A trainee maths teacher killed when his car ploughed into an oncoming lorry may have been trying to retrieve his phone after it fell into the passenger footwell, an inquest heard.Best to pull over when that happens. Guess the chap wasn'tt too familiar with physics.
The lorry driver said he could not see anyone in the driver's seat seconds before the impact, and the handset was found in the footwell – tests failed to establish whether Mr Mogra had been using it during the journey.Hmmmm, I wonder why?
PC Paul Joynson of Greater Manchester Police told the hearing: '...the phone was encrypted so it was not possible to establish if it had been used to send messages before the collision.Curiouser and curiouser...
There was 'no evidence' Mr Mogra was wearing a seatbelt, he added.
'His mother said she had constantly reminded her son to wear a seatbelt when he was driving.'/facepalm
Recording a conclusion of road traffic accident, coroner Tim Brennand said: 'It may have been a matter of loss of concentration that caused him to collide with the HGV but we don't know what caused that loss of concentration.
'Muhammad was a young man who was a credit to his family.'Really?
H/T: P Car via email
5 comments:
Think of the children - a bad role model won't be teaching them; rejoice.
Cough, H/T sent 13 May 2017
"PC Paul Joynson of Greater Manchester Police told the hearing: '...the phone was encrypted so it was not possible to establish if it had been used to send messages before the collision."
Does PC PLod mean that the phone was locked with a password? Why didn't the officer get details of calls made and text messages sent on the day in question?
It seems to me that PC PLod is happy to make unsupported inferences at the inquest, the Coroner might have been better informed if presented with proof that either (a) the phone had not been used or (b) the phone had been used moments before the collision. Otherwise the mobile phone is irrelevant. The contents of a car tend to get thrown about in a collision; the fact that this phone was found in the passenger footwell after the collision is not evidence of anything.
Just as well it was an HGV and not a Renault Clio with a kid in the front seat.
" H/T sent 13 May 2017"
I know, sorry! I've been swamped lately. I always get around to my mail sooner or later, though.
"It seems to me that PC PLod is happy to make unsupported inferences at the inquest..."
Or it could just be sloppy reporting?
"Just as well it was an HGV and not a Renault Clio with a kid in the front seat."
Quite!
Just an observation, but he was KILLED, so just what is to be achieved by plod searching his phone. A simple request to the phone network provider would have ascertained if a call was in progress, soooooooooooo, it looks like plod was on an ILLEGAL FISHING EXERCISE to travel through someone's private data. The state really does seem to be getting above itself.
Post a Comment