The driver in the Wimbledon school accident won't be charged?

[RiverF]

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

It sounds like a unavoidable and unforeseeable medical incident led to the tragedy, but the families wanted justice.

I can't begin to imagine their pain, but this is the right decision?

In every case, or just this one? Should a bespoke judicial process be implemented in every criminal case, dependent on the victims wishes? Or just the ones you’ve read about in the paper?

Could you explain how this would actually work in practice? The CPS don't think a crime has been committed. Are you saying they should again go through their normal assessment process, but in a courtroom? They should have to present a case they don't think actually exists? Or are we talking about some new, special procedure? If so, let's hear what you have in mind. There are a lot of possibilities here.

Where else do you get your news from?

Exactly. You don’t know the processes, and have no idea how the criminal justice system works.

The point being that there are hundreds of cases where the CPS
decide not to press charges every single week. Or where charges are dropped due to lack of evidence. You just don’t read about them. So if you want to let one family override the judicial process (which you’ve admitted you know nothing about), surely you have to let all families do the same? Or how do we decide who gets to override the system?

The total and complete ignorance of some people on Mumsnet never fails to surprise me.

Goes away and bangs head on a handy wall.

Probably by facebook poll.

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

The point is that unless the newspapers think people will be interested, many matters don’t make the newspapers or are only in little local papers / online blogs.

Going to court shows it's serious. Going to court keeps the issue in the public eye for longer so that people can take the deaths of these children seriously

You don’t go to court to show an issue is “serious” or to keep it “in the public eye”

Indeed. It shows a clear misunderstand of what the court system exists for.

I’m interested to know your more exact news sources? I get my news from local news media and then national and international news media. I think most people get news like this?

Totally bonkers 🤦🏻‍♀️

No one cares where you get your news! You’re being (wilfully?) obtuse. The point is that thousands of cases don’t make the news, and if you create a bespoke process for one case (this one), then you have to do the same for all of them.
I am not in the habit of calling people names online but I will make an exception in this case.
There is no arguing with stupid.

Perhaps you might answer the questions put to you about what exactly you want to happen, before asking any of others.

Do that.
My opinion is based on empathy for the family which is something here that lacks.

You are still missing the point. At this point, I’m assuming on purpose.

Of course these are my news sources. What people are asking you about (and you keep avoiding replying to) is what about the thousands of cases that don’t make the newspapers.

Quite. Justice isn’t metered out according to the family of the victims. Otherwise victims with no family wouldn’t be vindicated would they? I’m amazed anyone is so unintelligent they could actually think this way, literally amazed.

You’re commenting about yourself for sure here.

You clearly haven't understood what the poster was saying at all.

They were (quite obviously I thought) simply asking whether you'd apply your nutty idea to all cases or only the ones that had had public coverage.

Lack of understanding to the families again.

I have empathy for the families in droves. That doesn’t mean you can create a bespoke legal process for them, which isn’t afforded to anyone else.

The role of the court is, when it was been established that a crime has been committed, to determine whether the person accused is responsible
for committing that crime.
In this case, no crime has been committed and therefore no one is responsible for committing the crime. You cannot just decide, in that circumstance, to ‘go to court’. That is not the role of the court.
If you change the judicial process for one family, what about all the other families who ‘want to be heard’?

Sorry?

Agree. What crime has been committed? Can anyone pushing for ‘it to be taken further’ actually tell me?

Funny how you've shown no empathy for the families and victims whose access to justice would be impacted by the circus you want to put on.

The CPS pissing about with this is time they can't use on cases that might actually succeed. The judge and court officials are a limited and valuable resource, and when they're doing this, they can't be used on cases that might actually succeed. We don't have enough functioning and suitable courtrooms, so which victim would you like to tell that they've got to wait even longer until whatever nonsense you're advocating has finished?

This is not a moral high ground situation for you here. Quite the opposite.

Everyone here empathises with them. It's horrendous. But there's no crime... It was an accident.. So there's no crime.... And there's no court.... Because there is no crime

The investigation has been done

All 'sides' agree it was a horrible accident

The families are devastated because their children are dead

That is the end of the process. Everyone loses because no one intended harm and everyone has to live with the consequences