Jump to content

Prince Philip warned by police over seat belt, two days after crash


webfact

Recommended Posts

Britain's Prince Philip warned by police over seat belt, two days after crash

 

2019-01-20T081802Z_1_LYNXNPEF0J0AQ_RTROPTP_4_BRITAIN-ROYALS-DUKE.JPG

Debris is seen at the scene where Britain's Prince Philip was involved in a traffic accident, near the Sandringham estate in eastern England, Britain, January 18, 2019. REUTERS/Chris Radburn

 

LONDON (Reuters) - Queen Elizabeth's 97-year-old husband Prince Philip received a warning from police after he was photographed apparently driving without a seat belt, just two days after he was involved in a crash while at the wheel.

 

Newspapers showed pictures of Philip driving a replacement Land Rover on Saturday at the royals' Sandringham residence in Norfolk. He did not appear to be using a seat belt while travelling on a public road.

 

"We are aware of the photographs," a police spokesman said. "Suitable words of advice have been given to the driver and this is in line with our standard response when being made aware of our receiving such images showing this type of offence."

 

On Thursday, Philip escaped without injury when his car flipped over following a crash with another vehicle close to Sandringham.

 

Philip was unhurt, although shaken in the crash. The other driver, a 28-year-old woman, suffered cuts to her knee and a 45-year-old woman passenger in the car, which also had a nine-month-old baby on board, sustained a broken wrist. They were taken to hospital but later released.

 

A spokeswoman for Philip, asked about Saturday's incident, said: "It's a matter for Norfolk police."

 

Philip has developed a reputation for brusque comments and often headline-grabbing verbal gaffes.

 

(Writing by William Schomberg; Editing by Andrew Heavens)

 

reuters_logo.jpg

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-01-21
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, webfact said:

"We are aware of the photographs," a police spokesman said. "Suitable words of advice have been given to the driver and this is in line with our standard response when being made aware of our receiving such images showing this type of offence."

I would have thought that a photograph would be accepted as evidence for prosecution?

When I've seen TV documentaries about the UK police, when stopping drivers with no seat belt they always seem to report them for prosecution.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He has always been an arrogant pr*ck and looks down on others.  he should be prosecuted as an example to the general public. Police are too scared of him ! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jaiyen said:

He has always been an arrogant pr*ck and looks down on others.  he should be prosecuted as an example to the general public. Police are too scared of him ! 

Prosecuted for what? The police would have to find evidence of dangerous driving (driving at high speed) - in the prince's case, this is not possible as he was entering onto the road. Driving at undue care - again hard to prove. The other car could have been driving too fast. Given that the local authorities had the area under review with the view to reducing the speed limit, any defence lawyer for the other car could easily claim that this was the main contributing cause of the accident.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, jaiyen said:

He has always been an arrogant pr*ck and looks down on others.  he should be prosecuted as an example to the general public. Police are too scared of him ! 

You must know him well to make that comment...fancy someone in the inner circle of the Royal Family being a TVF member....🤔

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have thought the police had more pressing matters. They are only responding to red top reading morons 

 

The man is 97 years old and is The Queen's consort. Who gives a damn whether he wears a belt or not. Is he likely to be a burden on the NHS? Riding around in an old Freelander! He should have a Aston Martin for the highway and a Defender for the estate! It's good to be the king!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I assumed that he would always have a protection detail with him, so why did they let him drive with no seat belt, and besides that, why is a 97 year old man with a history of health problems allowed to drive on a public road anyway? IMO it's insanity, and just asking for a problem like that. 

Should ANY 97 year old be allowed to drive on a public road?

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bluesofa said:

I would have thought that a photograph would be accepted as evidence for prosecution?

When I've seen TV documentaries about the UK police, when stopping drivers with no seat belt they always seem to report them for prosecution.

If the police were to prosecute ever driver that was reported to them they would be overwhelmed, also they would need to spend a lot of time checking through the evidence to see if it would stand up in court first, and then their would be a lot of tit for tat reporting, also they would need to understand the reason for the why it was reported, this could turn into the female version of "revenge porn", (following the ex around with a dash cam and report them for every silly mistake).

 

as the police said "....and this is in line with our standard response when being made aware of our receiving such images showing this type of offence."

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

He can drive on the estate without seat belts 

Mrs Queen could get his licence revoked

Perhaps a driving test for him to remain using public(Queens Highways )roads

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I assumed that he would always have a protection detail with him, so why did they let him drive with no seat belt, and besides that, why is a 97 year old man with a history of health problems allowed to drive on a public road anyway? IMO it's insanity, and just asking for a problem like that. 

Should ANY 97 year old be allowed to drive on a public road?

Does he have a record of dangerous driving? I would have thought there would be more 18 year olds that are a menace on the roads.

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, giddyup said:

Does he have a record of dangerous driving? I would have thought there would be more 18 year olds that are a menace on the roads.

He has a history of health problems. He's far more likely to have a heart attack while driving and kill some other people, than some 18 year old hoon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

He has a history of health problems. He's far more likely to have a heart attack while driving and kill some other people, than some 18 year old hoon.

