Five dead in Buncrana accident

gctest50

embraer170 wrote: »

I am breaking the law by being 3 times above the drink driving limit. I drive down a slip. Is the root cause really the slip or the decision to drive down the slip?

Dr Dillon at the inquest( not embraer170 at the keybordz) could not say whether the level of alcohol in Mr McGrotty’s system had impaired his driving.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/buncrana-tragedy-driver-three-times-over-alcohol-limit-inquest-told-1.3300894

.

John_Rambo

embraer170 wrote: »

And the decision to get on the slip?

As I said, a few weeks later there were stone cold sober people driving down the slip in Mullaghmore. As I said, I've rescued sober people that have slid down slips in to the water in their cars (destroying my clothes, phones and loosing sunglasses in the process). We'll never know if the alcohol had anything to do with his decision, but experience tells me people do this all the time. Sober. I respect your posts, I know where you're coming from. I was one of the first to call out the probable factors when the tragedy was unfolding on this thread.

I can see where all of you are coming from when drink is involved. Sorry for snapping at you.

But, respectively....

This is after hours. And realistically, we're going to have some indignant, insensitive warrior on very soon with all sorts of horrible accusations to garner popularity and thanks that can and probably will be read by the family of the deceased. Without trying to "control" or back seat mod the thread, I'm just trying to get across that this type of thing happens a lot more than we think. With no drink, or with drink, but with drink not being the major contributor to the consequences.

That's all. My thoughts are with the family and friends and the community that's been affected by the events that unfolded on that day.

screamer

RhubarbCrumble wrote: »

And to Davitt Walsh too. I don't think there's even a word to describe him. Hero doesn't come anywhere near close. He should be so so proud of himself for what he did.

Indeed. That poor guy looked broken when interviewed in the immediate aftermath. I don't know the man or anything about him but he seemed so deeply affected by it. He for sure did a heroic and amazing thing in savings the little one.

Wesser

One if the purposes of the inquest is for the jury to make recommendations.

One if the recommendations they made was ijn relation to pier safety. Fair enough.

I feel they should also have made a recommendation in relation to drink driving for example ' this case should serve as a reminder to the public to not drink and drive'
I think to under play it is a missed opportunity.

The father might have made poor judgements of situations with drink on board. For example he might have spotted that the pier was slippy but thought to himself as sure it'll be grand. If he had been sober he might have thought twice. We can all lack in proper judgement with a drink on board.

embraer170

gctest50 wrote: »

.Dr Dillon at the inquest( not embraer170 at the keybordz) could not say whether the level of alcohol in Mr McGrotty’s system had impaired his driving.

We will all pick the parts of the inquest we want to backup the story we believe. Y

You have quoted that a second time... I am not exactly sure why? The fact is he was breaking the law 3 times above the limit.

screamer

screamer wrote: »

My heart goes out to the poor woman and her little girl. It's awful to have to go through an inquest a month before Christmas. What difference it makes as to who did what etc I don't know. It won't bring them back. I hope she can find peace and some way to keep going in what must be a nightmare situation for her. I wish her and her little girl nothing but the best, they deserve that.

She had legal representation. If it had been proven that the county council were negligent a law suit would have followed. Tragic for her. I assume she had no forewarning of the verdict. .

screamer

embraer170 wrote: »

We will all pick the parts of the inquest we want to backup the story we believe. Y

You have quoted that a second time... I am not exactly sure why? The fact is he was breaking the law 3 times above the limit.

And the fact is all are gone. What difference pointing fingers and preaching on high makes..... Nothing. Let it go.

LynnGrace

John_Rambo wrote: »

As I said, a few weeks later there were stone cold sober people driving down the slip in Mullaghmore. As I said, I've rescued sober people that have slid down slips in to the water in their cars (destroying my clothes, phones and loosing sunglasses in the process). We'll never know if the alcohol had anything to do with his decision, but experience tells me people do this all the time. Sober. I respect your posts, I know where you're coming from. I was one of the first to call out the probable factors when the tragedy was unfolding on this thread.

I can see where all of you are coming from when drink is involved. Sorry for snapping at you.

But, respectively....

This is after hours. And realistically, we're going to have some indignant, insensitive warrior on very soon with all sorts of horrible accusations to garner popularity and thanks that can and probably will be read by the family of the deceased. Without trying to "control" or back seat mod the thread, I'm just trying to get across that this type of thing happens a lot more than we think. With no drink, or with drink, but with drink not being the major contributor to the consequences.

