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

[M. Payton]

I'm sorry, but I don't really get your point. Where I live these things are still allowed. Are there places where children aren't allowed to ride without a helmet or where pregant women aren't allowed to drink? Especially the last one, are women supposed to have a pregnancy test before getting a drink? Drinking while pregnant might not always be a good idea, but it's still legal.

While it might be *allowed according to the law* is it *smart and intelligent* to continue to drink while pregnant or for a child to ride a bike without a helmet or to drive a car or any other motor vehicle with out a seat belt.....Just because the law allows a person to do some things it does not make that person smart or intelligent especially if a child is born with alcohol in it's blood stream or a child dies while riding a bike without a helmet or there is an accident and someone dies who was not wearing a seat belt.....it is all about choices and thinking of others besides oneself when driving a motor vehicle for that is a machine that weighs a ton or more and can do damage beyond repair all because of a person driving it has no appreciation for the other driver........we should all think only of ME when driving right... Arrogance has no place on the highway......nor egos out of control when other people's lives are at stake.

 

[Osipi]

Royals are meant to be role models, it is part of their job. Not wearing seatbelts, and worse kids not having them on, is irresponsible at best.

This is a strong statement.

Along with intelligence and knowledge, a person also has free will. Choice. Civilized society takes into account the ways and means of protecting *all* of the people and hence, we have laws to abide by. Stop signs, traffic lights and seat belts are a few that protect everyone. When on public roads, disregard these laws and pay the consequences. In one's own private domain, one creates their own rules (no foods with garlic is one the Queen has for food in her "domain"). Its the same in other areas besides the rules of the road. It pertains to smoking in public places. It pertains to aberrant behavior and rules and regulations for getting on an air flight to name a few.

Perhaps Philip's disregard for seat belts has opened discussions and put in forefront of our minds just why they should always be in use in motor vehicles and to pay attention to safety measures in place whether it be a car, a bike, an ATV (don't get me started on irresponsibility with those) or even being a pedestrian.

Royals and pubic figures are always very much highlighted when they happen to make errors of judgment or disregard common sense. We can learn from their mistakes even if they don't.

 

[BorgQueen]

Not sure of the law in UK but here it is the drivers responsibility to ensure they can safely pull out into the intersection. Glaring sun does not absolve a driver of that responsibility. The driver is required by law to take whatever steps to ensure it is SAFE to carry out your manoeuvre, whatever that may be. "The sun was in my eyes, your Honour" won't cut it.


I think the thing that angers me the most about all this is that this family lost someone to a car accident where the only survivor was wearing a seatbelt. Not saying that was the only factor that saved him, but for heavens sake. Seriously, what does it take for some people to learn?


Not only that, but now Phillips actions have become the story that just keeps giving and whatever else the other members of the family are now doing for their patronages/causes etc. is going to be under this shadow or even drowned completely.


He just needs to lift his game and start acting like a responsible grown up.

 

[Terri Terri]

OK...I have a question. If this exact accident had occurred on the Sandringham Estate but had involved estate workers instead...wouldn't the consequences be the same? Wouldn't there be the same police investigation?

 

[Osipi]

OK...I have a question. If this exact accident had occurred on the Sandringham Estate but had involved estate workers instead...wouldn't the consequences be the same? Wouldn't there be the same police investigation?

I don't think it'd be the same as in that scenario, the accident happened on private land and roads. The police may be called to file an accident report for insurance purposes though.

I'm not in the UK but only going by what happens here. The roads in and around my property are all classified as private roads. Speed limits are posted at 25mph but there's really no one that enforces it. I can legally drive to my mailbox without a seatbelt on if I choose to. I don't.

My husband was first EMT responder to an accident here where the kids were picked up from the central school bus area and the driver, wearing flip flops had his flip flop caught in the gas pedal which caused him to accelerate down a steep hill. It caused his granddaughter of 12 years old to fly out of the back area of the pickup and she died in my husband's care. Very traumatic not only for the family but for the rescue team involved.

There's still a memorial at that spot that reminds us here that a little bit of caution taking safety measures can prevent a whole lot of heartache.

 

[Muhler]

OK...I have a question. If this exact accident had occurred on the Sandringham Estate but had involved estate workers instead...wouldn't the consequences be the same? Wouldn't there be the same police investigation?

