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 ?

Where were the assumptions - she called you out on facts. The head wasn’t a key witness. She was interviewed but wasn’t asked to make a statement - that fact in itself doesn’t mean that there wasn’t a full investigation. The reason will likely come out as a result of the review, and I don’t think anyone regards a review as anything other than a positive step.

I do too, actually, but that has absolutely nothing to do with whether you were making assumptions or not. You were, and one of yours was based on you evidently not understanding the process.

And if you think I've made one, say where. I've spelled out yours.

The fact that the police have agreed to a review actually means nothing.

When a high profile case like this receives criticism they would self refer for a review. Which is what happened. Doesn’t matter wether the criticism is fair or unfair, they would be stupid not to refer themselves.

Thats just how it works. It doesn’t mean it wasn’t a full investigation.

I think there’s a lot of ambiguity in the head teachers statements.Not because they are being misleading, but because they don’t quite get it. I think there’s a slim to zero chance the police haven’t spoken to them at all. Especially since the investigation started on the grounds of the school. The head teacher seems to believe they should have had a formal statement taken. That doesn’t mean they haven’t spoken to at all. They will have be spoken to them and a decision (rightly or wrongly) would have been taken that they didn’t need a formal statement. Again, the fact that a formal statement that was taken from someone who dissent the accident is not indication a full investigation didn’t take place.

Exactly. It’s most likely a PR and arse covering exercise. The Police have obviously not been good at liaising with the families and teachers, if indeed they could ever have met their expectations. Remember this is a school community which is populated by wealthy people used to their world being very secure and under control. That it descends into all out paranoia in South West London private schools when the uncertainty around selective school entrance starts to loom in Year 5 is a symptom of that. I used to extract my daughter from the playground in the manner of getting a hostage out of a siege situation in the months leading up to the exams such was the frenzy the parents had got themselves into. Real trauma rarely touches their lives and this has done so in the most brutal and savage way. So of course they are lashing out to try and reassert some influence in whatever way they can.

And knowing what the Headteachers of these schools have to put up with there is probably nothing she could do that won’t leave her open to criticism from within the parent body. I am sure she is speaking from the trauma of the teachers and families but she will be under pressure to be forthright about it. Almost certainly, given what we have seen on here, some parents will think she and the families should be calling for a prosecution, it says something (though possibly the lawyer’s influence as well as the reality) that they haven’t.

The Police have obviously not been good at liaising with the families and teachers, if indeed they could ever have met their expectations.

@Emilyontmoor apart from providing the insurance details and potentially pointing them towards counselling there is no reason for the police to liaise with teachers/the school.

Real trauma has not touched their lives? So just because someone privately educated their children they are immune to pain and trauma? I’ve heard it all now. What a naive and revolting suggestion.

And agree with the allegation of racism at play. As a black woman myself I’ve seen it all too often sadly.

Do you not think that the woman's previous behaviour in the car is relevant? It sounded to my ears like there was something known to the teachers that was not then followed up in the investigation, which is why they were "speaking out" through the media. Speculatively, this could be something like showing poor judgement around safety and the car on school premises; previous erratic driving; previously speeding or reckless behaviour. The teachers were adamant that the issue had not been investigated properly. So I think the question is: what was it that the teachers had seen but was ignored by the investigating team?

The police forces are already massively understaffed with backlog of cases that's been piling up. I doubt they are doing a review for the PR as someone suggested .

@WoopsLiza

Do you not think that the woman's previous behaviour in the car is relevant? It sounded to my ears like there was something known to the teachers that was not then followed up in the investigation, which is why they were "speaking out" through the media. Speculatively, this could be something like showing poor judgement around safety and the car on school premises; previous erratic driving; previously speeding or reckless behaviour. The teachers were adamant that the issue had not been investigated properly. So I think the question is: what was it that the teachers had seen but was ignored by the investigating team?
You are totally speculating here. Your suggestions are terrible things to suggest with no knowledge of the woman.

In any case even if she was a lunatic in the car normally that would hold no bearing on this case. If the woman was declared to have had a seizure by the appropriate people and the seizure is what caused this accident, no previous crazy behaviour would be relevant.

The sort of trauma we all suffer of course, bereavement, illness etc. but the lives of these families are very privileged. I remember my Daughter coming back from a field trip to Wales and being appalled that the teacher pointed out a pregnant young woman and said “Probably your age and a single mother”, especially as most of the other girls were fascinated and didn’t even see an issue with that. One novelist christened it, the zone of complacency.

It’s not PR as such. But it may as well be. It’s so they can be seen to do the right thing. Which is, when accused of not doing a full investigation is refer themselves for review.

It isn’t an admission that they didn’t do a full investigation. It’s process.

Apart from the fact that given she was unconscious her driving ability is irrelevent, I have already pointed out that it is highly unlikely that the school would have witnessed her driving / parking. Unless she has a child in the school she would not park outside it and the road leads only to a golf course and common car park. Both will be packed with SUVs and not a few of them are, in the normal probability, terrible drivers. It is hearsay and not credible either.

You have missed my point completely. The post I quoted refers to the school staff being updated and I was saying that they wouldn’t be kept informed of how any investigation would be progressing. Nothing whatsoever to do with obtaining the account from the teacher/s.

Yes I take all your points and perhaps it is not at all fair to have this discussion here. The reason I went into this speculation is because the teachers were interviewed on R4 and from everything that was public about the case, part of you was saying: but if the woman had a seizure then what are these people so upset about? And my DM was a teacher who had all sorts of shenanigans about what parents said about each other/ he said/ she said etc. I just thought it remarkable the teachers were on national media complaininng that [something] hadn't been investigated properly. And thinking about the strength of feeling it might have taken teachers I know to say ANYTHING I did speculate to what that would be. Maybe unfair. Maybe this woman had both a terrible driving record and a seizure. Obviously people close to it are really struggling to make sense of it and maybe that is all we should really say about any of this. Sorry to all concerned. Sorry I contributed to opening it out rather than helping it move towards peace

Thanks for your reflections. She was a witness to what the driver said / did / behaved in the immediate aftermath of the incident so is still a key witness.

if she witnessed the aftermath and what the driver said / did / behaved immediately after driving into everyone she is still a key witness.

No, she isn’t. Clearly. Seeing the aftermath doesn’t mean she is able to provide anything new relevant to the investigation.

There were key witnesses there, however she wasn’t amongst them.

She is a witness. Seeing the aftermath can definitely provide information in general. She seen the state of children, car , the driver. The newspapers are also referring to her as witness.

Well she thinks she is so perhaps take it up with her rather than trolling me.

There is a difference between a witness and a key witness. That she, along with many others, witnessed the aftermath does not automatically mean that the information she was able to provide was enough to warrant the police obtaining a statement from her.

Being a witness to something and being a key witness are different.

Being a witness to the aftermath if something doesn't mean you will give a formal witness statement for the investigation.

It seems like the teacher was spoken to. But not a formal witness statement taken. But we dont know, until anything more comes out or the inquest.

She’s not the one arguing about it on mumsnet though, is she?

Disagreeing with you isn’t the same thing as trolling you.

And there is something called an appeal - decision makers (in this case the CPS) can only make their decisions based on the evidence available to them at the time they were reviewing the circumstances of the case. If new evidence relevant to the investigation / issue under appeal becomes available or there were issues with the evidence collected the case can be reviewed. It isn’t as watertight as some posters seem to suggest.

Yes, it's really a rather basic distinction.