Driving ban, for what?

unkel

Drunk pedestrian jumps into the path of an incoming car and causes a crash. Driver brings him to hospital (as he thought that would be quicker than calling an ambulance / the guards) and for his efforts he gets a driving ban and a €1,150 fine. Why?

Article

MugMugs

Dartz

+1 Crime solved. And an easy one to boot. The innocent just don't put up as much of a fight as the real criminals, so it looks good on statistics.

When it comes time to hand in the tally's of convictions, that's just one more ... without anyone caring about the circumstances.

Yakuza

Seems bizarre. He did all he reasonably could, under the cirumstances, and yet he gets the book thrown at him for not calling the guards before bringing the pedestrian to hospitall? The law is an ass, sometimes. How was justice served in this case? /boggle.

puppetmaster

Yeh thats crazy, Prosicuted him to the letter of the law, There were a couple of mad things he did. Like calling his uncle. And bringing the guy himself to hospital but that was really (in his mind) To get the guy to help as quickly as possible. Never left the injured party and never lied once.

Shows what the law thinks of honesty and decency.

Nonoperational

Ridiculous prosecution if it's as it sounds. Sickening. However bringing the man to hospital himself was a silly thing to do unless he was properly trained to assess his injuries first. Stay with him and call 999.

Triangla

That guy needs a better solicitor. Surely that can be appealed against.

Chuck Stone

I'd like to know how long it was before the Gardai became involved and the accident.

I can think of a motive not to call the police.

Anan1

So what exactly happened here? My reading is that, when he arrived at the hospital, the hospital called the Gardaí? And the Gardaí then prosecuted him for not having informed them himself? I'm getting the feeling I don't have the full story.

Voodoomelon

I think its got to do with the fact that he left the scene of an accident before Gardaí attended, and failed to report the accident after it happened, despite doing pretty much the "right" thing the whole time.

mathepac

Bizarre story and a bizarre outcome.

I wonder was Mark distracted counting all the "caps" Limerick had awarded him for lining out for the county. In my day we got jerseys; still time flies, the world changes but the Indo persists in employing the uneducated, unrefined and the plain stupid as journos.

Anan1

Voodoomelon wrote: »

I think its got to do with the fact that he left the scene of an accident before Gardaí attended, and failed to report the accident after it happened, despite doing pretty much the "right" thing the whole time.

His duty was to report it as soon as possible, and i'd imagine one could safely argue that reporting it when he got to the hospital would cover that. My understanding from the article is that the hospital reported it when he arrived. I'd like to know exactly why the Gardaí chose to prosecute him, and why the prosecution was successful. What we have in the article doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

galwayjohn89

That just doesn't add up. From the article it looked like he did everything he could and isn't denying anything. If the article is true it shows what a messed up country we live in.

cursai

We are basing all this information from the Irish Independent. Who knows what really happened. So many facts that could have been ommitted. Can't see why a Garda would prosecute someone if that story was fully true.

Jimdagym

Is it that harsh? He hit a fella with his car causing serious injury and then basically kidnapped him.

dilallio

I think that if the law in case isn't applied 'to the letter', then it could give a drunk driver an escape from prosecution by setting a precedent. All they would need to do is to pick up the injured pedestrian and bring them to the hospital.

The purpose of the law requiring driver(s) to remain at the scene, is to enable the Gardai to get an accurate & timely account of events, and to determine if the cause was due to driver or pedestrian behaviour such as excessive speed/presence of alcohol/careless or dangerous driving. They also need to examine the condition of the vehicle(s), and any environmental conditions such as weather or road surface. Once a driver leaves the scene, it is not possible to make an accurate determination of cause.


I am NOT suggesting in any way that Mark had any alcohol taken on the night and by all accounts, he did what he could and probably got the injured man to hospital quicker than calling an ambulance.

mathepac

dilallio wrote: »

... and probably got the injured man to hospital quicker than calling an ambulance.

I agree.

Certainly if you're in a remote rural area, the new centralised contact service won't be able to give accurate directions to local crews. I have 1st hand experience of this when the 999 contact company rang me back twice after I had requested an ambulance to tell me that the village I identified to them didn't exist!

I wish I could say more about the consequences of that delay, but the mods would delete the post.