Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Fri Oct 10, 2025 10:47

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat May 17, 2008 11:31 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 21:41
Posts: 3608
Location: North West
I posted up this horror ages ago when it first happened.

I sum up another version from the local Advertiser (which my sister Ju-Ju actually sent in summary to me via e-mail...

Per the Advertiser paper:

Quote:
His coughing was allegedly so bad that the passengers on board were worried and commented on it - per the prosecutor.

The case for the prosecution was that this driver took to the wheel knowing he was unfit to drive because of his throaty cough lurgy. Driver is said to be a cheerful chap with a good rapport with the passengers


(Said before - sure fire way to spread lurgies and folk are not wimps if they take a "duvet day" to sweat it out of them. :banghead: )

Quote:
The jury was shown 17 seconds of the bus's on board CCTV system to show how the bus veered and swerved around before colliding with the lolly lady.

The prosecutor alleged that there was no attempt to brake at all or avoid the collision.

The driver says he could nto remember leaving the bus stop further up and recalled little of the 135 metres to impact.

But there were SKID marks which the prosecution said was a last minute attempt to avoid the collision - which does seem to contradict his earlier claim that there was no attempt to brake!

Pc G of GMPs Collision reconstruction Team says that the skid marks show the brakes had been applied as if in emergency .. but that the rear wheels had locked. He told the court that the driver must have applied much force on the brakes to do this.. a sudden and severe pedal pressure.

The jury of 10 women and two men were told that the bus had no defects at all.

The prosecution warned the jury that the defence would claim the driver suffered from an altered state of consciousness or "micro-sleep" and had not been responsible for the accident. He claimed that this would be "unbelievable and not fit in with the other witness evidence"








http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... r_cleared_


MEN wrote:
Bus death driver cleared

17/ 5/2008

A BUS driver has been cleared of causing the death of a Salford lollipop lady by dangerous driving.

Stephen Wilson, 57, was accused of causing death by dangerous driving after Stephanie Davies was knocked down outside a school.

He was behind the wheel of the single-deck M10 Arriva bus service when the incident happened on September 11, 2006.

Mrs Davies had been standing at traffic lights outside Seedley County Primary School on Liverpool Street where she worked as a lollipop lady.

Coughing fit

Prosecutor Adrian Farrow had claimed Wilson suffered a coughing fit moments before the collision.

He told the jury that Mr Wilson's defence would be that he had suffered a "microsleep" at the wheel but asked them to discount that.

On Thursday, Judge Peter Lakin directed the jury of 10 women and two men at Manchester Minshull Street Crown Court to find Mr Wilson not guilty four days into the two-week trial.

Mrs Davies' husband Martin, who had come to meet her and collect their daughter Anna from school, was one of the first on the scene and was heard screaming "My wife, my wife" after seeing her underneath the vehicle.

Denied

Mr Wilson, of Coniston Grove, Salford, denied the charge.

Mr Davies paid a tribute to a "wonderful" wife today.

He said: "Steph was a warm, wonderful mother and wife. She loved working with children and lost her life doing a job she loved.

"She was well loved by the community, which was shocked by the event. The community have given us great family support since this event and I wish to pass on my thanks to them all."



:scratchchin:

He knew he was unfit to work. There is nothing "stoic" about working in that state of health to be honest here. I am possibly being subjective given what happened to Wildy all those years ago too :popcorn: But I am also work in the field of PRENTING the spread of lurgies and would say to folk to take a "duvet day.. drink lots of hot lemon with honey and chicken broth" rather than cough a lurgy around like this :banghead:

I do not think dangerous driving could have been proven under the circumstances. I think if we had a "negligent" option as in Switzerland/Austria/Germany/France - then there may have been a guilty verdict on this one given he knowingly went to work with a very, very nasty case of laryngitis :roll:

My condolences to the lolly lady and her family.

I also offer condolences to the driver who will still surely live with a guilt burden of "what if/if only" for the rest of his life in any case -regardless.

He was not speeding either by the way. But it still shows how a typical tragedy is caused by simply ignoring common sense decisions such as "calling in sick when genuinely sick" :roll:

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !

But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 17, 2008 17:19 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 15:00
Posts: 1109
Location: Can't see.
Mad Moggie wrote:
He knew he was unfit to work.


Is that a fact though? Judging ones own state can be very difficult- as a doc I'm sure you're aware how many people will over/understate conditions. Is it possible he felt "a bit rough" but was doing the right thing and not letting the side down/ antagonising a possible uncaring employer?

Not knowing all the facts here, can I ask why the lollipop lady didn't get out the way?

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 17, 2008 20:32 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6737
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Presumably this accident occurred before the new law on "causing death by careless driving" came in, because it surely would have been possible to convict him of that.

On the subject of fitness to work, many employers have cracked down very hard on sickness absence with the result that employees are likely to feel intimidated into coming in to work even when they are not really fit for it.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 17, 2008 21:12 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 23:42
Posts: 3820
hairyben wrote:
Mad Moggie wrote:
He knew he was unfit to work.


