The Duke of Edinburgh In Car Accident at Sandringham: January 17, 2019


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Lilyflo said:
I made a personal injury claim after my accident too. It's what lots of people do to recompense them for loss of earnings, extra expenses incurred eg taxis if you can't drive etc.

@Somebody
The man who caused my crash was a senior citizen and I'd have made my claim whoever it was. I think it was his insurance company who paid out and not him personally.
Click to expand...

That makes sense. Are those things handled by the insurance companies or did you need to go to court?

I guess 'sue' could be the media's way of dramatizing the filing of a claim. It probably also works differently from country to country.
 
Here you typically don't sue until after you have had offers and negotiations with the insurance company can't be settled. Then if you feel like you aren't being compensated fairly you go to court. But the second day after an accident...not sure how you would have already decided to sue the other party.


LaRae
 
Here’s a random question: say you have a verrrry elderly parent or spouse who is still driving, although he/she has complete access to a personal driver at all times.

He/she continues to drive, and is involved in a serious but not deadly accident- doesn’t see the other car and drives in front of it.

Would you want/allow that person to continue to drive? And if you would, why?
 
Somebody said:
That makes sense. Are those things handled by the insurance companies or did you need to go to court?

I guess 'sue' could be the media's way of dramatizing the filing of a claim. It probably also works differently from country to country.
Click to expand...

I didn't go to court. My insurance company handled everything & I also had legal cover within that. I did have to provide medical & financial evidence & also go to an assessment with an orthopedic consultant, who wrote a report for the other insurance company.

I had a front passenger who was more injured than I was & I think she had to claim off my insurance, who claimed it back from the other side but I might have got that wrong. It's a long time ago so there might be details I've forgotten but I do remember the whole process took a long time.
 
Regarding the new pictures published by 'the Fail', showing the sun dazzled conditions at the time and location of the accident. As I understand it they will not exonerate HRH, since the law is explicit - A driver 'pulling out' into a main road MUST be certain his/her way is clear.. and it is his/her responsibility to be so...[regardless of the conditions].
 
Last edited:
wyevale said:
Regarding the new pictures published by 'the Fail', showing the sun dazzled conditions at the time and location of the accident. As I understand it they will not exonerate HRH, since the law is explicit - A driver 'pulling out' into a main road MUST be certain his/her way is clear.. and it is his/her responsibility to be so...[regardless of the conditions.
Click to expand...

It's the same here...I had someone pull out in front of me from a side road (they had a stop sign) and impact the side of my car...the police on the scene even told the girls mom (the driver was in her early 20's and her mom came to the scene from her home) it didn't matter if I was driving with my eyes closed...I had the right of way and her daughter had the stop sign.



LaRae
 
Somebody said:
It is interesting how she states that the duke should be treated as anybody else but that she clearly is NOT treating him like anybody else... And, if true, she is indeed after money. Would she have done exactly the same if it was a different senior citizen? And, what if the investigation shows that it was her friend who was in the wrong?
Click to expand...

Thank you. This is exactly what I’ve been saying.

It has now been revealed that the RF have made several attempts to contact the people in the car, and they have been ignored. People are so so very quick at jumping to hideous conclusions and assuming the worst in someone, when actually what they’ve done is exactly what anyone should have done.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1087068437770354690

After claims royal family haven’t been in touch with women involved in Thursday’s crash I understand senior members of the household have been trying to make contact since yesterday. Until this morning they’d been unsuccessful but may now have made contact with one of them 1/2
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1087068440278560770

Police liaison officers had passed on a message of support before asking if it was ok for the royals to make direct contact #PrincePhilip 2/2
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Looks like that passenger has opened up a big mess on her now. Watch the tabloids start digging for dirt on her.
 
All of this could’ve been avoided. Somebody have to start using their royal brains.
 
They didn't answer the phone, because the press was calling them all the time, and they didn't want to speak to the press?
(Until Sunday Mirror got there, that is. Perhaps in person - with a contract...)
And as such didn't initially answer the call from the Palace? Until they got around to check the recorder? Or the text messages?

