2011.

Mr Counsell will now face one charge, under health and safety laws, of failing to ensure the safety of others.

That case will be heard at a later date, Bristol Crown Court heard.

The Crown Prosecution Service authorised Avon and Somerset Police to charge Geoffrey Counsell with manslaughter in October 2012.

Chief crown prosecutor, Barry Hughes said all CPS cases are kept under “constant review”.

He said: "During this review process, in December we sought further advice from a leading expert on the law of negligence and additional information was also provided by expert witnesses and police investigators.

‘Insufficient evidence’

“Based on this additional information and advice, it has been decided that there is insufficient evidence to continue with a prosecution for manslaughter.”

The fireworks display organised by Mr Counsell was taking place at Taunton Rugby Club, which is next to the motorway, when the crash happened.

Lorry drivers Terry Brice, from Patchway, South Gloucestershire, and Kye Thomas, from Gunnislake, Cornwall, died in the crash.

Father and daughter Michael and Maggie Barton, from Windsor, Berkshire; grandparents Anthony and Pamela Adams, from Newport, south Wales; and battle re-enactor Malcolm Beacham, from Woolavington, near Bridgwater, also died.

Det Sup Mike Courtiour of Avon and Somerset Police described the collision as “one of the worst in living memory” and said the force’s investigation was “meticulous and complex”.

Mr Counsell was originally charged with the seven counts of manslaughter, on 19 October last year.

More on This Story
Related Internet linksHM Courts Service
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites

Share this page

[wheel_nut]

Wheel Nut:

animal:

FarnboroughBoy11:
Hmmm difficult one, depends how long he gets. When 7 people die though someone’s got to go to jail.

Why could have just been 1 of those thing that happen called an " accident " & a sequence of events

Dangerous situation to judge the event organiser.

Apologies as I have posted the same news links in another thread which was running.

But if 32 vehicles run into each other whilst travelling in the same direction on a three lane motorway then there was obviously an error in the driving of someone

As we said

[anisboy]

bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-22083239

[bald_bloke]

Another update…m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-24909731

[bald_bloke]

Closure hopefully …m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-25316055

[pimpdaddy]

I’m glad for him, it was an accident, accept & move on…!!!