Can the parents reach closure with this?

[mids2019]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw4448xx4keo

Horrible tragedy but the driver was completely innocent having had an epileptic seizure with none previously occuring. The problem seems to be the parents can't accept this. Should they have been advised against not making a statement as it will probably exacerbate the huge guilt felt by the driver for no reason.

Could you please clarify, do you genuinely think Freemantle's own barrister should identify conclusive evidence to support the charge against her?

My husband blacked out and crashed, fortunately low speed and no one hurt. Was checked at hospital etc, nothing obvious found. He stopped driving, fortunately my father in law was able to drive him around for work. He saw neurologist on NHS, had scan EEG etc. We went private for cardiologist and he had a heart loop recording device fitted. Nothing detected. DVLA wrote to all health professionals, and he was allowed to drive again. This was over a year after the crash, no further episodes.
A few months after that, he got a letter asking him to a neurologist appointment. He was asked why he hadn't had a 24 hour sleep deprived EEG. That was the first he'd heard of needing one. It was arranged quickly and he got called back and told he had epilepsy, prescribed medication.

One of his friend's also developed epilepsy in his 40s, he collapsed at work, paramedics concluded it was stress induced and told him to get more rest. He started having hallucinations which were in fact seizures. He's never driven, but not everyone loses bladder control etc whilst having seizures.

This is crucially different in several ways.
1- You had a feeling something wasn't right and took action.

2- The driver in this case got into her car at the golf club, apparently feeling fit and well, yet 30 seconds later was fully unconscious with no recollection of anything that happened, ploughing through barriers, fences and children.
And then, upon impact was once again fully conscious and able to climb out of the car unaided, with no after-effects of seizure (eg drowsiness, tongue biting, loss of bladder control which you would not expect with all seizures, but would with a fully unconscious seizure)
3- This was an isolated event. No further seizures, no medication. She gets her licence back after a year.
She's actually taking the p**s out of people like you who have had genuine seizures

What charge is that?

Her own barrister? are you sure?

If people are going to accuse others of being trolls report the posts

If 'militant support' is pointing out how the law works I despair for society.

This was an isolated event. No further seizures, no medication. She gets her licence back after a year.

Can you show us your evidence of this?

@hohohomey but look at the drift on the crash she doesn't suddenly lose control the car drifts. The lack of damage to it also looks like she didn't have her foot on the accelerator more the car continued under its own power until it hit the school wall.

Looks like an absence seizure which typically last 10-15 seconds and immediately resolves within around 30 seconds.

The investigation has been reopened?

There should be some sort of injunction against them in my view. They are hurting and grieving and anyone would feel huge sympathy for them. But it’s effectively a harassement campaign now.

The Met have decided to reopen the case as there are a number of lines of enquiry that require further investigation. This makes me think that a proper investigation wasn't carried out in the first place.

Injunction against whom? Harassment campaign against whom?

A review of the force’s handling of the case is understood to have revealed significant shortfalls in the way officers conducted the initial investigation, including missed opportunities to interview witnesses about the driver’s behaviour in the immediate aftermath of the crash. The medical evidence will also be re-examined.

Reopening of investigation Reopening of investigation Reopening of investigation Reopening of investigation Reopening of investigation

Are you saying the driver is being harassed by the victims’ families, despite the Met saying their original investigation was flawed and will be reopened with a new and more senior investigator in charge? (We will see what, if anything, changes.)

Are you related to the driver? Your post is so extreme in the face of an admission of fault by the Met themselves that I query your bona fides. You’re asking for the parents of the deceased to be legally prevented from seeking a proper investigation into the deaths of their children, on the grounds that doing so would be “harassment”. Are you for real?

Im not surprised by this to be honest. I remember reading that the head teacher who witnessed it, said she was not questioned at all. Which does seem remiss to say the least

I see this has been reopened and Claire Freemantle rearrested today.

Well well

Not Epilepsy then.....was the epileptic fit a defence quickly put together by an expensive legal team with maybe some medical input?

It sounds like Claire defence stood ground but the parents continued search for the truth has been merited.

Have they decided it wasnt epilepsy already, I thought she was only re arrested today?

Is it on the same suspicion as previously?

I have a feeling she's been driving without declaring she has epilepsy. It's the only thing I can think why she's been rearrested.

The challenge with this whole thread is that it will now be speculation until the facts emerge from the process .

The bigger question I have is why this was so quickly closed in the first place, and why pressure has led to it being reopened.

Friends in high places possibly?

It could perhaps also be they found records of her phone being used at the time of the accident, that would also fall under forensic. Obviously this is just my speculation...

Well no, that’s not been announced at all. It could be that she does have epilepsy, or a history of seizures, but carried on driving. We don’t know and we need to stop speculating until more information is made public.

I was surprised to hear on the news tonight that not all the people present at the picnic had been interviewed - I would have thought that everyone there would have had to make a statement.

A terrible incident - I hope the investigation is thorough but doesn't drag in too long for those sadly involved

Closed quickly?

I thought there was a myriad of complaints last time it was open that the parents were left waiting an inordinately long amount of time for the conclusion

It's obviously a police problem as well. It's such a long time since the incident viable witnesses may be hard to come by. There is obviously enough there to question epilepsy or at least unknown epilepsy. The police also wouldn't have rearessted a woman with a disability with no cause.

One theory could be that the driver has shown no other epileptic episodes since the crash and therefore the likelihood of a single event at such a an awful point becomes very small?