I assume a number from the palace is not necessarily registered?

So our passenger, ms. Fairweather, may have spoken the truth at the time.
She had got no call from the palace, yet.
 
ladongas said:
I w
And once a person that age has had a driving accident, it’s almost inevitable that another will follow. A 97 year old’s driving skills will not improve. If the Duke should, heaven forbid, have another accident, will his defenders feel the same way?*

Thly is.
Click to expand...

Sicne we don't know for sure what caused the accident, I don't see how you can say thqat it is almost inevitable that Phil will have another one.
 
ladongas said:
Here’s a random question: say you have a verrrry elderly parent or spouse who is still driving, although he/she has complete access to a personal driver at all times.

He/she continues to drive, and is involved in a serious but not deadly accident- doesn’t see the other car and drives in front of it.

Would you want/allow that person to continue to drive? And if you would, why?
Click to expand...

It would depend on a number of things - firstly, what caused the accident and whether age had anything to do with it - which nobody knows yet because the Police have not completed their investigation. Secondly, whether my relative genuinely felt safe getting back behind the wheel of a car. Only the DofE can answer that and fear of being in a car after an accident can affect anyone regardless of age. Thirdly whether my relative relied on having a car to get out of the house and stay active - obviously not something impacting the DofE.
 
I can't believe how far this story is going! Now that I'm caught up a bit, I have a lot of thoughts.

Somebody said:
Still, it's interesting that she talks and the actual driver does not. So, that clearly was a possibility... And she is not just sharing what happened but also tries to gain sympathy by explaining how hard her life is. Of course, an accident is quite a shock and even more confusing when the other party happens to be a famous person but it would have been much better had she taken the advice given and processed all that happened with her friends and family instead of with the media.
Click to expand...

I do feel sorry for Ms. Fairweather. It seems she has had a rough time of it before the crash happened. However, the impression I got from her interview was that:

1) her lawyer is probably mad at her for talking, especially if her statements about how fast the driver was going and the weather conditions can be contradicted by evidence
2) her lawyer told her that she doesn't have a strong enough case, which is why she accepted payment for the interview.


ladongas said:
“...that luckily turned out quite well for everyone involved...” Not really. One totaled car, and one severely damaged...one broken wrist which may prevent the passenger from working...one traumatized driver and baby.

Incidentally, it’s hard to believe the Duke wasn’t injured if he was not wearing his seat belt- he could have been thrown from the car. (And that is how you can injure others if not wearing a seat belt. You can land on someone else’s car, or you can land in the roadway, leading to another crash when someone swerves in order to miss hitting you.)
Click to expand...

At one point, I received training as a child passenger safety technician. Even though we talked about safety for a child in a car seat, we were also instructed to tell caregivers that their actions had an influence and that they needed to wear a seat belt at all times. We also learned about how crash forces impact the body and watched many, many crash test videos to see crashes in slow motion. After some of the things I've seen, I will never wear just a lap belt again. :eek:

As a safety tech, I am grateful the child involved was in a car seat. Every time I hear about a child dying in a crash, there's usually a line about how the car seat was not used correctly or not used at all. At 9 months, he was probably in a rear-facing seat, which is safest. One safety expert I worked with called this the "orphan" seat because rear-facing infants often survive crashes that kill their parents in the front seat.

There is a certain irony to this discussion about the Queen and Prince Philip wearing or not wearing seat belts. If Diana had been wearing a seat belt that night in Paris, she probably would still be alive today.

Unfortunately, the palace has not handled the situation very well. Most people could have overlooked the "new" car being delivered. It was the sight of Philip driving that really drove the discussion. And of the Queen's children, the only one who could persuade Prince Philip to give up driving is Princess Anne. Instead, her public comments the day after the accident seemed very tone-deaf and that did not help at all.
 
Thena said:
. And of the Queen's children, the only one who could persuade Prince Philip to give up driving is Princess Anne. .
Click to expand...


Why ? Is she closer to Philip than her brothers ?
 
It's always been said Anne and the DoE are particularly close...more so than her brothers.


