i’ve got to agree with carryfast 
albion1971:
Carryfast:
albion1971:
The lorry driver has already been arrested on suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving.He as been given bail as per norm.But the important bit,that seems to shoot down your view (if I’ve read it right ) is that the truck driver obviously hasn’t admitted running into a vehicle in a way which would make him subject to actually being charged for the offence which he was arrested on suspicion of.Nor is there any sufficient evidence,so far,to charge him regarding same.In which case there’s no more reason as to why the truck driver should be under any more suspicion of causing the accident than there is the mini bus driver.
It is not my view.It is FACT and not Fiction.
But the law,so far,obviously doesn’t agree with you because of the inconvenient issue of evidence in that a truck running into a vehicle ahead of it isn’t sufficient evidence to create a charge of dangerous driving until it’s been established as to ‘how’ and ‘why’ the truck ran into the vehicle ahead of it.Unless you’re saying it’s a FACT that the driver has been charged with the offence described 
.
puntabrava:
Surely the driver was arrested due to the accident circumstances and witness statements given to the police at the scene. I disagree with those that keep harping on about not posting about it and giving an opinion on the crash, this is a forum after all, without opinions you may as well switch it off.
It seems to me that it’s actually a good thing because views concerning the important issues contained in the topic,like establishing the rule of innocence until proven guilty,in the case of anyone involved in such an accident,based on all the evidence available and views concerning the ‘possibility’ that road layout and/or road signs ‘might’ ‘possibly’ have been a contributory factor in the accident,depending on what is eventually found to have actually caused the mini bus to come into conflict with the truck ,are obviously needed.Especially in view of comments and views such as those of albion.
Pat Hasler:
Looking at photos on the lap top later it was clear that the lorry rear ended the bus.The driver of the lorry was arrested on the scene.
Death by dangerous driving surely.
Certainly the truck rear-ended the mini-coach.
But what if the mini-coach driver realised at the last minute that he/she was
wrongly on the exit slip road, rather than the main carriageway to Liverpool,
then suddenly and unexpectantly cut into the path of the truck ?
The possibilities are both endless and interesting.
.
Dieseldoforme:
Pat Hasler:
Looking at photos on the lap top later it was clear that the lorry rear ended the bus.The driver of the lorry was arrested on the scene.
Death by dangerous driving surely.
Certainly the truck rear-ended the mini-coach.
But what if the mini-coach driver realised at the last minute that he/she was
wrongly on the exit slip road, rather than the main carriageway to Liverpool,
then suddenly and unexpectantly cut into the path of the truck ?The possibilities are both endless and interesting.
Something obviously made the driver of the truck move across into lane 2 before the collision to whatever degree and the collision seems to have taken place at the nearside front corner of the truck.It would also be interesting to hear from the highways agency as to the exact reasoning for the placement of the road signs at that point and what is that road sign placement designed/meant to actually acheive assuming that any driver isn’t in the correct lane at that point for the directions marked on them.
That’s even without the issues of the confusing use of the same colour signs and arrows to denote both the continuation of the motorway and an exit slip road onto an A road,at least to the average lowest common denominator driver,which is why we’re told we have to have a 70 mph national motorway speed limit not an unlimited one. 
Carryfast:
albion1971:
Carryfast:
albion1971:
The lorry driver has already been arrested on suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving.He as been given bail as per norm.But the important bit,that seems to shoot down your view (if I’ve read it right ) is that the truck driver obviously hasn’t admitted running into a vehicle in a way which would make him subject to actually being charged for the offence which he was arrested on suspicion of.Nor is there any sufficient evidence,so far,to charge him regarding same.In which case there’s no more reason as to why the truck driver should be under any more suspicion of causing the accident than there is the mini bus driver.
It is not my view.It is FACT and not Fiction.
But the law,so far,obviously doesn’t agree with you because of the inconvenient issue of evidence in that a truck running into a vehicle ahead of it isn’t sufficient evidence to create a charge of dangerous driving until it’s been established as to ‘how’ and ‘why’ the truck ran into the vehicle ahead of it.Unless you’re saying it’s a FACT that the driver has been charged with the offence described
Yes it is a fact he has been charged.You can read it in the news if you want.
The driver of the (Farmfoods) goods vehicle who was arrested on suspicion of death by dangerous driving has been interviewed and bailed pending further enquiries.
West Yorkshire Police.
albion1971:
Carryfast:
albion1971:
Carryfast:
albion1971:
The lorry driver has already been arrested on suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving.He as been given bail as per norm.But the important bit,that seems to shoot down your view (if I’ve read it right ) is that the truck driver obviously hasn’t admitted running into a vehicle in a way which would make him subject to actually being charged for the offence which he was arrested on suspicion of.Nor is there any sufficient evidence,so far,to charge him regarding same.In which case there’s no more reason as to why the truck driver should be under any more suspicion of causing the accident than there is the mini bus driver.
It is not my view.It is FACT and not Fiction.