That's all. My thoughts are with the family and friends and the community that's been affected by the events that unfolded on that day.

Very well said.

And thank you for the work that you do.

eviltwin

Normally I have nothing but contempt for drink drivers but I can't feel anything but sadness for that poor woman who has already lost her family and now finds out her partner had been drinking. And sadness for the dad too who paid the ultimate price. Whatever the outcome he's gone now, he can't be held accountable. She has to live knowing his actions probably contributed to the deaths of her family and that is a heavy burden.

_Dara_

John_Rambo wrote: »

I'm not at all keen on people drink driving but I'm aware anyone with half a clue about uncleaned and uncared for slips after a warm winter will know the difference between three drinks and zero drinks will make zero impact on the traction between the four tyres and the algae covered concrete incline.

Tragically the car was going in to the water no matter what the sadly deceased drank, smoked or ate.

I guess the point is that he might have taken more risks with drink taken ie. ending up on the slipway at all.

SeanW

embraer170 wrote: »

I don't know about you but after 6 pints, my judgement is impaired and I am more likely to do something stupid.

Same here, and same with most people. However ...

Without 6 or more pints, he may not have ended up in the situation in the first place. Without 6 pints, he might have reacted differently after his car ended up in the water.

I think I can speak for most here when I say there've been times I've had a few too many and made stupid decisions because of it. One thing however, I NEVER thought of doing after a few too many drinks, was operate and kind of vehicle. Ever. Maybe it's because I was a passenger with a drunken moron one time as a kid (that was scary!) or because I've heard tales of people who've died trying to drive home after a bender, or because I know, even in a drunken state, that there's no way in hell I could operate a vehicle safely, of any kind, under any circumstances.

I've never got drunk and thought "Gee, it might be a fun to drive onto a steep, algae covered spillway with children in the car, what could possibly go wrong?" and I suspect the same is true of most sane people.

The problem here was not the uncleaned and uncared for slip.

It may not have been the root cause, but it didn't help. A good rule to use in a case like this is "would this have been safe to use/do sober?" if the answer is no, then whatever it is, is a problem.

cisk wrote: »

It does seem that there is some playing down of the impairment of the father. The state pathologist gives evidence that he was 3 times over the drink drive limit but wouldn’t be drawn on what impairment this could cause as “everybody is different”

What the actual? Our government is so concerned with drink driving that it reduced perfectly safe limits (80mg like the UK) to even lower levels, but someone causes an accident at twice the old limit, three times the new one and the pathologist is like "it's all relative?" F@#%ing hell.

embraer170 wrote: »

I know nothing about inquests but I am amazed at how this ends up as death by “misadventure”.

Driving a car with your entire family when you are 3 times above the legal limit is no misadventure.

I had to check the dictionary for this one:
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/misadventure?s=t
In a general sense, this was very much a misadventure since stupidity does not prevent an accident from being a misadventure. And the driver's decision to get on a steep, algae covered slipway with drink taken and kids in the car was clearly negligent and criminal. This, in the legal sense, makes it not a misadventure. However, if we consider the condition of the slipway, it may have contributed elements of misadventure.

embraer170 wrote: »

And the decision to get on the slip?

I am breaking the speed driving at 120km/h into a narrow bend. I crash the car. The root case is that I am breaking the speed limit. A contributory factor might be the narrow bend.

I am breaking the law by being 3 times above the drink driving limit. I drive down a slip. Is the root cause really the slip or the decision to drive down the slip?

It always depends on the circumstance.

Consider a similar case, on land about a decade ago here in the Midlands. One Mary Carberry was speeding, drunk, with kids in her car presumably towards Longford/Sligo. She was using the old Longford road from the town, possibly unaware that it had been replaced by a bypass and crashed where the old road became a cul-de-sac. I heard uninformed speculation that the changes on the old road were partly to blame, because without them, the accident might have been avoided. Thing is though, in that case, driving down that same road is perfectly safe, and even if by mistake, even unaware that it's been bypassed and even if speeding, would not be seriously dangerous because the new layout, while somewhat ridiculous, is well marked and if you approach sober, even if otherwise careless and clueless, you'll presumably observe enough in time to prevent an accident. Drunk as a skunk, it's a different story.

The same was not true of this slipway. The same series of actions may have been just as dangerous if sober. Therefore, both the intoxication of the driver and the condition of the slipway were both causal factors.

jackboy

screamer wrote: »

And the fact is all are gone. What difference pointing fingers and preaching on high makes..... Nothing. Let it go.

