Full de­tails of wife’s death af­ter car ran over her may never be known

Buckinghamshire Advertiser - - NEWS - by Tom Herbert tom.herbert@trin­i­tymir­ror.com Twit­ter: TRHer­bert

THE cir­cum­stances sur­round­ing the death of a 94-year-old woman who died when she was hit by a re­vers­ing car her hus­band was driv­ing will re­main a mys­tery, ac­cord­ing to the coro­ner.

But the death of Cather­ine King, which hap­pened in Ger­rards Cross on July 10, has been ruled an ac­ci­dent by Bucks Coro­ner Richard Hulett at an in­quest on Wed­nes­day last week.

Bucks Coroners Court heard Mrs King died when her hus­band, Ge­orge King, 90, a re­tired man­ag­ing di­rec­tor, was re­vers­ing a grey Honda Jazz out of a subter­ranean garage into an en­closed car park at their home on South Park Cres­cent when at some point he hit his wife.

Po­lice were called at 11.15am. When col­li­sion in­ves­ti­ga­tor PC Adrian White ar­rived he found Mrs King ‘laid on her back, and her feet were no more than two me­tres from the off side of the Honda’, which had hit shrubs and trees.

He said: “The rear [of the car] had sus­tained ex­ten­sive dam­age and the wind­screen had smashed.”

PC White said that there were dirt marks on Mrs King’s abodomen, she had some ‘ob­vi­ous in­juries’ and her walk­ing stick was found nearby, but be­cause there were no in­de­pen­dent wit­nesses he said there is ‘a sig­nif­i­cant lack of ev­i­dence, there is not a lot to go on’.

He added :“Un­for­tu­nately I wasn’t able to find any­thing in re­la­tion to the ve­hi­cle to sup­port that it did col­lide with a pedes­trian.”

PC White said: “It’s clear from hav­ing as­sessed Mrs King she was driven over by the ve­hi­cle and died as a re­sult, how­ever there’s no phys­i­cal ev­i­dence or wit­nesses ev­i­dence to have any firm con­clu­sions.”

He added: “Mr King was driv­ing. At some point his wife came to be un­der the ve­hi­cle but what I can’t say ef­fec­tively is what led to that. I’m very con­fi­dent that at some point Mr King and the ve­hi­cle have ex­pe­ri­enced un­ex­pected ac­cel­er­a­tion.”

Con­sul­tant pathol­o­gist Caro­line Graham said there were mul­ti­ple in­juries but the most se­ri­ous were in the chest.

How­ever she said the au­topsy re­vealed the coro­nary ar­ter­ies were not blocked suf­fi­ciently and there was no clot in the lungs which would sug­gest Mrs King had fallen, and while there were mul­ti­ple grazes and cuts to Mrs King’s body, there was noth­ing that would point to­wards a sug­ges­tion of a point of im­pact.

Mr Hulett said: “There’s noth­ing that’s con­clu­sive in any of this. There is no in­de­pen­dent per­son to say what hap­pened and Mr King is not well placed to tell us what hap­pened.”

A con­clu­sion of ac­ci­den­tal death was recorded.

Mr Hulett said it was ‘quite im­pos­si­ble’ to de­ter­mine whether Mrs King had fallen be­fore she was hit as there is ‘no ev­i­dence to sup­port it one way or another’.

He said: “I would call this an ac­ci­dent. I can’t see any other way to cat­e­gorise it.

And added: “I’m afraid it’s a tragic out­come but there’s noth­ing more I can use­fully say.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.