Paphos Life

You would think when their ex-daughter-in-law died, almost certainly through not wearing a seat-belt, then they would take note.....

Apparently William and Harry have been seen as passengers in limousines, not wearing belts - which on a private estate is their prerogative, but this has been on public roads - again - an offence for the driver and passenger.

As I said previously, the monarchy is already coming under pressure. People cannot understand different laws for them, nor unabashed displays of exorbitant spending or wealth, during times of austerity with millions below the poverty line.

Hudswell wrote: ↑Sun Jan 20, 2019 8:06 pm If Monarchy bashing was an Olympic Sport Jim, you would win gold.... give it up.

And if Royal Arse licking, was an Olympic Sport, you would have the largest collection of Gold medals in history,

I've said before, I can put up with Lizzie, Phil, Charles, William and Harry..... but the other hangers-on......... Apart from Anne who works hard for charities.....

Remember chaps, this is the General Discussion Area. Please keep responses civil. Perhaps "boot licker" in future?

It isn't just the 'no seat belt' issue here, Philip caused a serious accident, occupants of the Kia were injured, and Philip was at fault, sorry but 'a talking to' is rather tame in my book.

Jackie

Especially so soon after causing a major accident. I don't know what else you can call an accident that rolls your car over, other than major?
It just goes to show he doesn't give a toss...

I wonder if the Police really do give people a 'talking to' normally, for not wearing a seat belt....

Police officers are given a reasonable amount of discretion in dealing with what in real terms is a minor offence.
Norfolk Police seem to have a set policy on dealing with offences reported by the public using phone photograph pictures of alleged offences and used that policy in dealing with the allegation against PP.

Also IF they were to take the case to court you have to prove the location (ie public road), the time and date, a statement from the photographer and most likely an ID parade to identify the driver.
So all that to deal with an offence of no seat belt, no way better things to do.

Jimgward wrote: ↑Mon Jan 21, 2019 1:37 pm I wonder if the Police really do give people a 'talking to' normally, for not wearing a seat belt....

From personal experience, yes they do.

Granville

I quite agree with you we will have to wait and see the outcome, if indeed there is one. I take your point re. the speed of the Kia, but sorry, Philip can afford the best sun glasses the world has to offer, no excuse as I see it.

Should he be driving, yes on private roads on Her Majesty's Estates, on a public road I think not.

I imagine that the driver has been advised to maintain a dignified silence by her insurer, and yes I think the lady with the broken wrist should follow suit, but she isn't.

Jackie

Firefly wrote: ↑Mon Jan 21, 2019 12:49 pm It isn't just the 'no seat belt' issue here, Philip caused a serious accident, occupants of the Kia were injured, and Philip was at fault, sorry but 'a talking to' is rather tame in my book.

Jackie

You're talking apples and bananas here. The 'no seat belt' photo had nothing to do with the accident, which the police say is still under investigation, so the 'talking to' is a completely separate incident. Don't try to confuse the issue.

"How fast was the KIA going to overturn a Land rover" How do we know that the Land rover didn't overturn when it hit the KIA? We don't. That is why it is being investigated.

The care was a Freelander, much less stable than a Range Rover. I have seen one overturn on a motorway in front of me, simply because of an avoidance fast manoeuvre..... they are renowned for instability due to height and narrow wheelbase

Jackie, re sunglasses, I don't short change on my specs, particularly the sunglasses since I moved here. I always order the legally darkest tint they can do, and have every other coating etc possible.

Yet still, when doing the school run at the moment I frequently have to almost stop as I'm completely blinded by the low sun at this time of the year, so I wouldnt presume to think HRH could have done any more and may well have been blinded by the low sun.

Who knows! I'm sure the police would have been full of well meaning advice. Not so sure he's the person to take it though!

Devil I'm well aware of that but the thread is 'driving in your dotage', which covers all issues.

We don't know if he was wearing a seatbelt or not, if he was wearing sun glasses or not, what the weather was like at the time, how fast the Kia was moving, all that aside, the age factor is also an issue.


Jacs


Maybe that's the whole point here, as you say you 'frequently almost have to stop', when to stop or not stop, surely if one cannot see, you don't pull out onto a main road.


Jackie

If the sun was blinding him then he shouldn't have pulled out of the junction if he couldn't see clearly. It's not like he had a queue of traffic behind him...

One law for the peasants and one law for the pompous old fool. Just glad he didn't kill anyone. Only a matter of time, if he continues to drive

Radio this morning said one of the victims wanted him to go to court.....

Even though I see him as a pompous old fool as well, I can't see why there should be any decision re prosecution other than the lawful one. I don't think he will, nor do I think he should.... he made a mistake, possibly due to age, (victim said it was a cloudy day!) but thankfully no-one seriously hurt.

Jim

Seriously, made a 'mistake' ? That's one hell of a 'mistake', you're starting to sound like a politician.

The main problem here I feel is that Philip will not pay for his 'mistake', in any way, and will feel free to make even more 'mistakes', maybe next time the victims won't be so lucky. I understand that he could be required to take another driving test, but then it would take a very brave examiner to fail him.

Jackie