To actually feel sorry for the woman driving the car in the Wimbledon car accident

No, what you actually said was that she would be morally wrong to resume driving and that it wouldn’t be decent. If you’re going to say something here, the least you can do is stand by it and not try to backtrack when you’re challenged. And you weren’t exactly pleasant yourself, which got you deleted at one point. However much it may irk you, everyone is entitled to their own opinion - it’s a controversial subject and things are bound to get heated. And you know what they say - if you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. It’s MN’s job to police threads, not yours.

I feel much sorrier for the driver now than I did at the start of the thread, because I now realise that, even when the inquest totally exonerates her, there will be people willing to harass and threaten her and make her family's life a misery (as described upthread by someone in relation to another blameless driver involved in a child's death). Attitudes here make it clear that some just enjoy righteous anger, no matter how irrational.

Wow. What exactly have you had enough of ? People not agreeing with you ?As has been pointed out upthread, this seems to have become a driver versus victims scenario, which I’m sure the OP didn’t intend - her question was whether it was unreasonable to feel sorry for her. Which is what you clearly think, despite the fact that it may well be that she had no control over what happened, but will still have to live with the fact of the deaths of those two little girls. That’s your opinion, but if you come on MN you have to be prepared to be disagreed with, and you have to expect some colourful opinions and language when discussing controversial topics.

Most posters disagree with your point of view and from the comments made seem to view you as in favour of punishment for the driver - certainly in the form of self punishment in the absence of any legal penalty, because you’re vociferous in your opinion that she would be morally bankrupt to ever get behind the wheel again, despite it being perfectly legal for her to do so once she has satisfied the standard. So the fact that someone outside MN who you describe as ‘neutral’ doesn’t have much sympathy for the driver doesn’t really mean anything does it ? Because you only showed them the OP, and nothing of your participation or opinions you expressed. Including the last one in which you imply that we must all be mad to have anything but minimal sympathy for the driver.

With respect, you sound very triggered by this and it might be a good idea for you to step back from the thread for a bit if that’s the case.

Mmm, it's incredible how much troll hunting and bot hunting this thread has contained. Primarily going one way too.

You said

Well, as I said earlier, if I were the parents and saw this woman driving again…..

You suggested you would be prepared to act against them. And refused to answer what you would do. You didn’t talk about how you would feel. You were talking about what you would do.

Surely as the parent you would feel upset seeing them at all? And sadly, anyone being upset by something doesn’t mean it should not happen.

You asked if people thought she should drive again. And anyone that said ‘yes, like anyone with epilepsy who meets the criteria’. You decided those people don’t have sympathy for the parents, are trolls working as PR for the driver, accused then of silencing the parents and having more more sympathy for the driver.

”Oh no! How dare people point out the punitive irrationality of what I’m actually saying whilst I’m trying to pretend that isn’t what I’m saying!”

‘Unpleasant insults’, says the poster that thinks anyone with a different opinion is in fact a (possibly paid for) bad actor with an agenda, as if that isn’t a thoroughly wild take.

You can’t complain about name calling when you got deleted for troll hunting. Incorrectly, I might add.

I can see that some are quite determined to have the last word. I would just say that this “exchange of views” was thoroughly spoiled by some posters hurling unpleasant insults.

They have inferred things I’ve written, carping on about my saying I would be livid, nay, murderous if I saw the person who had killed my child driving again. Who wouldn’t?! Only a saint, I believe, would be all fine and dandy with them sailing past. I did not say they should be prevented from driving if legal; I said their own thoughts on the matter should be the judge.

Ah come now. You repeatedly tried to imply the driver would be in danger if you were to ever see them drive again and this was your family.

and I haven’t seen one person say they have equal or more sympathy for the driver, then they do for the family,

You can feel very sorry for the family. And feel sorry for the driver. You can also understand that people with epilepsy are also entitled to drive if they meet certain criteria. You can also feel that believing this one particular driver, when they are no more at risk than other people with epilepsy who also meet the criteria, is advocating for a punishment.

You can feel very sorry for the family and still understand that the driver isn’t to blame. To understand that this can happen to anyone.

You can have sympathy for the family and still get in your car and drive, knowing there’s a risk something similar could happen to you.

You can also see think that a smaller car may have improved the outcome but could have also made it worse. Until someone sees the reports and sees accurate modelling no one can say. Whilst still having lots of sympathy for the family.

The only person who insists it’s one or the other, is you.