Have a look at the statistics instead of talking out your toot.

The study finds that older drivers, who represent 15 percent of all licensed drivers, cause 7 percent of all two-car accidents (both fatal and nonfatal). Younger drivers, on the other hand, who represent 13 percent of all licensed drivers, cause 43 percent of all two-car accidents.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a miracle he walked away from an overturned vehicle with no serious injuries, it would be a bigger miracle had he not been wearing a seat belt at the time, not sure if it was the landrover or the Kia that I saw photo of where the airbag had fired, but wonder if it was the landrover they may be able to confirm if the seatbelt was deployed, and his excuses could his ribs were sore due the seatbelt in the accident.

 

I would say he was out on Saturday and was seen because he wanted to been seen, it was a two fingered salute to those who say he should not be driving at his age, unfortunately the events of the last few days has highlighted his vulnerability to a simple terrorist attack and as noted he had no close protection officer with him on either occasion will no doubt trigger a security review.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone is worried about Prince Philip I suggests he takes a proper Range Rover ( not the Sport which is slower and the rear door is unsuitable for lunching with the hunt). The V8 diesel would be ideal as it weighs over 2 tonnes without armour. The roads should be cleared and he should be accompanied by a convoy of security people, valets, a game keeper, a chef, a somalier, an ambulance together with outriders when he visits his floosie just like in Thailand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Grouse said:

If anyone is worried about Prince Philip I suggests he takes a proper Range Rover ( not the Sport which is slower and the rear door is unsuitable for lunching with the hunt). The V8 diesel would be ideal as it weighs over 2 tonnes without armour. The roads should be cleared and he should be accompanied by a convoy of security people, valets, a game keeper, a chef, a somalier, an ambulance together with outriders when he visits his floosie just like in Thailand.

 

 

You wont roll one these in a Kiora or whatever it was. The Queen is driving this one!

 

 

IMG_3255.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

 

You wont roll one these in a Kiora or whatever it was. The Queen is driving this one!

 

 

IMG_3255.JPG

I was wrong; it's 2.5 tonnes

 

The 4.4L V8 diesel produce 720Nm - now you're torqueing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The Rule of Law is applied to everyone in the UK.

 

Drivers of expensive cars and the ermine clad not exempt.

 

Those who like to say that the privilege afforded to such people in Thailand is "no different in the West" please take note.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Proboscis said:

Prosecuted for what? The police would have to find evidence of dangerous driving (driving at high speed) - in the prince's case, this is not possible as he was entering onto the road. Driving at undue care - again hard to prove. The other car could have been driving too fast. Given that the local authorities had the area under review with the view to reducing the speed limit, any defence lawyer for the other car could easily claim that this was the main contributing cause of the accident.

 

He wants to return as a virus to wipe out the world population, he should be hung for his crimes, including this one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Enoon said:

Drivers of expensive cars and the ermine clad not exempt.

 

There are police officers whose job it is to decide if cases are worth the effort and cost of pursuing.

Oh never been a Mason then......?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

 

 

You wont roll one these in a Kiora or whatever it was. The Queen is driving this one!

 

 

IMG_3255.JPG

She's quite an adept driver.

queen elizabeth territorial service

 

Just ask the late King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia:

"British diplomat Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles recounted for The Sunday Times that during an audience with Her Majesty, she told Coles that she was talking to Abdullah the whole time, even as he pleaded for her to pay attention to the road. "

https://www.businessinsider.com/queen-england-terrified-saudi-king-driving-2017-2

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Proboscis said:

Prosecuted for what? The police would have to find evidence of dangerous driving (driving at high speed) - in the prince's case, this is not possible as he was entering onto the road. Driving at undue care - again hard to prove. The other car could have been driving too fast. Given that the local authorities had the area under review with the view to reducing the speed limit, any defence lawyer for the other car could easily claim that this was the main contributing cause of the accident.

 

Depends what he said in his statement. Early reports say he blamed dazzling winter sun. But the passenger in the other car said it was overcast with no sun.

 

Had no one been injured it would purely be a matter for the insurance companies. Now the police are investigating, the should, and must be seen to act in accordance with the law. 

 

Careless driving rather than dangerous perhaps?

 

Otherwise it will again be apparent the law doesn't apply to all equally.

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, bluesofa said:

I would have thought that a photograph would be accepted as evidence for prosecution?

You think wrongly.

 

To be used as evidence the court must be satisfied that the image has not been manipulated in any way except for sharpening the image for identification purposes. Impossible to be sure of this with a photo taken by a member of the public and then sold to a national newspaper.

 

13 hours ago, bluesofa said:

When I've seen TV documentaries about the UK police, when stopping drivers with no seat belt they always seem to report them for prosecution.

Two points.

 

1) It is the officer(s) who have witnessed the offence and so the police are not relying on a third party`s photograph which may or may not have been altered, and may even have been taken on a private road where seatbelts are not required.

 

2) Seat belt offences are dealt with by a fixed penalty notice of 100 pounds. It would only go to court if

  • the person concerned did not pay the penalty notice within the required time, or
  • they disputed that the offence had occurred at all.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...