Why is the Wimbledon school crash investigation not getting more attention?

[Eesha]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15731159/Eleven-Met-Officers-probed-Wimbledon-crash-killed-schoolgirls.html

Why isnt this bigger news? This school is similar to mine, and it seems like they have great lawyers who got her off.

Agree with all that, however I believe that the burden of proof should be on the driver no matter the size of the vehicle. A Harley Davidson motorcyclist who knocks a cyclist, for example.

Is there a Law I missed somewhere where it's illegal for anybody with epilepsy to attend medical and dental appointments, buy food or go on holiday with their family lest they lose their diagnosis and medication/monitoring now? They're things that pretty much everybody has to do in order to live whether they have epilepsy, other conditions or not.

Yes, I remember that people who expressed dismay at the speed at which it was all brushed under the carpet were attacked on MN for being insensitive to the driver.

Those who were angry at the lack of culpability had given up hope on behalf of the victims and their families.

Parents are not required to sit in the dock so your point is moot.

Surely then their insurance is invalid too if they don't have the right licence

Was her car caught by this?

I bet that if she was poor /working class she'd have been sat in the dock

Yes, probably. I suppose any concession like this depends on having the confidence and knowledge to request it, and that's going to depend partly on the quality of your legal team and your general expectations in life. And people do unfortunately often make concessions to people they see as more like them than others, so judges etc could be affected by that.

I don't see why anyone who isn't being charged with violence should be in the dock at this stage though.

Well no that isnt the case, the vast majority of people that I work with and support are poor/criminal classes and its not unusual that people dont have to be in the dock if there is a reason not to be.

Anyone in her position would have a KC, and any KC worth the title would request her not to sit on the dock at a pre-trial hearing. I agree that having money will/has probably helped in a number of ways, but this probably isn’t one of them.

Who are the ‘criminal classes’? JFC.

Correct - just as the question was moot.

My son has tonic clonic seizures, never bitten his tongue. Epilepsy comes in many shapes and sizes. It’s unpredictable and unless you witness a seizures, person may not know they’ve had one.

I expect @likelysuspect was referring to Boris "lockdown parties" Johnson/Michelle "COVID entrepreneur" Mone / Andrew "sex trafficking " Windsor .....

In this case, perhaps those witness statements will be interesting.

Well recidivists really, in and out of courts a lot. Most are very vulnerable so have lots of concessions in court when needed.

Crumbs, what do you do?

Im sure I read at the time she had suffered a medical episode that hadn’t happened before or since. But it seems she does have epilepsy so that does change things.

Glad to hear it - thanks for that information

You missed my point. Which was I assume that she has been to the dentist/doctor/day out whatever - but suddenly and rather conveniently her epilepsy precludes her from doing something….

Maybe she is a completely wronged person. But the “medical episode” defence is a bit handy and seems to be the go-to defence in a lot of cases now. See The Crash documentary; methinks that young lady may have had an easier ride in the UK with the medical defence.

Frontline statutory work with families so there are high levels of criminality, parents in and out of criminal proceedings, not always incarcerated, but in and out of courts, breaching their probation a lot, more crime, round and round it goes. You cant keep up with it sometimes.

If stress triggers her epilepsy, which isn't unusual, she will have tried to do these things in ways that don't cause stress, or avoided them if she can't do that and they're not essential. Being in the dock in a case where there is such intense media interest would certainly be very stressful, probably more so than a visit to a GP or the shops for most people.

And you refer to the people you work with as ‘criminal classes’. Good to know.

The purpose of the trial is to test the defence. The prosecution didn’t object to CF not sitting in the dock (which they can and do), so there must be some reasonable basis for the request, and no doubt they are also acting tactically.

If CF had a seizure three weeks ago, and drove to Court she would not be driving legally. Agree with a PP, the defence should have a copy of her present epilepsy medication

It was reported that the driver voluntarily surrendered her license and cannot reapply for one until she is free of seizures for a year - that was back in 2024.