Are you seriously saying people should not condemn the drink driving in this case.

Crea

[Deleted User] wrote: »

She had legal representation. If it had been proven that the county council were negligent a law suit would have followed. Tragic for her. I assume she had no forewarning of the verdict. .

My MIL had to deal with an inquest when FIL died. There was an asbestos aspect to his deathhence the inquest. It was horrendous for her. It is so clinical - all facts, no mention of the person themselves.

splinter65

embraer170 wrote: »

I know nothing about inquests but I am amazed at how this ends up as death by “misadventure”.

Driving a car with your entire family when you are 3 times above the legal limit is no misadventure.

I feel horribly for the family and think of them anytime I go near a slipway but real cause of this tragedy has to get out there to stop similar things from happening.

Misadventure is a palatable way of saying that certain people involved in the tragedy made fateful bad decisions on the day which most likely contributed to the deaths of the five family members.

John_Rambo

LynnGrace wrote: »

Very well said.

And thank you for the work that you do.

Thanks LynnGrace. Just to confirm, I'm not a first responder, certainly no hero. But I'm an experienced water person. I've taken it upon myself to train in first aid and CPR to selfishly further enhance my hobbies and sport! The rescues carried out where due to me being there at the right time, doing what I enjoy. I just did what I know any of you would do if you had the knowledge and skillsets. It's a bit like the mechanic knowing to stop the fuel flow in a car accident to stop further damage & injury. That's all.

screamer

jackboy wrote: »

Are you seriously saying people should not condemn the drink driving in this case.

I think people should have a bit of cop on and realise that the remaining family have suffered immensely already and to cop on with finger pointing and condemnation which can not change the tragic outcome nor be quantified as to what part it played in this case. I swear sometimes the insensitivity in this place is disgusting

_Dara_

RhubarbCrumble wrote: »

And to Davitt Walsh too. I don't think there's even a word to describe him. Hero doesn't come anywhere near close. He should be so so proud of himself for what he did.

I was on a spa break at a hotel a month after the tragedy. He was there at the spa with his GF when we were there. It was nice to see him looking so relaxed. I'm sure the break was a gift from a well-wisher to help him unwind after such trauma.

I didn't let on at all that I recognised him. Just left him alone. Nobody bothered him from what I could see.

I still can't believe it was DARK when he went in the water. :eek:

splinter65

eviltwin wrote: »

Normally I have nothing but contempt for drink drivers but I can't feel anything but sadness for that poor woman who has already lost her family and now finds out her partner had been drinking. And sadness for the dad too who paid the ultimate price. Whatever the outcome he's gone now, he can't be held accountable. She has to live knowing his actions probably contributed to the deaths of her family and that is a heavy burden.

Knowing Donegal eviltwin I would be certain that she didn’t have to wait till the inquest to hear how much he’d drank, or where he drank, or with whom.
Oh she’d have heard a blow by blow of his last 24 hours while she was away, the whole story embellished and added to in the intervening nearly 2 years.
I’m sure the end of the inquest is a relief to her the poor woman.
Peace to her and her little girl.

wylo

From Irish Times “He estimated the car was in the water for about 12 minutes before it sank.”

Is it that the doors would not open in those 12 minutes or did the driver perhaps opt to not open them (in case of faster flooding perhaps). Did he think help would get there on time I wonder?

I’d like to know where the “misadventure” part comes from exactly.

Sometime this amount of people would die in a few days in car accidents in Ireland but this story horrifies really horrifies me. I can’t imagine what was going through their mind in the final minute. Especially those completely trapped in the back.

As morbid as it sounds I hope they died as quick as would be possible once they went under.

darced

This post has been deleted.

denismc

I was in a diving club a number of years back and we were trying to launch a boat from a slip that was covered in algae.

The rear wheel of the trailer slid of the edge of the slip. The driver tried to pull forward but the weight of the boat and trailer pull the jeep sideways and the whole lot ended up in the sea.
Luckily no one was hurt.
The guys launching the boat were very experienced boat handlers and regularly launched boats from slips but they still got caught out.

So if these guys can get caught out then I can see how a person who is in an unfamiliar vechicle with no experience of driving in slipery conditions could get caught out.

Similarly there was an accident in Cork a number of years back where someone try to drive through a flooded stream in a 4x4 and the jeep was flipped resulting in 2 deaths.