That would be a work-related accident, right?

Don't know how it is in Britain, but elsewhere if the cause of the accident is poor safety procedures - or even worse, ignoring safety procedures, the consequences can be pretty harsh! As a minimum the workplace will get a hefty fine and be ordered to set up safety procedures in order to prevent an accident like this happening again.
On top of that if it's a case of negligence, the one driving the vehicle (the duke) will face personal charges. It is after all the operator's responsibility to adhere to the safety procedures.
If the safety procedures are ignored or not enforced, the daily leader of the place (whoever that may be) will be charged as personally responsible and get a hefty fine, in serious cases go to prison.
Also, if the safety protocols have been overruled, you can rest assured that the union (or a law firm) will demand (and likely to be awarded) a serious compensation for the one who has been injured.

Again, don't know how it is in Britain, but in other countries it would be much more serious if an employee had been injured as a consequence of the Duke's driving. Assuming of course he is responsible.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

I feel for the Duke. This sort of accidents happens thousand times a day, all over Europe. It could happen to you, it could happen to me. And as in far most cases: only damage to the car and minor injuries. Usually we would not even spend 1 minute to a collison, but now the Duke is in question and that awful media with media-savvy "victims" are milking the old cow completely dry. Pffff.

 

[ladongas]

Why do you say “victims”? The women and the baby ARE victims of a driver who failed to follow the rules of the road, not yielding the right of way and not proceeding safely. It’s quite shocking to be in a major collision like that, and those people deserve our sympathy, empathy, and respect for their suffering.

It’s unfair to absolve the DoE of all fault while blaming and shaming the victims. And even if the driver were at fault (she wasn’t), the passenger certainly wasn’t. It seems some think that she is somehow to blame because she has chosen to speak with the press. She’s 58 years old and may very well lose the job she has recently started. She’s entitled to make a bit of money to tide her over in that event. Too bad if the BRF looks bad in this.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

I say "victims" between marks because in 9.999 of the 10.000 collisions insurance and police will do the work. I do not absolve anyone, but when I hit you (or you hit me) in an unlucky accident for the rest our insurances will do all the work.

This lady running to the media and blaming the Duke or stating that he did not say sorry, pfff. Of course not. Maybe SHE had to say sorry? Maybe he DID say sorry? We do not know. That is why I placed "victims" between marks.

Statistics on reported road casualties in Great Britain for 2017 show, there were:

• 170,993 casualties of all severities in reported road traffic accidents (almost 500 casualties per day!)

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-annual-report-2017

 

[ladongas]

The fact remains that these three people were in a car, driving at highway speeds, and suddenly their car was stopped by a shattering collision with another vehicle. Even if they got a million dollars from insurance (which they won’t), it was a horrifying experience for them. Even a minor fender bender type collision can be traumatic.

They were ordinary people minding their own business when their lives were interrupted by the careless behavior of another. And unlike the other driver, their economic lives will be affected, to a greater or lesser degree.

It doesn’t matter how many other traffic accidents happened that day; this one happened to them.

 

[Pranter]

Back when the queen was young, women drank when pregnant. Should they still be allowed? Yes many children were born to mothers who drank alcohol and were just fine. Does that mean saying drinking while pregnant is a nanny state?

Many of us rode bikes without helmets when we were kids. Most of us survived. Should kids not be required to wear helmets, because Most of them will not die from concussions?

That's the great thing about mankind, we have intelligence, and we learn. We learn how things work, and how to make them safer. We realize that you may drive every day of your life for 20 years and never get in an accident, but the one crash you get in, may be the one you fly through a windshield. You can control your own car, but you cant control everything else on the road. Just because people were ignorant of the dangers back in the day, and didn't see the need to wear seatbelts, doesn't make it intelligent now.

Its one thing when they are on their own estate. If they are on roads where there are no pedestrians, other cars and anything else. Still some risk, but they don't have to worry about anyone else but their own driving skill. A public road is another matter.

Royals are meant to be role models, it is part of their job. Not wearing seatbelts, and worse kids not having them on, is irresponsible at best.

First off it's a false comparison to use children in something that is adult controlled behavior.

