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

[bagpuss90]

I’m sure I’ll be flamed here . I totally sympathise with the bereaved parents- I can’t stress that enough. I can understand them wanting justice . As we know the driver of the car suffered an epileptic seizure at the wheel - she had no history of epilepsy. I don’t see what she could have done differently. She has to live with what she did although it wasn’t her fault. AIBU to feel quite sorry for her ?

Nope. The issue is culpability. If she had a seizure and she was unconscious throughout then she is not guilty of killling anyone. Or are you seriously suggesting that we go down the slippery slope of prosecuting people for having a health condition of which they were not aware before getting behind the wheel of a car? If so then no one on the planet should be allowed to drive.

When someone jumps in front of a train, do we say the train driver killed them?
Nope.

This whole thing was a tragic accident... and it is possible to feel sorry for the lady who sadly had a seizure and lost control of her car, and the children that died as a result.

In twenty years on MN I have never seen name-calling and insults like this on a thread - and I’ve been on the Harry and Meghan threads!!

There are posters who are determined to promote the interests of the driver. Presumably because of a vested health interest or a personal angle. That’s fine - it’s their opinion. But all this stooping to base insults and telling people to shut up or shhhh - usually MN would have rapped them over the knuckles. Ironically it was me who was deleted for pointing out that some posters had a remarkably similar turn of phrase…

The pp doesn't say anything about prosecution.

If someone dies through your actions, voluntary or not, you still caused their death. That doesn't necessarily mean it was your fault.

I mean if the woman didn't kill the children then why the sympathy thread?

Because she was in a horrible accident and as a result she’s being publicly attacked by those who think she’s to blame, I imagine.

she has to live with what she did

This is the premise of the thread and something that everyone understands is very horrible.

What she did was have a medical episode that she could never have anticipated. There was no intent to cause harm on her part, nor negligence.

This branch of the thread inspired by this bit

l imagine the thread was started in response to the various articles calling for her prosecution and levelling accusations that she was faking the seizure.

My response was to a poster who clearly thinks the drivers’ actions were responsible, regardless of whatever medical evidence comes to light, which is why l mentioned culpability. If she was unconscious throughout the event the children didn’t die as a result of her actions, because she didn’t voluntarily take any actions. All she did was to get in the car with the intention to drive to wherever she was going. That alone has prompted some awful responses about rich and privileged people driving ‘tanks’, and banging on about how a smaller car might not have killed anyone, which is utter nonsense when you look at what actually happened, not to mention totally irrelevant as it’s perfectly legal to drive an SUV.

If she was unconscious and oblivious when the crash took place, it’s ridiculous to suggest that she herself killed the children when the fact is that they died because of a tragic set of circumstances which couldn’t have been foreseen at the time she took her last deliberate action of getting in the car and heading to her destination. And which, it should be remembered, could happen to anyone..

Actually if you look back through the thread some of the most unpleasant posts have been in defence of the children and the bereaved.

You yourself have posted some very unpleasant things, and repeatedly
suggested that it would be ‘immoral’ for the driver to ever get behind the wheel again, despite it being perfectly legal for her to do so once she has been seizure free for the required time.

And this post isn’t exactly unbiased is it ? You’re accusing those of us supporting the driver of having some sort of vested interest. Why is that ? Do you think everyone who supports her is epileptic ? Do you think anyone needs to have a vested interest of some sort to be able to see that if this woman was unconscious at the time due to a medical episode completely out of her control, then the accident was not down to her actions ?

And l remember the post that got you deleted. It was an unpleasant post and was deleted because clearly it crossed the line of what’s acceptable. So for you to post about how unpleasant this thread has been, to my mind is a case of pot, kettle and black.

Agree. Most people have the capacity to feel sympathy for everyone involved. The children lost their lives, the families are grieving and the witnesses are traumatised. And the driver will have to live with this for the rest of her life. No one has emerged unscathed.

My brother was a passenger in a car that was rammed by another car driving in the opposite direction on a motorway. That driver had a massive heart attack, and we told he was probably dead when his car flew towards my brother and his friend´s. Their car was crushed. They are both very lucky to be alive, it could have gone the other way. It was an accident.
This is a horror story. So awful. But we live in a culture where if something happens there must be blame, somebody must be at fault. Well sometimes there isn´t. The most tragic set of circumstances that couldn´t have been foreseen.

And let's not forget that the driver has to come to terms with a condition that very nearly killed her with its first presentation (were it not for the vehicle she drove, she would have been another fatality) and still could easily kill her at any random point in the future, whether she's in the bath, caring for her children, shopping in sainsburys, asleep in bed - anywhere. And beyond taking medication (and hopefully avoiding stress, such as reading oblique threats from randoms on the Internet), there is nothing she can do about it.

l imagine the thread was started in response to the various articles calling for her prosecution and levelling accusations that she was faking the seizure

Can you share these? I've not see them. This is not what the parents of the dead children are saying or what the head teachers are saying. Who else is 'calling for' anything? It's almost like someone is trying to make out there is a barage of abuse against the driver online but there's nothing that I can see. Is it to try and prove that she wouldn't be able to get a fair trial should it over come to court? Or to get sympathy from a judge that she is being persecuted in some way? This thread is all about trying to make out black is white. Plus some smoke screen shit about Fiat puntos...

@Rosscameasdoody - actually I’ve been screenshotting my posts (which I’ve never done before) and your accusations are downright lies.