As for the “had enough” - that was me who has had enough. See thread for people saying Shhh and telling others to stop posting. And also see thread for copious amounts of name-calling.

You’ve had enough of what ? Are you the thread police ? If you don’t like it stop monitoring it and move on. The insults have come from both sides of the argument, and that’s only to be expected on MN when the subject at hand is so emotive. It’s actually posters like you who have helped to turn this into a driver v victims scenario. What were you expecting by banging on over and over again about the moral issues - did you think we would all magically agree with you if you said it often enough ? You’ve done your fair share of pulling people down for disagreeing with your point of view and trying to insert moral arguments where there are none - look at your post above. You end by insinuating that anyone feeling more than slightly sorry for the driver must be insane. Grow up.

I’ve really had enough of this now. The bilious contributions full of insults and twisting of words are extraordinary.

Actually I showed just the OP to a neutral person (and said nothing of my participation in thread). They said yes, they feel a bit sorry for driver, but hardly at all in comparison with the victims. I think this would be the reaction of most sane people.

Even a smaller car going flat out will annihilate railings like that, particularly if, as in this case, they hit the last panel.

Those railings are not equivalent to armco on a motorway. Their main function is to channel humans away from dangerous crossing sites such as on a junction, to stop people stepping into a road, ie outside a school and in some circumstances to deter people from parking on the pavement/on that bit of road.

They will not stop most vehicles and in some situations, could serve to launch a vehicle into the air.

I don't think the driver could have avoided a crash happening and so cannot be prosecuted. The children I think might be alive if a standard size car had been driven, and the sooner we restrict large cars the better.

Totally agree !!

Nope, not epileptic and have never had any form of seizure. I’m just rational and can see the poor woman isn’t in any way responsible for what happened, while at the same time my heart goes out to the parents who lost their daughters in such a tragic accident.

By the way, in case it needs spelling out, having epilepsy and being rational aren’t mutually exclusive, either.

Probably those backing the driver to the hilt are possibly epilepsy sufferers who want to carry on driving,

Quick poll. Who here is epileptic or has another form of seizure disorder ? I’ll go first. Nope. Anyone ?

I clearly remember an article in the Sun newspaper a few weeks after the event, inviting people to vote as to whether they thought this woman should be prosecuted or not. I’m not remotely connected to the case, and just for the record, I don’t have seizures. This thread really needs to be brought to a close because it’s well into the realms of batshit conspiracy theory now.

Do you beep when you back up like that ?!! With every post you’re advocating punishment. There is no callous attitude to the families except in your head - why would there be ? They are grieving for their children. But anyone with an ounce of empathy and intelligence can see that if the driver was indeed unconscious by way of medical emergency at the time of the accident, then they are not present and are therefore not responsible. Please don’t direct any more replies at me because I really can’t be arsed arguing with you any more - your intransigence prevents you from seeing any other point of view but your own, and I’m not wasting any more time on you.

Posted too soon. I support the driver because I have the intelligence to understand what the issues are here. If you think that everyone here is backing the driver because they have skin in the game, you’re deluded. Or just plain ignorant.

You’ve been called out several times with facts, as opposed to your biased and ableist opinion. Why do you keep digging ?

Probably those backing the driver to the hilt are possibly epilepsy sufferers who want to carry on driving,

Just wow. Ableist, ignorant in the extreme and utterly offensive to both seizure disorder sufferers and those of us intelligent enough to recognise the issues at hand. You really should ask MN to take this post down because it says more about you than anything else.

Please do enlighten us as to what you think that agenda is. You’ve hinted and implied all the way through this thread but you haven’t said what you actually mean. Could it be that you actually have no idea what seizure disorders are, or what the checks and balances for restoring someone’s driving licence after a seizure actually involve ? Seems to me you think this is on their own recognisance and I can assure you from personal experience this is not the case. Either you think that no-one who has had a seizure should be allowed to drive again, or you have demonstrated a huge bias against this driver if you think she should be prevented from driving again.

I have sympathy for all involved but to the people who question the seizure, do you think this woman purposely drove into the school on a suicide mission to take others with her ? I mean what other explanation other than her having a seizure makes any sense ?

@oakleaffy

Probably those backing the driver to the hilt are possibly epilepsy sufferers who want to carry on driving,
Or we are just rational

Her choice of an almost four ton vehicle capable of gunning through a fence in a built up area is selfish in my opinion.
Total non sequitur
Her being epileptic and her driving a completely legal vehicle don't make her a criminal