An adult choosing to not wear a helmet or seatbelt is not the same thing as a woman drinking while pregnant. Situations aren't even comparable.

A person choosing to not wear a seatbelt has no bearing on your safety.

The Queen has ridden horses for decades without a helmet. The only risk is to herself.

No I don't think we need laws to tells us what to do in these situations. If you want to ride a motorcycle without a helmet or a horse or drive without seatbelt that's no one's business but yours. I don't need you (the state) to save me from myself.


LaRae

 

[M. Payton]

I feel for the Duke. This sort of accidents happens thousand times a day, all over Europe. It could happen to you, it could happen to me. And as in far most cases: only damage to the car and minor injuries. Usually we would not even spend 1 minute to a collison, but now the Duke is in question and that awful media with media-savvy "victims" are milking the old cow completely dry. Pffff.

Well that got me laughing for the day, does anyone really think Ms. Fairweather will take Prince Philip to the bank and put him in the poor house.....??. Someone is way off target on that statement.......

And she is the victim here,not Prince Philip, he was pulling out in front of her, not the other way around here, and she did not run to the media, seems from what I read they went to her.......please get at least some of the facts straight Duc. I get that the impression because Philip is an old man that he can do no wrong....since when does age excuse us of our behavior be it good or bad? And then again to be driving the next day with out a seat belt......good grief does is he looking for another accident? I would like to think that he would be a strong role model for senior to wear seat belts, but then again he is a royal prince and above the law.......if it had been you or me, we would be hung out to dry on the nearest tree...

 

[M. Payton]

First off it's a false comparison to use children in something that is adult controlled behavior.

An adult choosing to not wear a helmet or seatbelt is not the same thing as a woman drinking while pregnant. Situations aren't even comparable.

A person choosing to not wear a seatbelt has no bearing on your safety.

The Queen has ridden horses for decades without a helmet. The only risk is to herself.

No I don't think we need laws to tells us what to do in these situations. If you want to ride a motorcycle without a helmet or a horse or drive without seatbelt that's no one's business but yours. I don't need you (the state) to save me from myself.


LaRae

First this is not about HM and horses here.........and good grief when a person *regardless* of their position in life makes the decision to drive a car that weights tons without a seat belt is taking not just their life in their hands but everyone around them in a vehicle. This is not about ME, this is something a smart intelligent thinking adult should be doing in consideration of others in this world. There are laws that tell us what to do for our safety and the safety of others, we make choices in those laws that we obey or not obey and *we all must suffer the consequences of our choices*, Philip was in the wrong for he pulled out in front of this woman, how hard is that to see. I did the same decades ago, I pulled out in front of someone and paid the piper, it was my fault and I accept that......Philip should and needs to *man up* his actions and accept responsibility for what he did wrong....instead of hiding behind palace walls. Just because he is a royal does not excuse his behavior in my book........NOBODY on earth is above another all because of a damn title, money or position or power that they might have.......nothing gets me seeing red when royals think they are better then I am or anyone else for I am just as equal as a human being as they are........

 

[Pranter]

First this is not about HM and horses here.........and good grief when a person *regardless* of their position in life makes the decision to drive a car that weights tons without a seat belt is taking not just their life in their hands but everyone around them in a vehicle. This is not about ME, this is something a smart intelligent thinking adult should be doing in consideration of others in this world. There are laws that tell us what to do for our safety and the safety of others, we make choices in those laws that we obey or not obey and *we all must suffer the consequences of our choices*, Philip was in the wrong for he pulled out in front of this woman, how hard is that to see. I did the same decades ago, I pulled out in front of someone and paid the piper, it was my fault and I accept that......Philip should and needs to *man up* his actions and accept responsibility for what he did wrong....instead of hiding behind palace walls. Just because he is a royal does not excuse his behavior in my book........NOBODY on earth is above another all because of a damn title, money or position or power that they might have.......nothing gets me seeing red when royals think they are better then I am or anyone else for I am just as equal as a human being as they are........

Your rant really has nothing to do with my reply to another person.


LaRae

 

[M. Payton]

My comment was in reply to a comment as lots of comments here are done the same........sorry if you did not like my comment yet that is fine with me. We all have very different opinions here don't we.....call them rants or comments make no difference to me.....?

