The fatal accident inquiry into the Glasgow bin lorry crash has shed considerable light on events, but a number of questions remain unanswered.
Most notably, these include the dozens of questions the lorry's driver Harry Clarke refused to respond to, when asked about the accident which killed six people just before Christmas last year.
One query was answered when Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland defended the Crown Office against criticisms over its failure to prosecute Mr Clarke after the crash.
This decision was deeply unpopular with the grieving families of those who lost their lives. The FAI heard that Mr Clarke had concealed his history of blackouts from employers and shocking revelations about previous incidents in Mr Clarke's employment, including his having fainted while at the wheel of a bus containing passengers in 2010.
It is probably fair to say that the decision was unpopular with the public, too, as Mr Mulholland acknowledged. However he said crown officials were duty bound to take the decision they did, as there was insufficient evidence in law to bring a prosecution. The time that had elapsed since Mr Clarke's last blackout and the fact he had been cleared to drive by doctors, mean he could not be charged with dangerous driving.
The decision may have been legally legitimate, but that does not mean the law is right. The families of Mhairi Convy and Laura Stewart were not the only ones troubled by similarities between the George Square crash and the one in which the young students died, after epilepsy sufferer William Payne passed out at the wheel of a Range Rover, four years earlier.
The FAI into that fatal accident also heard that the driver had concealed his medical history and in that case too, calls for a prosecution were ruled out due to a lack of evidence. This was surely an opportunity missed for reviewing the law.
The Lord Advocate's detailed defence of the Crown's actions did not explain fully why Mr Clarke could not face a lesser charge, in relation to his failure to alert the DVLA to his medical problems, for instance. There is no evidence Mr Clarke must have known he was unfit to drive, Mr Mulholland says, which again may be legally accurate, but sits uncomfortably the FAI's revelations that the driver went to lengths not to reveal his history of blackouts to employers.
Dorothy Bain QC, representing the family of Jacqueline Morton at the FAI, accused him of telling a pack of lies in order to retain his licence. Mr Clarke's lawyer, Paul Reid QC says his client is not a liar. "He is a very ordinary man who has the failings of ordinary men," he claimed.
Some would hope for higher standards. A private prosecution may yet be possible and it it is understandable that the relatives of some of those who lost their lives wish to bring one.
We await the FAI's findings, but it has raised significant questions about how easily drivers can gain and keep a license when there are questions over their fitness to drive, and about the lack of legal response when such problems come to light. And it has left behind a strong public sense that justice has not yet been done.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel