Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Sunday, 6th July 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Edinburgh Evening News site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sheriff rules out speed claim in crash that killed brothers



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 17 May 2008
A SHERIFF has dismissed suggestions that a motorist may have been travelling at up to 82mph in the seconds before a crash which killed him and his brother.
David Black and his brother Stuart crashed on Maybury Road in November 2005 returning from the funeral of their young niece.

Stuart, 31, died on arrival at hospital, while David, 37, spent 16 months in hospital before dying of an infection in May
last year.

At the summing up of the Fatal Accident Inquiry into the two men's deaths yesterday, Sheriff Kenneth Maciver said he was unlikely to come to the conclusion that Mr Black's Audi had been going in excess of 80mph when the accident happened.

The inquiry had previously heard that the men's car could have been travelling at up to 82mph and on the wrong side of the road.

The inquiry has focused on whether bollards on a traffic island near the accident scene were properly lit and has heard how there had been six accidents near the crash site in the two years leading up to the incident.

He addressed David Black's widow Gail and the two men's mother and brother, saying: "I want to give my sympathies to the family. I understand that it has been a long process.

I know all three of you in court today have been here for every minute of this accident inquiry.

"You have heard every piece of evidence and it's only right that I deal with it all when I deliver my determination."

The sheriff is expected to reach his verdict by the middle of July.

An investigation carried out by road safety consultant Malcolm Bulpitt, commissioned by the family of the two men, found their Audi had hit an unlit and unmarked traffic island as David Black attempted to overtake, colliding with a Range Rover travelling in the opposite direction.

Stuart Black, who had moved from Edinburgh to Somerset shortly before the crash, was being driven to the airport by his brother at the time of the accident.

He was pronounced dead on arrival at ERI.

David Black spent over a year in hospital and was left confined to a wheelchair until he died.

Last year, campaigners welcomed plans for a series of safety measures on Maybury Road after a reported 20 crashes in just three years. Among the measures were plans to reduce the speed limit at the accident black-spot from 60mph to 40mph.





The full article contains 417 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 17 May 2008 9:59 AM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

allknowing,

17/05/2008 12:20:10
Hold on, isn't this why Maybury Road was vandalised and speed reduced to 40mph, and to a sinlge lane south bound!!
I assume we will see this being undone at the earliest oppurtunity!

2

Beergut,

Embra 17/05/2008 14:20:53
The Maybury Road has been a race track for years with impatient drivers desperate to overtake every vehicle in sight. I've even seen a car which tried to go straight through the roundabout at Bughtlin and finished up embedded! Far from vandalism this will, hopefully, bring drivers to their senses. And when will Queensferry Road, a suburban road lined with residential homes and with a busy school entrance at Clermiston, have a sensible 30 mph limit? The Barnton traffic lights resemble a drag-racing track instead of a suburban road.
3

The Sheriff,

17/05/2008 14:37:44
Ok,the sheriff may have dismissed a speed of up to 82mph but that still does not mean they were not speeding.The speed limit at the time was 60mph,can the sheriff confirm the fact they were not exceeding that limit?
4

alex paterson,

At the moment in Sevilla 17/05/2008 15:14:35
I WILL shoot the sheriff but not his deputy.
5

Dragonlord,

17/05/2008 15:15:42
Witnesses say the were speeding, is the serrif calling them liars? If speed was NOT the cause then why the reduction of the speed limit?

Having your cake and eating it maybe.
6

Grumpy,

17/05/2008 15:24:26
The data stored in the engine managemnet system of the Audi would have given details of the speed at impact. But sherriffs are not usually aware of this, and car manufacturers don't like to advertise that this data is there, in case people see it as a violation of their human rights.

But expert police examination, which would have been carried out anyway, would have been able to preety accurately deterine terminal speed.

Look at the Fatal Accident Enqiry formal report case and read the evidence presented before believing all that is written (and not written!) in the EEN.
7

Friend of victim,

Highlands 17/05/2008 15:33:48
Comment 3 - Let's wait for the REAL Sheriff's determination - article states this will be available mid-July. Comment 5 - were any of the witnesses experts at identifying vehicular speed by sight? Any chance we could leave this to those who know what they are doing (i.e. those with training, qualifications and experience)? Just a thought. Same thought Grumpy had with Comment 6 I believe. I wish folk would stop jumping to their own conclusions, especially those who were not there, not involved, not connected. It's beyond insult to those who cared.
8

Dragonlord,

17/05/2008 21:07:02
As an ambulance driver with over 17 years experience I think I am qualified to comment on driving on this streach of road.
9

tumshie heid,

17/05/2008 23:38:33
#8
Why does being a driver of 17years experience qualify you to dismiss the findings of a sheriff in a court?
As we all know government these days cannot wait to drop perfectly legitimate speed limits in order to catch out unsuspecting motorists and rake in the fines.
Perhaps if they had spent some of the millions already accrued on properly lighting the traffic island then this tragedy could have been avoided.
10

The Sheriff,

18/05/2008 09:58:18
To number 7 and 9,As I stated earlier whilst the sheriff has dismissed the car was travelling at 82mph he has not dismissed the possibility that the car exceeded the 60mph and I wait with great confidence of at last seeing the final verdict to either confirm that fact or not.
11

,

18/05/2008 12:02:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

celtic4,

USA 18/05/2008 21:00:39
I have found that speed limit signs do not deter some people bound to speed anyway. It's that way here, and I figure it is there too. So sad they died. No matter the cause.
13

Julian,

EDINBURGH 19/05/2008 00:52:54
Am I missing something here.

Does anyone think or have they ever thought this was a nice safe stretch of road?

Call me stupid but does it take a rocket scientist (or a higway safety expert) to conclude that:-

1 mile straight, almost level dual carriageway with 60mph speed limit and without central reservation = recipe for disaster.

Isn't the real conclusion that the Council refused to spend money on this until the body count rose to an unacceptable level?

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.