 

[Winnie]

I say "victims" between marks because in 9.999 of the 10.000 collisions insurance and police will do the work. I do not absolve anyone, but when I hit you (or you hit me) in an unlucky accident for the rest our insurances will do all the work.

This lady running to the media and blaming the Duke or stating that he did not say sorry, pfff. Of course not. Maybe SHE had to say sorry? Maybe he DID say sorry? We do not know. That is why I placed "victims" between marks.

Statistics on reported road casualties in Great Britain for 2017 show, there were:

• 170,993 casualties of all severities in reported road traffic accidents (almost 500 casualties per day!)

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-annual-report-2017

I do agree with you on your points. If it wasn't DoE in the accident and of course his age, this would not be headline news. When the police report is made public, all will be known. The only thing that turns me off is the news media and other driver, who was definitely hurt with broken bone, is making a much bigger drama out of it. Being paid for her story and probably wanting millions for her pain and suffering knowing that the royal will probably do it. If she was hit by any other old gent, she would be shutting her mouth and the media would look to have another William against Harry saga.

As far as seat belts, I wear one because it is the law. That is the only reason. Helmets are not required here [even on motorcycles] except on very young children and only on public grounds. People wear if they want, which most do.

I look back years ago, no seat belts required, no baby car seats required, no helmets required, etc. and wonder how we old ones have survived. Just maybe it the ridiculous speed that is permitted on narrow two lane roads that should be change back to years ago.

 

[Osipi]

This is a short video that explains an attorney's point of view on what actions Philip could take. The important thing right now is to remember that there is a criminal investigation ongoing. Emma Fairweather is to give her statement to the Norfolk police today.

 

[Lilyflo]

I look back years ago, no seat belts required, no baby car seats required, no helmets required, etc. and wonder how we old ones have survived.

Unfortunately too many of us old ones didn't survive, which is why they brought in the safety laws. Just in my own circle, a schoolfriend's brother was paralysed aged 13 after being thrown out of a vehicle in a crash. A neighbour lost her husband as he drove a motorbike without a helmet. She was left widowed with 3 young children & another on the way. A friend's girlfriend went through the windscreen & her face was lacerated to pieces. These events all happened in the 60s & 70s & wouldn't happen now.

Even if the DoE & the Queen don't agree with the law, they should be showing by example that it should be upheld rather than being seen to flout it.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

I think the thing that angers me the most about all this is that this family lost someone to a car accident where the only survivor was wearing a seatbelt. Not saying that was the only factor that saved him, but for heavens sake. Seriously, what does it take for some people to learn?

The seatbelt issue is important but it had no bearing in the facts/conditions of the accident between the Land Rover and the Kia. Very often a seatbelt is the difference between minor injuries and serious injuries or death but seatbelts were not involved in the whys of this accident.

However, Trevor Rhys-Jones survived that accident in 1997 by the grace of God-not because he was wearing a seatbelt-as he was not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trevor_Rees-Jones_(bodyguard)

"Early media reports claimed he survived because he was wearing a seat belt,[1] but a December 2006 Operation Paget technical examination said that none of the occupants of the car were wearing their seat belt."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paget

The fact remains that these three people were in a car, driving at highway speeds, and suddenly their car was stopped by a shattering collision with another vehicle. Even if they got a million dollars from insurance (which they won’t), it was a horrifying experience for them. Even a minor fender bender type collision can be traumatic.

They were ordinary people minding their own business when their lives were interrupted by the careless behavior of another. And unlike the other driver, their economic lives will be affected, to a greater or lesser degree.

It doesn’t matter how many other traffic accidents happened that day; this one happened to them.

I don't think they should be treated any differently than if they had had an accident with any other driver. They don't get extra sympathy because the other car in their accident was driven by the Queen's husband. It is not like he was inebriated or driving 20 mph over the speed limit.
Yes, it is a pain to be involved in an accident but it is not worse because it was with a member of the Royal family, (unless you have expectations of special treatment and your expectations are not met.)

 

[caethi]

I look back years ago, no seat belts required, no baby car seats required, no helmets required, etc. and wonder how we old ones have survived. Just maybe it the ridiculous speed that is permitted on narrow two lane roads that should be change back to years ago.[/QUOTE]

Many people, children and babies did not survive accidents. That is why the seatbelt and child restraint laws exists. If adults choose to risk catapulting themselves through windshields because they aren't wearing seat belts, then I suppose they ought to be allowed to do so, but as a taxpayer I would insist that these folks receive no publicly funded emergency, hospital or rehabilitation care.