LaRae
 
Mbruno said:
Why ? Is she closer to Philip than her brothers ?
Click to expand...

It's more that Anne is tough enough to stand up to Philip. Admittedly, I'm reading the Sally Bedell Smith biography on Prince Charles and there are so many references to how Charles was intimidated by Philip but Anne was strong enough to stand up to him. I really don't know much about Andrew's relationship with Philip, but he appears to be closer to his mother than his father. And I remember hearing somewhere that Edward relied heavily on Anne when he told Philip his reasons for leaving the Royal Marines.
 
Dman said:
She do have a passport. She just don’t have to use it.

The royals aren’t used to wearing seatbelts in the big official cars. The younger royals wear their seatbelts when driving privately. I’m so sure about The Queen and Prince Philip. I’ve seen The Queen in a seatbelt once in a while, when driving privately.

The thing is this whole things is being handled badly. That massive accident should’ve been a wake up call for Prince Philip and Palace officials. A personal meeting with the the two ladies involved in the crash would be great.

If I remember correctly - didn’t Princess Anne and The Queen meet with the person that help save Princess Anne’s life sure that near-kidnapping event back in the day? I remember photos was taken of the meeting as well. That is something that needs to happen here. Unless the investigation is now preventing all of that.
Click to expand...


The Queen does NOT have a passport. As UK passports are issued in her name she doesn't need one. The number 1 passport holder in the UK is Prince Philip - that is his passport number and is his by virtue of the fact he is the consort of the monarch.

Meeting with people who saved your daughter from a kidnapping attempt is different to meeting with someone who was also involved in an accident until such time as fault is determined. To do so before then would be to admit guilt and that will affect insurance payouts etc.

When the investigation is complete and fault is attributed - or no fault to either side which is also possible - there can be a meeting.

The fact that a car like a KIA was able to overturn a reinforced car like Philip was driving suggests that there may have been speed involved as well as just the blinding light.

I think everyone should wait until the investigation is completed and the legal processes are also finished before deciding blame.

Mob rule, fortunately, is not the norm in the UK and even what may appear obvious based on the media coverage can turn out differently once the full facts are presented in a court of law e.g. the Ben Stokes affair. The footage sold to the media showed a short clip of video which was quite damning but when the jury saw all the available footage, which was a lot more than the media had shown, and heard all the evidence, they came up with a 'not guilty' verdict although the public had decided he was guilty on the short clip available. That is trial by media - not trial by jury.

The UK believes in a simply legal principle - Innocent until PROVEN guilty.

Philip hasn't been found guilty of anything - and nor has the other driver. Maybe neither will be or maybe one will be and until then all that is happening is the media trying to determine the outcome and create a mob mentality and we know that they are excellent at that. Fortunately they often get their hands slapped with that approach e.g. the payout the BBC had to make to Sir Cliff Richard over their allegations which were determined to be false.
 
Last edited:
The Mirror are reporting that one of the Queen's Ladies in Waiting has left a kind message on the woman's answerphone on behalf of the Queen.

The Mail are reporting that the woman was advised by the police more than 10 times not to talk to the media, which it sounds like the woman took as trying to shut her up rather than as supportive.

The circus will continue with this woman at the centre of it while she's feeding the press with info but as someone said earlier, they're as likely to dig into her personal life for dirt as well. She's behaving stupidly IMO but I don't know how much of that is her own fault or whether it's due to being shaken up by the crash & her injury. I still think she's vulnerable to exploitation by the press and a home visit by a police liaison officer on Friday morning with a support package might have avoided all this.
 
VictoriaB said:
It would depend on a number of things - firstly, what caused the accident and whether age had anything to do with it - which nobody knows yet because the Police have not completed their investigation.
Click to expand...

I think this is key. Phillip may not be at fault for the accident. Or he may be a good driver who made a mistake, like thousands of good drivers in their 20s, 30s, 40s, etc do every day.

I can’t remember where I read this but I’m pretty sure it’s young drivers who are by far the most dangerous on the road. I don’t think the Duke in his 90s is likely as good a driver as he was in his younger years, but he still may be a much better driver than the average 21 year old.
 
