Distraction of fireworks

[Mike Gallafent]

Am I alone in having some disquiet over the decision to charge the organiser of the firework display at the Taunton Rugby Club with seven counts of manslaughter due to a multiple pile-up on the M5?

It is frequently the case that multiple deaths in motorway accidents are subsequently attributable to one causal error followed by numerous contributory driving mistakes.

Many years ago I flew a Belfast into Luqa, Malta at night. The locals were celebrating some religious festival or other and were showing their enthusiasm with widespread fireworks displays. There had been no warning from ATC and the approach with spectacular rockets exploding, visible from each side of the flight deck, could have been a distraction.

Of course the attention requirement differs from driving on the motorway to flying an aircraft but I still have some doubts on the CPS decision.

[late-joiner]

From memory, it was more than causing a distraction, I think there was a large amount of smoke from the display going across the motorway.

[airborne_artist]

The CPS clearly think they have a case, but I'd ask how the defendant could have known the impact of the smoke on the motorway, as he could not have measured it.

I'll lay money now on a not guilty verdict.

[NutLoose]

Me too, what a stressful time to put them through this, when they were to never know the results... I think it also will be not guilty.


The other one I'm uncomfortable with is the decision to allow the pursuit by the families against the MOD for the unsuitability of equipment such as the Snatch Landrover, no matter what they were in, the Taliban would simply tailor the size of their bombs to the vehicles. whilst I can understand their grief, they signed on the dotted line knowing that if they went into a combat situation, they could be killed. I could agree with it in the cases where there were Was not enough body armour to go around, as happened, but where you could not prevent a roadside bomb killing them, no matter what they were in, then no I cannot.

Sorry for the thread drift.

[SRENNAPS]

Mike Gallafent

I had exactly the same thoughts last night when I first heard the news and I certainly share your disquiet.

My other thoughts were that in this H & S gone mad age that we live in; surly the organiser of the display would have to have had approval from certain official bodies such as the council/local fire service etc. If this was the case and approval was given then surly they should be held accountable as well for the very tragic incident.

I must admit that I was a very worried man that night because I knew my daughter and some friends were driving down the M5 from Abbey Wood to Butlins around that time and I was unable to contact her for ages.

Ironically, with respect to your comment of your Belfast to Luqa and widespread firework displays, I am flying off to Munich from Birmingham airport on 5 Nov, taking off approx 1730. I am hoping for a clear night to see all the fireworks as we cross the country.

[dervish]

I've no knowledge of the M5 incident but IIRC the waters were muddied by the rugby club seeking permission and it being granted after an inspection.



On snatch I'm on more comfortable ground and it is much the same argument as C130 ESF. MoD knew it was unsuitable and the replacement was approved in the 1990s but for some reason not delivered. Then it lied about this and claimed snatch was suitable for Iraq. I agree with Nutloose's sentiments but I think you have to ask what the Command reaction would've been if they'd known snatch had been declared unfit. I think more pressure would have been applied. The fact there was a solution to known problems was withheld from them so in neither case could the operators make an informed decision or prioritise their requirements.


All these cases share one thing. It looks like the authorities decided to proceed hoping the truth wouldn't emerge.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Driven the M5 past Taunton many times.
I feel this is the classic problem with H&S these days. There's unending amounts of procedures and permits, but a serious deficiency in common sense. The M5 runs by the edge of the ground on an embankment.
There would always be a risk using this venue. The weather conditions at the time should have led the organiser to cancel. But then he loses his fee.
Cash versus risk.
I think the manslaughter charge is correct.

[MATELO]

"It was clear from the investigation carried out by Avon and Somerset Police that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute for driver error and therefore no action will be taken against any motorists.


Seems an easy get out to be honest.

BBC News - M5 crash deaths: Geoffrey Counsell on manslaughter charges (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-20012262)

[November4]

but I still have some doubts on the CPS decision.

So do I.....

In this case it would seem the CPS are going for the Gross Negligence Manslaughter (http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/h_to_k/homicide_murder_and_manslaughter/#involuntary) where

This is where the death is a result of a grossly negligent (though otherwise lawful) act or omission on the part of the defendant. The law in respect of this has been clarified in the case of R v Adomako (1994) 3 All ER 79 where a four stage test for gross negligence manslaughter known as the Adomako Test was outlined by the House of Lords:

The test involves the following stages:

a) the existence of a duty of care to the deceased;
b) a breach of that duty of care which;
c) causes (or significantly contributes) to the death of the victim; and
d) the breach should be characterised as gross negligence, and therefore a crime.

There is no manslaughter by "Lawrence Recklessness", overruling R v Seymour (1983) 2 AC 493.

Personally I think this fails at the first stage. If the deceased had been in the actual crowd watching the display then this is possibly the correct charge.