I agree that excessive speed is a big problem that continues to cause death and injury (along with impairment). Both the Duke and the Queen should wear seatbelts because it is the law.

Finally, sometimes an accident is just an accident. I ran a red light by accident (I was focusing on the light in the intersection down the road, not the one in the intersection right in front of me). I could say that there was something that he did or didn't do that contributed to the collision but he had the right of way and it was my fault. No one called for my license to be revoked. I was lucky the driver of the car that T-boned me wasn't hurt.

If the Duke fails road testing, then his license should be removed. If he passes, he has the right to drive. If he is at fault, his insurance will pay, or he will pay damages awarded in a lawsuit. That's usually how these things go and likely this is how it will go in this case.

 

[sndral]

... The only thing that turns me off is the news media and other driver, who was definitely hurt with broken bone, is making a much bigger drama out of it. Being paid for her story and probably wanting millions for her pain and suffering knowing that the royal will probably do it. If she was hit by any other old gent, she would be shutting her mouth and the media would look to have another William against Harry saga...

Unless things have changed in the last couple of hours and there's a media report I haven't seen, the other driver has said nothing to the media, so perhaps we should not falsely accuse her.
The woman who has spoken to the media was the passenger in the Kia.

 

[ladongas]

Why do you say “victims”? The women and the baby ARE victims of a driver who failed to follow the rules of the road, not yielding the right of way and not proceeding safely. It’s quite shocking to be ikn a major collision like that, and those people deserve our sympathy, empathy, and respect for their suffering.

It’s unfair to absolve the DoE of all fault while blaming and shaming the victims. And even if the driver were at fault (she wasn’t), the passenger certainly wasn’t. It seems some think that she is somehow to blame because she has chosen to speak with the press. She’s 58 years old and may very well lose the job she has recently started. She’s entitled to make a bit of money to tide her over in that event. Too bad if the BRF looks bad in this.

I don't think they should be treated any differently than if they had had an accident with any other driver. They don't get extra sympathy because the other car in their accident was driven by the Queen's husband. It is not like he was inebriated or driving 20 mph over the speed limit.
Yes, it is a pain to be involved in an accident but it is not worse because it was with a member of the Royal family, (unless you have expectations of special treatment and your expectations are not met.)

Some posters were shaming the victims; that is why I wrote that.
They were being denied sympathy by some.
And I do think that the DoE could have been more gracious, never mind police reports or insurance issues. He has nothing to fear, and he could have looked like a prince if he had sent flowers. Noblesse oblige...

 

[HereditaryPrincess]

This is a short video that explains an attorney's point of view on what actions Philip could take. The important thing right now is to remember that there is a criminal investigation ongoing. Emma Fairweather is to give her statement to the Norfolk police today.

Interesting points made in the video, thanks for sharing Osipi. I've heard people commenting before that if he apologises it would pinpoint that he was guilty of causing the accident (for which yet we don't know who caused it).

 

[Somebody]

First off it's a false comparison to use children in something that is adult controlled behavior.

An adult choosing to not wear a helmet or seatbelt is not the same thing as a woman drinking while pregnant. Situations aren't even comparable.

A person choosing to not wear a seatbelt has no bearing on your safety.

The Queen has ridden horses for decades without a helmet. The only risk is to herself.

No I don't think we need laws to tells us what to do in these situations. If you want to ride a motorcycle without a helmet or a horse or drive without seatbelt that's no one's business but yours. I don't need you (the state) to save me from myself.


LaRae

I think I get where you are coming from but even though you might be willing to loose your life in an accident, anyone else involved in that accident might feel guilty for life because you died while they wouldn't have to be devastated if you had chosen or had been required to wear a seat belt. It also helps others to enforce those rules in their cars. So, I do support helmets or seat belt for high speed vehicles.

Yet, I am aware that I'm not completely consistent in my logic because I don't apply the same rules to those on bycicles who imo should be free to decide to wear a helmet or not - to defend myself: if wearing a helmet it is obligated less people ride theirs bikes and that's worse for everyone's safet. Requiring it for those on (race-type) road is fine with me, so I guess it comes down to speed and therefore expected impact of collission.