But the law,so far,obviously doesn’t agree with you because of the inconvenient issue of evidence in that a truck running into a vehicle ahead of it isn’t sufficient evidence to create a charge of dangerous driving until it’s been established as to ‘how’ and ‘why’ the truck ran into the vehicle ahead of it.Unless you’re saying it’s a FACT that the driver has been charged with the offence described
Yes it is a fact he has been charged.You can read it in the news if you want.
Not according to the news as it stood at 16.27 it said bailed not charged if I’ve read it right.While I also think it’s wrong for the BBC to be posting photographs concerning anyone involved in the media.
Saturday 27 April 2013.
"This is a Police update in relation to the fatal road traffic collision which occurred on Junction 32 of the M62 yesterday morning. (26/04)
The 18 year old woman who died at the scene of the incident has been named as
Bethany Jones from Pontefract.
A total of 21 passengers were admitted to hospitals across the county, seven of whom are currently in a serious but stable condition.
A further woman remains in intensive care and is described as very poorly.
The family of Bethany Jones have this afternoon (27/04) issued the following tribute:
“Beth was a fun and bubbly girl who was caring and considerate to everyone she met.
She was the apple of her grandad’s eye and she will never be forgotten and sadly
missed by everyone.”
R.I.P.
Well you did not read it correctly…
West Yorkshire Police said the lorry driver, arrested on suspicion of death by dangerous driving, has been bailed.
Im sure we will find out who made the fatal mistake the minibus driver or the lorry driver in coming weeks. Im not hanging the fella out to dry yet as i think this crash is more complicated than ‘‘he has ploughed through them’’. Something else happened to contribute to this.
Its just a sin the lassie was so young, whole life ahead of her now gone 
albion1971:
Well you did not read it correctly…West Yorkshire Police said the lorry driver, arrested on suspicion of death by dangerous driving, has been bailed.
you’ve said he read it wrong, but then wrote what he said
you can get bailed by the police without being charged
For the benefit of the hard of thinking, “bailed” certainly does not mean “charged”!
People are typically arrested on suspicion of having committed an offence, then interviewed while in custody. If there is sufficient evidence to charge at this point then they must be charged and either bailed to appear before a court or kept in custody until the next available court (usually the next day).
If further enquiries are necessary, or there is a lot of evidence to consider before a decision can be made on charge(s), then they will be released from custody and bailed to return to the police station at a future date.
If there are no grounds to charge, then they will be released without charge (or their bail will be cancelled if already released on bail).
merc0447:
Im sure we will find out who made the fatal mistake the minibus driver or the lorry driver in coming weeks. Im not hanging the fella out to dry yet as i think this crash is more complicated than ‘‘he has ploughed through them’’. Something else to contribute to this.
^ This with the reservation that this ‘might be’ more complicated than ‘he has ploughed through them’.Something else ‘might have’ happened in this case.
If albion is right in his obvious view then I’d be the first to agree that it’s time that minds were focused on the issue of driving standards by making an example of the truck driver in this case by giving him the full term possible for the charge.
If it’s shown that it was caused by what I think it might have been then it should be both the mini bus driver ‘and’ those who designed that road sign layout at the junction being charged and getting that sentence not the truck driver.
How about another radical idea, maybe the police, who were actually there on site, asked witnesses, who were also on site, what happened. Could be the reason the trucker was arrested and not the coach driver.
ajt:
There was a crash for cash scam some of you might have seen on the national news month or two back where the scammers locked on the brakes on a motorway and a woman rammed into the back of their car. A following van unconnected to the incident then ploughed into the back of the woman killing her. He ended up doing a 12 month stretch for careless driving.
That wasn’t as clear cut as it seems, the woman got out of her car and had time to go back to get her belongings before the van hit her car, he was charged because the investigators proved that there was ample vision and space for him to see the accident before the fatal collision, he didn’t just plough into her after she hit the other car.
Dieseldoforme:
Pat Hasler:
Looking at photos on the lap top later it was clear that the lorry rear ended the bus.The driver of the lorry was arrested on the scene.
Death by dangerous driving surely.
Certainly the truck rear-ended the mini-coach.
But what if the mini-coach driver realised at the last minute that he/she was
wrongly on the exit slip road, rather than the main carriageway to Liverpool,
then suddenly and unexpectantly cut into the path of the truck ?The possibilities are both endless and interesting.
The coach had the most damage to the rear right and the truck to the left front which sugests the truck left it late and moved over on the coach.
Pat Hasler:
Dieseldoforme:
Pat Hasler:
Looking at photos on the lap top later it was clear that the lorry rear ended the bus.The driver of the lorry was arrested on the scene.
Death by dangerous driving surely.
Certainly the truck rear-ended the mini-coach.
But what if the mini-coach driver realised at the last minute that he/she was
wrongly on the exit slip road, rather than the main carriageway to Liverpool,
then suddenly and unexpectantly cut into the path of the truck ?The possibilities are both endless and interesting.
The coach had the most damage to the rear right and the truck to the left front which sugests the truck left it late and moved over on the coach.
What do you mean? Left it late for what?
I’ll put a tenner down and say it was the mini bus drivers fault.
What a sad loss and such a pretty girl, the bridesmaid is still in Hospital too. 