Still a detection is a detection and that's all that matters....

[airborne_artist]

Desperate situation as it was, drivers are responsible for driving within the limits of their car and their ability and should be able to stop safely at all times. If I crash into someone on a bend/in ice/in fog that I was not expecting that is my fault.

[green granite]

Well first of all they have to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that the smoke came from the fireworks display, I wonder how they are going to do that.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Not an uncommon occurrence.

10 motorists dead after fog, smoke envelope Florida highway (http://www.autoblog.com/2012/01/30/10-motorists-dead-after-fog-smoke-envelope-florida-highway/)

I imagine the problem is that the smoky bit can cause sudden drops in visibility and not be noticed easily within the fog.

[Dan Winterland]

You should see Shanghai at Chinese new year. Or not! the vis is close to zero.

[AGS Man]

I remember that night very well as me and Mrs AGS were due to travel to Taunton to see family. Fortunately she was late finishing work so we postponed trip until the saturday. There are several concerns that I have about this case. As has already been mentioned the drivers should have been expecting the unexpected (drive in Saudi and you always do), Was the smoke from fireworks or bonfire? As I understand it the guy being prosecuted is the firework display director and he probably wouldn't have had control of the bonfire. As to duty of care Taunton Rugby Club have held this event in the same place for several years without anything like this happening before. My final point and this makes my blood boil is that if found guilty he will get around 5 years for what was a tragic accident whereas a thug who goes out with the intention of causing trouble will get a slapped wrist. Ok off my soapbox now!

[SRENNAPS]

AGS Man

Well said :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

You stay on your soapbox mate:ok:

[tonker]

Virtually all of the deaths were lorry drivers, and they ALL died from the effects of rear ending the vehicle in front ie they were too close to stop in time if an event happened.

Most of the car drivers(who left a gap) survived.

Yet again in our society we are looking for any other excuse, but their own poor driving. Any of us on these boards know anything could happen any time(unforeseen smoke/fog/animals) and thus drive accordingly.

Fireworks have been let off at that rugby club for years. Was it sensible that night based upon the fairly slack wind and its direction, probably no. Was it why the lorries rear ended each other, no.

[Wander00]

We will see what we will see..I suspect someone wants a scapegoat - it was in my view a tragic acident, and I am sure the deaths were in many cases due to tailgating to a greater or lesser extent - if you think that is bad in UK, try driving in France, wgere they also habitually come round bends on the wrong side of the road! Yesterday waas nearly "had" 3 times in 10 minutes.

[Basil]

I'd guess that, if the operator was licensed to conduct a firework display, there will be a checklist of H&S considerations.
If one of the items is reduced visibility/windspeed & direction etc then he will be on shaky ground. Otherwise, a dreadful accident and he leaves as a more careful professional.

I once tied two smoke canisters to the back of a colleague's wedding limo. As they drove off it became clear that one would have been more than sufficient. I was a worried Bas who watched the bend in the road until the thick red smoke cleared. :uhoh:

[SRENNAPS]

if you think that is bad in UK, try driving in France,

Whilst I will agree that the French drive like nutters sometimes, I drive quite regularly on the motorways/autobahns of France, Belgium, Holland, Germany and Italy (I also lived for 12 Years on and off at Bruggen). I can honestly say that in all the thousands of miles that I have driven on the continent it was/is extremely rare that I have come across an accident of any kind. You cannot go 100 miles on the motorway in this country without seeing an accident. We had 7 last week just on a 30 mile stretch of the M4 between Newport and Bridgend; all of them caused by driving too close in cr@p weather conditions.

People fully understand the dangers of smoking tabs or the life threatening capability of a packet of crisps with a bit of salt, but put them in a vehicle and they have absolutely no idea of what is safe, what is not safe and what is dammed dangerous!!!

[Wander00]

Talking of smoke, anyone else remember the RAF coach from Cranwell waiting for cadets from first weekend walkabout (1984, Jan), and driver was trying to clear a bad injector. Passing lorry driver thought a bomb had gone off and called the emergency services. Just about every appliance in Lincolnshire and East Notts arrived in the layby (Brant Broughton "retained" appliance about 15 miniutes after the rest had gone home, but got teir call-out fee).

[garyscott]

On that night i had arrived in Taunton, driving up from Wellington, 30 minutes prior to the incident. At that time as i came off the motorway, there was a 100 - 200M viz fogbank, with its edge sat on the M5, and extending in the direction of Ilminster, this fog had lightened by time of accident, but was still present when it happened. It was this fog that masked the much denser smoke from the display, so as vehicles drove into limited vis, they would hit the display smoke and suffer complete white out. Survivors spkoe of breaking when they could see no further, and hitting vehicles/debris as soon as it came into view. It was just that thick.