 

[MARG]

I cannot believe we are on page 20 and counting, worse, most people are complaining that he does not wear his seatbelt. Did that cause the Accident? No, it did not but if people are going to lecture ad nauseum, please note that HM does not wear a seat belt either!

She was seen shortly after the crash without a seatbelt and last Sunday both she and Prince Andrew were driven to St Peters Church. Neither wore a seatbelt and never do when they go to church, whether St Mary Magdalene Church, St Peters or Crathie Kirk she didn't even wear one to St Georges Chapel for Harry and Eugenie's weddings. Being past ninety, will she too have to give up driving?

 

[Leopoldine]

Actually, the initial reports of the accident described HRH Prince Philip as "hanging" when people approached the crashed vehicle. The only reason someone would "hang" in an overturned car is if he or she was restrained by a seatbelt.

 

[rmay286]

Despite the later photos, I feel Prince Philip must have been wearing a seatbelt at the time of his crash, otherwise how could he have rolled over the Land Rover and escaped uninjured?

 

[wbenson]

Actually, the initial reports of the accident described HRH Prince Philip as "hanging" when people approached the crashed vehicle. The only reason someone would "hang" in an overturned car is if he or she was restrained by a seatbelt.

The Land Rover was on its driver's side, so I'm not sure where he would have been hanging.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Why do you say “victims”? The women and the baby ARE victims of a driver who failed to follow the rules of the road, not yielding the right of way and not proceeding safely. It’s quite shocking to be in a major collision like that, and those people deserve our sympathy, empathy, and respect for their suffering.

It’s unfair to absolve the DoE of all fault while blaming and shaming the victims. And even if the driver were at fault (she wasn’t), the passenger certainly wasn’t. It seems some think that she is somehow to blame because she has chosen to speak with the press. She’s 58 years old and may very well lose the job she has recently started. She’s entitled to make a bit of money to tide her over in that event. Too bad if the BRF looks bad in this.

I assume that you have access to the police findings as you have found the Duke guilty of an offence.

If you haven't access to the police findings you are speculating and thus are guilty of shaming people without all the evidence to hand - the very thing you are accusing others of doing.

Are you aware that accidents happen with no one at fault?

I have no idea who was to blame for this accident.

What I do know is that it would take a great deal of force to overturn a reinforced vehicle - designed to stop this very thing from happening.

We also have the passenger saying they saw the Duke's car pulling out from 150 metres which would mean he should have had time to get around and they had time to prevent the accident by breaking.

Trial by media and public vilification is NOT fair to anyone and just blaming one person because of his age and/or his status is unfair to him.

If the police determine Philip is in the wrong they will act accordingly - as they will if they determine the other driver is in the wrong. It is not up to the public or the media to make that determination.

 

[COUNTESS]

I do agree with you on your points. If it wasn't DoE in the accident and of course his age, this would not be headline news. When the police report is made public, all will be known. The only thing that turns me off is the news media and other driver, who was definitely hurt with broken bone, is making a much bigger drama out of it. Being paid for her story and probably wanting millions for her pain and suffering knowing that the royal will probably do it. If she was hit by any other old gent, she would be shutting her mouth and the media would look to have another William against Harry saga.

As far as seat belts, I wear one because it is the law. That is the only reason. Helmets are not required here [even on motorcycles] except on very young children and only on public grounds. People wear if they want, which most do.

I look back years ago, no seat belts required, no baby car seats required, no helmets required, etc. and wonder how we old ones have survived. Just maybe it the ridiculous speed that is permitted on narrow two lane roads that should be change back to years ago.

If you only wear a seatbelt because it's the law you are foolish. They have a reason and work very well. Yes, many years ago we didn't have them and we had many accidents that ended people lives or harmed them, when now they are much safer. What ridculous speeds on two lane roads, 45 MPH. Hardly ridiculous. In many States helmets are required for those who ride motorcycles. Bikes cannot be controlled. It was the passenger who has a broken writs. She did nothing but sit in a car. And as far as the sun blinding one, then you drive very cautiously, as you know you cannot see well.