Iluvbertie said:
The Queen does NOT have a passport. As UK passports are issued in her name she doesn't need one. The number 1 passport holder in the UK is Prince Philip - that is his passport number and is his by virtue of the fact he is the consort of the monarch.

Meeting with people who saved your daughter from a kidnapping attempt is different to meeting with someone who was also involved in an accident until such time as fault is determined. To do so before then would be to admit guilt and that will affect insurance payouts etc.

When the investigation is complete and fault is attributed - or no fault to either side which is also possible - there can be a meeting.

The fact that a car like a KIA was able to overturn a reinforced car like Philip was driving suggests that there may have been speed involved as well as just the blinding light.

I think everyone should wait until the investigation is completed and the legal processes are also finished before deciding blame.

Mob rule, fortunately, is not the norm in the UK and even what may appear obvious based on the media coverage can turn out differently once the full facts are presented in a court of law e.g. the Ben Stokes affair. The footage sold to the media showed a short clip of video which was quite damning but when the jury saw all the available footage, which was a lot more than the media had shown, and heard all the evidence, they came up with a 'not guilty' verdict although the public had decided he was guilty on the short clip available. That is trial by media - not trial by jury.

The UK believes in a simply legal principle - Innocent until PROVEN guilty.

Philip hasn't been found guilty of anything - and nor has the other driver. Maybe neither will be or maybe one will be and until then all that is happening is the media trying to determine the outcome and create a mob mentality and we know that they are excellent at that. Fortunately they often get their hands slapped with that approach e.g. the payout the BBC had to make to Sir Cliff Richard over their allegations which were determined to be false.
Click to expand...

I’ve heard it millions of times that she do have a passport on hand, but, she just don’t have to use it.

Yes, we just have to wait until the investigation is complete. I just think things could’ve handled better. The Queen and Prince Philip being seen not wearing their seatbelts after that horrible crash just sent the wrong signal, IMO. Thank goodness there were no fatalities, but - Philip, the two ladies and baby could’ve been dead. So being seen back at the wheel within 48hrs with no seatbelt just took the cake.
 
Last edited:
How many in this thread have ever had to take the keys away from a parent (or other family member)?
 
Dman said:
I’ve heard it millions of times that she do have a passport on hand, but, she just don’t have to use it.

Yes, we just have to wait until the investigation is complete. I just think things could’ve handled better. The Queen and Prince Philip being seen not wearing their seatbelts after that horrible crash just sent the wrong signal, IMO. Thank goodness there were no fatalities, but - Philip, the two ladies and baby could’ve been dead. So being seen back at the wheel within 48hrs with no seatbelt just took the cake.
Click to expand...

I have never heard that she has a passport - until you stated she did.

Every comment I have ever seen - since the 1950s - is that she doesn't have a passport and doesn't need one - just as she doesn't have a drivers' licence and again doesn't need one. Her car/s also aren't required to be registered.

This is from the British Monarchy's own website: https://www.royal.uk/passports The Queen does not require a British passport.

If she has one then the BRF's own website has the incorrect information.

From The Telegraph - 24 Things You Don't Know About Your Passport https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/galleries/fascinating-facts-about-passports/the-queen-passport/ No 21 The Queen doesn't have a passport.

From The Independent: 10 Facts You Never Knew About The Queen https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...s-no-passport-champagne-bedtime-a8440166.html No. 4 - She doesn't have a passport.

From The Express: Queen Elizabeth II: The monarch has to do this one thing when she goes to the airport https://www.express.co.uk/travel/ar...izabeth-ii-news-airport-passport-royal-travel However, the Queen is, in fact, the only person in the whole of the UK who doesn’t need a passport to travel.
 
Dman said:
The Queen and Prince Philip being seen not wearing their seatbelts after that horrible crash just sent the wrong signal, IMO.
Click to expand...

