I AGIREE entirely with the conclusion of your editorial that justice has not yet been done in the matter of the Glasgow bin lorry crash (“Justice and families of bin lorry victims”, The Herald, August 29).

Evidence from the Fatal Accident Inquiry (FAI) indicates that inadequate vetting procedures by some of Harry Clarke’s employers contributed to the eventual tragedy. The role of medical professionals, and of the DVLA, in comprehensively monitoring an individual’s fitness to drive also appears to be inadequate. These are procedural matters which should be relatively simple to remedy, in light of any findings of the FAI.

The actions of the driver himself in only selectively disclosing his medical history also appear highly questionable. His advocate describes these as “the failings of an ordinary man”, and no doubt many drivers have similarly deceived in order to protect their driving licence. Legislating for such human frailty will be difficult, but that doesn’t mean society should tolerate it.

Attributing and punishing any guilt arising from the driver’s actions fall outside the remit of the FAI, but are probably of more immediate importance to those bereaved and injured than the peripheral issues which the inquiry is able to address. It is in this crucial area that those caught up in the tragedy continue to be cruelly and doubly victimised. The Crown Office acted with unseemly and uncharacteristic haste in ruling out any criminal charge against Mr Clarke, thus effectively forcing the victims’ families to consider a private prosecution. That in turn left Mr Clarke with little alternative but to decline to answer many of the vital questions put to him at the FAI, for fear of incrimination. The Crown Office needlessly introduced a monstrous elephant into the inquiry room which distorted and diminished the entire proceedings.

The conduct of the Crown Office as a whole, but in particular the added grief which its actions have heaped on the bereaved and injured, seems to me to be scandalous. Yet, faced with mounting public incredulity and anger, It remains obdurate. It refuses to even consider the possibility that it might be wrong. Once the envy of the world, Scotland’s legal system now looks inept, crass and brutal.

In the highly unlikely event of a private prosecution, it is hard to see how Mr Clarke could now receive a fair trial. So much information and opinion is now in the public domain that there can surely be little hope of finding 15 impartial and objective jury members to try him. The more realistic option, as suggested by Cameron Fyfe, QC, is for a judicial review to establish whether the Crown Office’s decision not to prosecute Mr Clarke was unreasonable, irrational or erroneous. Then, if appropriate, the driver should be prosecuted.

I welcome the recent decision of Scotland’s most senior police officer to retire early in response to growing public concern about shortcomings in his organisation.

Iain Stuart,

34 Oakbank Crescent, Perth.