Is that a fact though? Judging ones own state can be very difficult- as a doc I'm sure you're aware how many people will over/understate conditions. Is it possible he felt "a bit rough" but was doing the right thing and not letting the side down/ antagonising a possible uncaring employer?

Not knowing all the facts here, can I ask why the lollipop lady didn't get out the way?


Heavens"! The Mad Doc chooses the hardest cases here :roll: I think to his credit that he picks out these difficult ones for discussion. Not family loyalty. I'd choose the guy to be a good pal .. thoughtful and concerned for safety even if not married to my wild Swiss cousin :lol:

It;s a touchy one for us given what happened to Wildy though. :roll: Ted did say he thought he was being subjective to be fair to him. :bighand:

Yes . I think folk will bne "stoic".. think they are fitter than in reality .. :roll:
I think we all have some misguided loyalties to employers and I support BRAKE in this issue.

Mary has her finger right on the button on this one .. to be fair! Employers have a duty of are to all employees amd if genuinely unfit to work or drive or operate any machinery . then this must be considered in terms of safe wr#orking condtions.,

NOTE - we do not condemn BRAKE or ROADPEACE quintessential arguments. We do question whether a a rather tunnel visoned focus on speed cams is helpful though.


I would uge employers to apply common sense as claims for compo may hit the profit margins here :popcorn:

I am fair minded .. but MM has raised the right questions - and it;s not family loyalty. The Mad Cat s raise tjhe argument stakes all the time :popcorn:
We KNOW" there are no easy answes here ..but I think corrrect to promote discussion so that we may live and learn a;l the same :popcorn:

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!


Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 16:39 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 16:22
Posts: 2
My name is Martin Davies. I am the husband of Stephanie. Please dont be like the ignorant people below who comment on other peoples tradgedies,just to appear in print on the internet. For your information,Steph was on the pavement..where she SHOULD have been.Why didnt she "jump" put of the way?? Well hard to believe it or not,she didnt see the bus coming... It crossed the white lines and hit her on the WRONG SIDE OF THE ROAD. . You say you dont know enough of the facts? Then DONT COMMENT. I DO know the facts. Things that the Police have told me since the trial collapsed. I am bringing up my two children alone. I saw my wife killed in front of my eyes. I hope it never ever happens to anyone you know. I've never got invoved in these kind of replies before,but this was one comment too far for me.Even two years after Steph,we are all devastated. Please drive carefully.
Martin Davies,
Salford,
Manchester.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 18:20 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4364
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
Martin,

Your family have been the victim of a tragic set of circumstances. However, I can't really understand your reaction to the posts above which are pretty much all non-confrontational.

As for commenting "without knowing all the facts", this would exclude most newspapers from publication as most everything they print is distorted through the prism of ignorance. We don't pretend to do anything here other than try to improve safety.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 00:40 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 16:22
Posts: 2
Malcolm i apologise if i have upset you,and thanks for the reply. Its appreciated.I was browsing through things on Stephs death for a friend i havent been in touch with for a long time,to try and point him to some sites that may explain things in a factual matter as to how i lost Steph. He lives in Australia now. Thats how i came across this site,on google. The Newspapers were very good to me and my family after the accident,and reported things accurately,without knowing the facts as i do now. What i cannot live with with anymore,are crass comments like the one"Why didnt she get out of the way?" by Hairyben,whoever he is. As if it was that easy,and she wouldnt have if she'd had the chance. When you are the one who is affected,things take on a very very different perspective to reading about other peoples losses. I dont know how many,if any on here have been affected by road deaths. I hope not many. I stand by what i said. Its very easy to trivialise things like this by saying the driver should have taken a day off work if he was feeling rough.. I DO know the circumstances of the accident now,and the history leading up to it,thanks to the Police.Even though the trial collapsed, due to a CPS expert medical witness,brought in from Scotland, whose evidence was not what was agreed beforehand,i have been thoroughly debriefed by the Police as it were,and appreciate all their hard work. I will sign off and leave you to it now. This accident was thoroughly,thoroughly preventable. I had to sit down and tell my 15 year old son,and 5 year old daughter their mum is dead.Peoples lives should not be the subject of speculation and guessing about circumstances, or trivial comments about "compo and profit margins"so please,just be wary of who might be reading. I repeat again,only i know the facts, but i'm not really in a position to tell you what the Police told me just yet. The Internet is a strange place. Opinions are branded randomly,and most of the time its a healthy way of discussing things. Occasionally though,someone somewhere is hurt by what they read,and Malcolm,your idea of "non confrontational" may be different to mine. If i read something inaccurate about my wife being dragged to her death under a bus as she stood on the pavement doing her job...then thats confrontational to me. And until you are in my position i defy anyone to let certain things go without replying. Take care,drive safely,and protect the ones you love. Martin.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 25, 2008 09:49 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 15:00
Posts: 1109
Location: Can't see.
My sincere condolences for your loss.

No offence was intended by my comments, more an attempt to seek further knowledge of how things occurred. We discuss various aspects of road safety here, and in discussion things are looked at from a variety of perspectives, perhaps in the same way that in a trial the victim would be cross-examined or "attacked" by the defense counsel, in order to establish exactly what happened.

Best wishes for the future, Ben.

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.019s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]