At the risk of opening a discussion on an only remotely connected matter, the same point was made after Diana's death but, unfortunately, we are now 21 years on and the Queen and Duke still do not appear to wear seat belts. And if they do wear lap belts that just cannot be seen, it would be easy for the Palace to have put out a statement within the last couple of days while the latest kerfuffle has been ongoing, setting the record straight.
 
Iluvbertie said:
I have never heard that she has a passport - until you stated she did.

Every comment I have ever seen - since the 1950s - is that she doesn't have a passport and doesn't need one - just as she doesn't have a drivers' licence and again doesn't need one. Her car/s also aren't required to be registered.

This is from the British Monarchy's own website: https://www.royal.uk/passports The Queen does not require a British passport.

If she has one then the BRF's own website has the incorrect information.

From The Telegraph - 24 Things You Don't Know About Your Passport https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/galleries/fascinating-facts-about-passports/the-queen-passport/ No 21 The Queen doesn't have a passport.

From The Independent: 10 Facts You Never Knew About The Queen https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...s-no-passport-champagne-bedtime-a8440166.html No. 4 - She doesn't have a passport.

From The Express: Queen Elizabeth II: The monarch has to do this one thing when she goes to the airport https://www.express.co.uk/travel/ar...izabeth-ii-news-airport-passport-royal-travel However, the Queen is, in fact, the only person in the whole of the UK who doesn’t need a passport to travel.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the miss understanding: The Queen don’t need a passport, but, she still have have to give information over to the immigration officials - her full name, age, address, nationality, gender and place of birth.

https://metro.co.uk/2018/08/06/does-the-queen-have-a-passport-7805193/
 
ladongas said:
Here’s a random question: say you have a verrrry elderly parent or spouse who is still driving, although he/she has complete access to a personal driver at all times.

He/she continues to drive, and is involved in a serious but not deadly accident- doesn’t see the other car and drives in front of it.

Would you want/allow that person to continue to drive? And if you would, why?
Click to expand...

Having the almost identical accident happy to my other half back when he was in his 40s with the morning sun glare hampering at an almost identical intersection, I would say that whether or not I'd take away an elderly person's keys would depend on the circumstances involved around the accident.

Now, if said elderly person was deemed to be negligent (such as fiddling with the radio or applying makeup or talking on a cell phone), the keys would go away with a posse helping me take the keys away with having the license revoked by the law enforcement department/motor vehicle department and/or a backup by a physician. There has to be *reason* besides the person being deemed elderly and unfit to drive.

Its my understanding that the Queen and Philip *only* drive vehicles within their residences and estates. I take this to mean that its primarily private roads they're on. Still, should something happen, as did with Philip, on a public road, its subject to the full extent of the law and the investigation will determine fault and take appropriate measures. Whether or not Philip was wearing a seat belt actually has no bearing on what happened. It didn't come into play of causing an accident.

The glare of the sun is something that really messes me up when I'm driving or a passenger in a car and sometimes isn't helped by sunglasses. Hubby got a pair of those HD sunglasses and they seem to work a lot better.

Question: Do they have no fault auto insurance in the UK?
 
Statement from @NorfolkPolice: We can confirm arrangements were made on Friday (18 January) to take a statement from the passenger [Emma Fairweather] involved in the collision. This will take place tomorrow (22 January)." #dukeofedinburgh

So @NorfolkPolice say they have been trying to reach Emma Fairweather, the passenger in the car, all weekend: “Further contact was attempted on a number of occasions over the weekend but unfortunately these were not successful.” #DukeofEdinburgh

Via Chris Ship Twitter

So the Duke has been declared the guilty party by many in the press without the police having even taken statements :whistling:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Warren
  • Locked
Queen Elizabeth and the Duke of Edinburgh Current Events 17: January-May 2008
5 6 7
Replies
209
Views
32K
Warren
Warren
Josefine
The Snow Princess: Queen Astrid of Belgium, Part 2
2 3 4
Replies
118
Views
47K
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla
J
  • Locked
The Snow Princess: Queen Astrid Of Belgium, Part 1
5 6 7
Replies
198
Views
91K
Marengo
Marengo

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom