Recent Cases

R v T

The defendant was an elderly gentleman who had collided with two females on a pedestrian crossing. Tragically one of the individuals died and the prosecution alleged that the defendant was criminally responsible as he had defective eyesight. Initially charged as careless driving,the prosecution upgraded the charge after seeking expert opinion from an eye specialist. The defendant maintained that he had undertaken regular consultations with his doctors and had never been told that his sight was below the standard required by the DVLA. A further complication was that the defendant himself was in a very poor state of health and had various life threatening conditions of his own. Representations were made to the crown that the case should not proceed on public interest grounds and that the defendant was too frail to stand trial. Eventually the defence petitioned the attorney general seeking an order of nolle prosequi asking the AG to intervene and terminate proceedings. As a result of these approaches the crown reviewed their decision and did not oppose the defence application to stay proccedings as an abuse of process.