Turns out that while they may worry over the tiny things, they aren’t so concerned with the big, obvious dangers :
A teenage girl was killed on her way to pick up her GCSE results when a bin lorry, which had no reverse warning alarm, backed over her.Still, never mind, eh?
Esther Bush, 16, died after walking behind the 7.5-ton truck and into the driver's blindspot, an inquest heard yesterday.
At least they’ve sorted it out now:
All such lorries at Rhondda Cynon Taf county borough council have since been fitted with reverse alarms and rear-view cameras the court heard.Bit late for Esther, but still, you can’t make an omelette, and all that…
Driver Huw Jones told the inquest in Aberdare he saw Esther walking past the truck before he started reversing when trying to turn around.Did it occur to them that there might be a problem?
He stopped the lorry when he and his navigator, who were collecting goods for disposal and recycling, heard a muffled scream.
Asked if it would have helped to have someone outside directing him at the time, he said: 'I think it would have.'But you did have someone available – you had a navigator.
If it would have ‘been helpful’, why didn’t he get out to help you reverse?
Recording a verdict of accidental death Huw Medlicott, deputy coroner for Bridgend and the Glamorgan Valleys, said: 'I particularly note at that time there was no training whatsoever in what to do in reversing situations.'Apart from my initial driving lessons, nor have I.
But in situations where I can’t see properly to reverse, if I have a passenger in the car, I ask them to get out and help if safe to do so.
I didn’t need training for that. It’s called common sense. And I don’t even drive anything as huge as a 7 and a half-tonne schoolgirl-crushing machine…
9 comments:
Rhondda Cynon Taff. Not surprised really. The most corrupt council in Wales and probably England too.
No doubt the reverse alarm had not been repaired as the councillor in charge had probably skimmed off the money earmarked for it.
But I'm sure all the relevant elf'n'safety paperwork was in order so its OK then.
I despair, I really do. We have reached a point where reality is outweighed by the virtual reality of the paperwork. If the form says its OK it is. Run someone over in your dustcart, fine as long as the forms are OK. Be perfectly safe, but have no paperwork - prosecution and fines.
The lunatics have definitely taken over the asylum.
When I was a kid I remember they always had someone outside directing them. Always.
I'm sorry, but where does some semblence of responsibility on the dead girl's part come into this?
Of course it's a horrid accident but do people not have eyes and ears any more? A 7½ ton truck isn't exactly small is it?
Everyone seems happy to blame the driver but some portion of blame must go to the pedestrian.
Agree with Anon. It's six and two threes. What if the vehicle had a functioning reverse alarm and a lookout, yet someone managed to walk under it and died anyway before the lookout could react because they were deaf or because there was so much ambient noise that it was drowned out? In that situation, along with most others, I'd say it's incumbent on each of us to look out for our own safety, which means looking where we're going and at what's going on around us. We're not talking about being skittled by something small and hard to hear like a cyclist or a little electric car. As Anon says, a 7.5 tonner would have a nice noisy diesel engine and would be the size of... well, its the size of a fucking truck, isn't it? The fact that the council are going to get it in the neck for this just shows how people are forgetting how to take responsibility for their own safety and need the fucking nanny state to hold their hands all the time. Reversing alarms and banksmen or whatever should be considered a desirable extra but people should think of their own senses - including the common one - as the most important things to keep them safe.
"But I'm sure all the relevant elf'n'safety paperwork was in order so its OK then. "
As long as the right box is ticked...
"...where does some semblence of responsibility on the dead girl's part come into this? "
Well, I'm certainly always cautious around large, moving vehicles. Perhaps she just took it for granted they could see her?
"...people should think of their own senses - including the common one - as the most important things to keep them safe."
The report doesn't say, but I wonder if she had an iPod on, or was looking at her mobile phone?
The report doesn't say, but I wonder if she had an iPod on, or was looking at her mobile phone?
That wouldn't surprise me in the slightest, but my answer would be the same. It boils down to this: pedestrians are road users just as much as drivers and have a responsibility for their own safety because all road users have a responsibility to avoid colliding with each other. Since pedestrians will always come off worse when colliding with just about anything other than another pedestrian it always puzzles me why so many seem not to have given the matter any thought.
Years ago I used to have to go into London quite a lot and I lost count of the number of times I had to slam on the anchors for retarded pedestrians who entered the road without looking, and nine times out of ten they had a phone clamped to their ear or faces buried in a newspaper. This was the late 90s so pre-iPod but I'm sure they have their own fuckwit users who'd rather immerse themselves in a world of sound than stay alert for the possible dangers that go along with motorized transport. But if their choons, or phone conversations or newspaper articles, are more important than the simple act of checking the bloody road, whose fault is that really?
As you say, the article doesn't make it clear one way or the other, though I'd be a bit surprised if the Daily Fail missed the opportunity for an iPods Of Death Killing Our Children spin on the story ;-) However, I think there's enough there that we can infer that the truck was on the road and the unfortunate girl was not killed because the driver reversed it up onto the pavement. Assuming that is the case I can't see much difference from when people get hit by trains or eaten by sharks - both fates are easily avoided by staying off railway lines and out of the ocean, or taking some fairly obvious precautions if you do want to cross the line or go for a swim. In any event there should be no question of ultimate responsibility if the worst should happen and you get killed by a shark driving a train.
"...I'd be a bit surprised if the Daily Fail missed the opportunity for an iPods Of Death Killing Our Children spin on the story ;-) "
Lol! No, they'd never pass up that chance, that's for sure...
What if she had been deaf and couldn't hear it? Do you think the driver and his navigator would have got off their arses then? No, of course not.
Post a Comment