My repeated point is that as the parents, I would feel very, very distressed at the thought of this woman driving again after possibly a very short time. The attitude of some posters sounds really hard-hearted. Of course it was a terrible accident, and not once have I suggested anything else, mentioned epilepsy or advocated punishment.

But it remains the fact that two young girls lost their lives and all the sympathy (in particular yours) seems to lie with the driver and her right to go on to live a life untrammelled by this.

I only posted on here because I was involved with a causing serious injury by dangerous driving case where the defence was autoism that was taken to court but resulted in a not guilty verdict. It was an enlightening experience and I therefore now understand the legal framework and could explain the complexity and nuance. In that case the medical evidence was actually not entirely conclusive, less so than it appears from the CPS decision in this case. Thankfully for the driver the case received no publicity so they did not find themselves subject to the sort of ignorant, vindictive, intrusive and emotion driven social media noise and speculation that has manifested itself on here in relation to just one case amongst many where a loss of consciousness has caused a terrible accident. I am quite happy to back up each one of those adjectives.

However quite amused to now see that because I am not with Cheeseball I must be part of a conspiracy. Nope, no vested interest, no personal angle, not employed by her expensive lawyers or PR company. Not commenting from some nefarious brief. Just as others here say, and the majority in the poll, able to take a more objective perspective on the consequences of this terrible tragedy for the family and the driver.

Just for some more nuance I don’t agree the nature of the vehicle is irrelevant. The vehicle demolished a set of metal safety railings before it went through the fence. The sort of safety railings that are outside most schools. Would a mini car of whatever make have demolished those railings even if the driver was having a seizure and had their foot hard on the accelerator, or not at least been slowed? Presumably at some point they were tested to withstand an impact from what would then have been an average car. I don’t know but I think this something the Coroner might well address as part of their public interest brief.

An example of your bias. The driver is not going to go on to live an untrammelled life, like the driver in my case she is going to have live with the trauma of this experience for the rest of her life, just as the parents of the dead children, the other families and the teachers involved. To lose a child is most would agree the greatest tragedy you can have to endure but it was traumatic for all who were involved.

If by untrammelled you mean she might one day be able to drive again then that is because there is a national policy designed to be fair for those who experience seizures. The fact that she had the bad luck to be where she was in the car that she was when she had her seizure and it resulted in much more awful consequences than average does not mean she should therefore face a worse outcome under that policy. That would be punitive rather than fair.

You’d have to search because I’ve seen a couple of articles published when it first happened. One notable one in the Sun newspaper. It wasn’t the parents or the teachers calling her out, it was the newspaper itself, in their usual style trying to whip up public sentiment for a non existent issue. If I can find it, I’ll link to it.

I doubt this was the first indication that she had an illness. I wouldn’t be surprised if she ignored the signs to keep driving. If she had an idea and kept driving then that’s diabolical. There needs to be a proper review.

When it first happened no one knew anything.

Advocating for someone to be penalized for an accident beyond their control is a point in favor of keeping emotion out of the matter tbh. And yes, wanting to apply different rules to her because this case is high profile and emotive is advocating to penalize her. As distressed as the parents may feel, and as distressed as you may feel, neither they nor you are in the position to determine which laws apply to this woman. She will be legally able to drive if she passes 12 months without a seizure, the same as everyone else suffering from
seizures.

There is not a finite amount of sympathy one can feel. Feeling it for the driver does not take any away from the children or their parents.

How does it demonstrate that?

Why wouldn't it be?
Even if she did it might just have been she felt a bit tired or unwell, nothing to think she was going to have a seizure
I had a fit out the blue after I trapped my finger in a door. The only warning I got was 30 seconds before it happened when my vision went
People have heart attacks, strokes, even die all without a warning
You can be driving a car and drop dead without feeling unwell beforehand

And you still show bias. There is no legal or moral reason the drivers’ life shouldn’t go ‘untrammelled’ by this tragedy if she was unconscious and unable to act at the time it happened. She was incapacitated and unable to respond because the essence of what she is as a human being with the capacity to recognise what was happening and act to prevent it, wasn’t present at the time of the accident. But the fact is, it probably won’t. She will have to live with the fact of it for the rest of her life, and to my mind that’s worse than any punishment the law could mete out.

The overall tone of your posts reeks of punishment. Why else would you advocate that it’s immoral for her to drive again ? Why else would you think it a question of decency ? You’re advocating for self imposed punishment in the absence of any legal recourse. And no, you may not have mentioned epilepsy directly but if that’s not what you meant, explain what you did mean when you accused posters supporting the driver of having some health related vested interests ? The law provides for those who have had seizures to drive again if they are seizure free for a prescribed period. Your posts advocated that it would be immoral and indecent for her to do that. So you’re singling her out for different treatment based on an incident beyond her control. You didn’t need to mention epilepsy directly - we all knew what you meant.

I doubt very much you have the slightest clue at all as to whether this is the case. I think I’ll take the the word of the police investigation and medical reports rather than some random only interested in whipping up vengeance. And for the record I have tragically lost a child and fully understand the grief involved for the poor families. My heart goes out to them but this was just a very tragic accident with no one to blame. Sometimes in life there isn’t anyone to blame and that can be hard as you have nowhere to direct your anger. My son died from a brain tumour but I still sometimes wish there was someone to blame to let the anger out so I fully can understand the parents finding this difficult to accept. Strangers not related to the girls however should be able to be a bit more objective instead of trying to be vengeful on someone else’s behalf.