I just don't know if the alcohol made a difference in this situation.
It is easy to sit in front of a p.c going woulda, coulda, shoulda but all I do know for definite is the sea is deadly it has caught out many experienced boat users over the years.

iamwhoiam

wylo wrote: »

From Irish Times “He estimated the car was in the water for about 12 minutes before it sank.”

Is it that the doors would not open in those 12 minutes or did the driver perhaps opt to not open them (in case of faster flooding perhaps). Did he think help would get there on time I wonder?

I’d like to know where the “misadventure” part comes from exactly.

Sometime this amount of people would die in a few days in car accidents in Ireland but this story horrifies really horrifies me. I can’t imagine what was going through their mind in the final minute. Especially those completely trapped in the back.

As morbid as it sounds I hope they died as quick as would be possible once they went under.

It is horrifying to even think about it .Which is why my heart plummets when I see Louise and her pain must be unbearable .She is a brave woman to be able to stand upright every day and carry on for her little girl .My heart also goes out to Davitt who must be deeply traumatised as are others who stood and watched it happen . As my husband said last night he was a brave warrior but must also be paying the price with the gut wrenching feeling of Sophies choice when he had to let go the little boy .

Gatling

The more I read over the case ,I'm thinking it sounds almost suiscide between the drink and prescription meds and the Audi engineers reports , saying the door and windows were in working order ,for me parts of the case don't make sense

neonsofa

Such a sad story. Heard a discussion about the inquest on the radio yesterday while driving to the shop. Got to the shop,parked the car and couldn't turn off the radio. They read a statement from the man who saved the baby and I just sat in the car crying. Didn't have that reaction when it first happened- i obviously felt awful then but something about knowing the devastation in detail so long after it happened... I dunno it just felt so heart breaking for everybody. For them to have to go through all this and re live it all in such detail,and hearing the full account. My heart is so heavy for the poor woman.

seamus

bucketybuck wrote: »

I'm no ghoul looking for all the gory details, but I think a lot of lives could be saved if people really knew what happened in many incidents rather than them being hushed up and forgotten about.

Right.

Deleted User wrote: »

People know damn well the risks involved driving with drink taken. What lessons could be learned? What "good" as another poster mentioned, could possibly come from the inquest verdict? At the end of the day a family died tragically. A woman is broken. A man will forever carry the moment he saw in to that car.

How many drink driving ads talk about the risk you pose to yourself and your family?
It's all about losing control, rolling a car into a garden and killing someone else's child.
I don't ever recall a single advertisement - for drink driving - which tries to push home the danger you pose to your children, your family by driving while impaired. It's all about the danger you pose to others. They all end with a forlorn driver standing safely on the road looking on at someone else's life they've ruined.

The "Looking back" campaign is the first one I can recall which has a message of "You will kill your own children if you drive badly".

Perhaps if anything good can come of this tragedy, one person might think twice before having 3 or 4 pints or a bottle of wine with dinner on a family day out. Many people do it. And they think nothing of it.

Gatling wrote: »

The more I read over the case ,I'm thinking it sounds almost suiscide between the drink and prescription meds and the Audi engineers reports , saying the door and windows were in working order ,for me parts of the case don't make sense

No, doesn't sound likely tbh. It's one of those things which happens slowly at first - so slowly that you think you have loads of time to get out. And then you sink incredibly suddenly, so fast that you're not prepared for it.

Hannibal_Smith

Gatling wrote: »

The more I read over the case ,I'm thinking it sounds almost suiscide between the drink and prescription meds and the Audi engineers reports , saying the door and windows were in working order ,for me parts of the case don't make sense

With the mother in law and sister in law in the car too?

Gwynplaine

It wasn't an accident

SnakePlissken

Gwynplaine wrote: »

It wasn't an accident

You see it's disgusting comments like this which is why I believe this thread should be closed. The results of the inquest are public and have/will be reported on in the press.

There are far too many insensitive ghouls such as the above on after hours for this thread to serve any reasonable purpose.

Mods, do the right thing please.

Gatling

SnakePlissken wrote: »

You see it's disgusting comments like this which is why I believe this thread should be closed. The results of the inquest are public and have/will be reported on in the press.

There are far too many insensitive ghouls such as the above on after hours for this thread to serve any reasonable purpose.

Mods, do the right thing please.

So wait people are not allowed to discuss this ,it's nothing to do with ghoul's ,
People have a right to ask questions and raise issues

Boom_Bap

Closed for review.