advertisement


OAP unhurt in car accident

I cannot see how he is immune from prosecution. HE is not the head of state. The family are not immune - I recall Princess Anne (as she was) being done for speeding in her Scimitar.

Anyway - not that many road accidents result in a prosecution. Accidents happen and unless there is clear evidence of evidence of a crime, then an accident it will remain and the insurance companies will sort out the mess.

Was there no close protection officer in the car with him? - I would have thought there always would be, but perhaps they sometimes follow in another vehicle.

Think if you read that wiki link then he and members of the royal household are immune from prosecution when they are on her land/property and they can't be arrested in front of the monarch and both the monarch and the state can't be prosecuted ergo she/the monarch is the state.
 
Am I hallucinating or did I read somewhere that the Monarch can't be prosecuted for any crime? If so does that apply to 97yr old Greek racists?

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

Certainly does apply to 97 year old Greek racists
Sovereign immunity applies only to the Monarch i.e.The Queen who is literally above the Law. Philip is only the Queens husband.

Royals other than the Queen can be prosecuted as Princess Anne was for speeding in 2001.
 
Sovereign immunity applies only to the Monarch i.e.The Queen who is literally above the Law. Philip is only the Queens husband.

Royals other than the Queen can be prosecuted as Princess Anne was for speeding in 2001.

So old Lizzie can literally murder someone and not be prosecuted?
 
Still no news of whose fault it was.....being ageist etc, if I had to bet, I'd say it was his fault.
 
I recall Princess Anne (as she was) being done for speeding in her Scimitar.

I remember Private Eye’s resident poet writing along the lines of:

So sad that a Princess in a Scimitar
Cannot with impunity exceed the limit - aaah.

I wonder if Mark E Smith read that too?
 
Surely the serious point to be addressed here is that 97 yr olds should not be driving. There has to be a serious medical & driving competency test regularly after a certain age - say 65 or 70.

I was horrified by my Dad's driving as he was nearing 80.... I persuaded him to give up and they were quite happy after that relying on taxis and buses to get around.
 
It varies I think...but testing should be compulsary at 75 IMO. A simple test retake after a few (voluntary) refresher lessons would eliminate the 'no longer safes' from the perfectly ok.
The vehicle would be armoured under the land rover special model scheme I'd think, hence the roll and the lack of damage. Hope it shocks the daft bugger into using the bus from now on (fat chance). Thank goodness the other people involved were not seriously hurt. I imagine they had special ops company at their bedside yestrday, 'a few papers to sign madam and then we can let you go. Thanks so much'.
 
I can understand why people may think too much fuss is being made of this but, like it or not, he is the elderly husband of our Head of State and clearly had a narrow squeak, as did the others involved in the incident. As has been pointed out already, he can't be prosecuted as we can hardy expect the Head of State to prosecute her own husband - which is what it would amount to - can we? :rolleyes:
She might enjoy it? Payback for years of putting up with him.:)
 
He was pulling out of a drive onto the main road. It’s difficult to see how it could be anyone else’s fault.

Knowing that road, I would say that he was likely blinded by the sun. You're facing West at that junction and at that time the Sun would be low. However, as any fule kno, if you can't see, you slow down or stop.
 
Never has anyone had a more appropriate user name. Every post drips with one dimensional piety.
fond of the elderly are you? 'semi-senile' is interesting. The brain starts to run down after 18 yrs old IIRC (see the irony in that sentence?) :)
 


advertisement


Back
Top