Lorry driver may be charged

Clarke could be prosecuted on behalf of Welsh-based DVLA

THE driver of the bin lorry that crashed in Glasgow killing six people will not be prosecuted in Scotland but could still face charges south of the Border, a fatal accident inquiry (FAI) has heard.

Solicitor General Lesley Thomson, QC, had been asked to clarify whether Harry Clarke could be prosecuted by the Crown Office in light of evidence that has emerged during the inquiry at Glasgow Sheriff Court.

She said that the scope of the Crown’s decision not to prosecute Mr Clarke, 58, extends beyond the December 22 crash to include information he provided to doctors, the DVLA and Glasgow City Council regarding a blackout in 2010.

But the FAI later heard a prosecution of Mr Clarke by the Crown Prosecution Service south of the Border on behalf of the DVLA for failing to disclose his medical history is “under consideration”.

Dorothy Bain, QC, representing the family of crash victim Jacqueline Morton, said a prosecution could be possible as the DVLA is based in Swansea.

THE inquiry into the Glasgow bin lorry crash has heard the driver could still face charges elsewhere in the UK, as Scottish prosecutors confirmed he will not face proceedings here.

It has been claimed Harry Clarke could be the first person in the UK to be prosecuted for offences such as failing to disclose a medical condition or making a false declaration to the DVLA if the proceedings go ahead.

It is understood that while the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) could prosecute on behalf of the DVLA, time constraints on certain charges could throw up potential problems in bringing them to court.

The fatal accident inquiry at Glasgow Sheriff Court heard evidence from a senior medical adviser for the DVLA, Dr Gareth Parry, who said prosecuting Mr Clarke is “under consideration” by the Swansea-based driving body.

The driver could face a fine of up to £1,000 or a maximum of two years in prison.

Dorothy Bain QC, who represents the family of victim Jacqueline Morton, put it to Dr Parry that “there are criminal sanctions already in place if somebody failed to disclose a medical condition or... makes a false declaration”. Dr Parry said: “Yes.” Asked if he was aware of any other individual being prosecuted for such offences, Dr Parry said: “To the best of my knowledge, I’m not aware of any prosecutions.”

Ms Bain suggested that a “good way to bring home to people the need to make a truthful declaration on a D4 form (a medical form for HGV drivers) would be to prosecute robustly and rigorously those who make a false declaration?”. Dr Parry said: “I would agree there’s an argument for that.”

The inquiry heard from Solicitor General Lesley Thomson who confirmed Mr Clarke will not face any prosecution from the Crown Office, despite claims he lied to the DVLA, doctors and his employers.

In February, prosecutors revealed the driver would not be prosecuted for his involvement in the disaster. However Sheriff John Beckett QC, who is hearing the inquiry, asked officials to confirm if he was to be prosecuted for fraud.

Ms Thomson said she had “looked back” at the statement issued this year, which said there was no evidence to suggest the driver’s conduct at the time amounted to a breach of criminal law.

She added: “I consider that the scope of the decision in February extended to all aspects of the manner of Mr Clarke’s driving on December 22, as well as the information previously provided to doctors, the DVLA and Glasgow City Council.”

A representative for one of the families said they were “not surprised and remain disappointed” at the decision.

Sheriff Beckett also asked if the families plan to raise a private prosecution and requested that he is notified if the CPS or DVLA intend to press ahead with charges.

If the answer is yes to either of these questions, Mr Clarke will be given a warning ahead of giving evidence that he does not have to say anything that might incriminate him.

The inquiry continues.

SHOULD motorists with a medical history of blackouts be allowed to get back behind the wheel? Maurice Grimes, a Chicago lawyer whose 27-year-old daughter, Vanessa, was killed in a head-on collision by an unconscious driver, does not think so. He has been campaigning to change Illinois state law ever since to ban motorists with a history of blackouts from returning to the road, so far without success.

The man who killed Vanessa, 26-year-old Spyridon Botsis, was found guilty of reckless homicide and aggravated battery and sentenced in 2007 to three years in prison.

After a minor crash less than a year earlier, Botsis had been diagnosed with neurocardiogenic syncope, the medical condition that caused bin lorry driver Harry Clarke’s lethal blackout in December last year. Doctors had told Botsis not to drive, stressing during the trial that he was considered “high-risk” as episodes came on without warning.

Mr Grimes wants doctors to be legally bound to report all patients who suffer blackouts to state officials, who could then revoke their licence, but he has faced staunch opposition from the American Medical Association, which argues this would discourage patients from being honest with doctors.

Mr Grimes dismissed their logic – that if doctors reported patients with blackout syndromes, patients wouldn’t seek treatment and there would be more deaths – as six states already had this law and there was no evidence of more blackout-related crashes.

The issue of blackouts and driving has come to the fore with the Glasgow bin lorry crash. The fear of being stripped of a licence and, potentially, losing a livelihood, may be a significant hindrance to being candid. But even where drivers have been completely honest with their GP and the DVLA after a blackout, in most cases the loss of a driver’s licence is temporary. In Mr Clarke’s case, information uncovered due to the FAI has seen his ordinary licence revoked for one year and his HGV licence for 10 years.

So, is someone with a medical history of unpredictable and untreatable blackouts ever fit to drive, particularly commercial or passenger vehicles? Ultimately that is a decision for the DVLA, but at the very least it seems worth reviewing. A case in Northern Ireland in 2013 saw 47-year- old motorist Mary McLaughlin jailed for 10-and-a-half months and handed a 10-year driving ban after she continued to drive despite knowing she suffered from “no warning” blackouts. She was convicted of causing death by dangerous driving after passing out and killing a young mother of two.

McLaughlin claimed she had learned to anticipate an attack and would not have driven if she felt unsafe but the court was shown applications for disability allowance where she said the episodes occurred “without warning”.

The judge said it was “quite astounding” that no doctor had told her not to drive, yet she had been “honest and candid” with both doctors and the licensing authority. Twice her GP filled in application forms disclosing McLaughlin’s history of “sudden bouts of fainting, giddiness and blackouts” and twice her licence was reinstated. If the rules were tougher, a young mother might still be alive.

‘‘ The fear of being stripped of a licence and, potentially, losing a livelihood, may be a hindrance to being candid