The defendant was charged with causing Death by Careless Driving. The prosecution relied, almost entirely, on reconstruction expert evidence to position the vehicles relative to each other in the seconds leading up to the collision. Our instructing solicitors asked us to consider the expert evidence and to comment upon it and produce a defence report. A careful scrutiny of the prosecution expert’s calculations and conclusions took place and we were able to show that they were potentially unreliable and that, ultimately, the prosecution hypothesis was flawed. After a lengthy trial at Crown Court, the defendant was acquitted of the charge. We were praised by counsel who commented, ‘I only fire the bullets, it is the expert (Mr Mason) who provides the ammunition’. High praise indeed.
Case Studies Archive
RGM Collision Investigation Services were contacted by a major UK law firm on behalf of an insurer requiring accident investigation services. Client was charged with careless driving, the allegation being that she had pulled out from a lay-by into the path of a vehicle approaching from behind. A significant civil claim had also arisen as a result of the crash.
Lawyers asked us to help. Having visited the scene, considered the evidence of witnesses and having carried out some calculations it soon became evident that client had been wrongly prosecuted. At the next court hearing, during which the client was due to stand trial, the Crown Prosecution Service agreed to review the case in light of our expert reconstruction report and the trial was immediately adjourned.
A few days later the CPS formally withdrew the charge against our client. Furthermore, it was realised that liability lay, in fact, with the other driver.
Lawyer’s client was charged with careless driving having been involved in a collision with a police vehicle. RGM Collision Investigation Services initially offered guidance to the defence team in order that they may seek evidence that had not yet been disclosed. Upon disclosure, it was clear that there was overwhelming evidence undermining the prosecution case, yet the CPS decided to pursue the matter to trial. RGM provided a more detailed investigation and provided an expert report. At trial a submission of ‘no case to answer’ was made to the bench based upon detailed plans and photographs provided by us. The magistrates accepted the submission, the case was dismissed and all costs were awarded in favour of the defendant. Accident investigation evidence was key in the acquittal.
Advocates’ client was charged with attempted murder by deliberately driving her vehicle over a cliff with a passenger in the vehicle. RGM Collision Investigation Services was instructed by her counsel. Our expert report showed clearly that the road was a notorious black spot for vehicles inadvertently losing control and showed that, far from a deliberate act, her vehicle was undergoing emergency braking on the approach to the accident site, supporting her account that she was braking and taking evasive action. The jury acquitted her of all charges.
Client was charged by the police with careless driving. It was alleged that he had driven at high speed into a bend and had lost control of his vehicle, colliding with an oncoming car. Witnesses in the oncoming car purported to have seen the defendant travelling towards them at high speed. Having visited the scene and prepared detailed measurements and an expert report, it was shown that the witnesses could not possibly have seen the events they described. On the basis of our expert report, CPS withdrew the case the evening before the trial was due to commence.
Client was charged with causing the death of a motorcyclist by dangerous driving. The prosecution alleged that the defendant must have seen the motorcyclist approaching but, nevertheless, pulled out into his path. RGM Collision Investigation Services were instructed by the defendant’s advocate to consider the strength of the prosecution case and, in particular, the expert evidence. We were able to show that the motorcyclist, travelling at a speed in the region of 100mph, must have been out of sight when the defendant commenced his manoeuvre. Such was the strength of our defence expert report, the case was dismissed with ‘no case to answer’ and the driver acquitted of all charges.