UK - US Diplomat's wife leaves UK after killing Harry Dunn, age 19, Northampton, Sept 2019 *suspended sentence*

"Anne Sacoolas

insisted she

'drove like an American'

on day she careered into Harry Dunn's oncoming motorbike outside RAF base -

as killer US diplomat is absent from teen's inquest.


1718204646123.png


 

"Anne Sacoolas

insisted she

'drove like an American'

on day she careered into Harry Dunn's oncoming motorbike outside RAF base -

as killer US diplomat is absent from teen's inquest.


View attachment 509768



Oh yeah right. In what alternate universe are Americans always just driving around killing people? Someone is having trouble accepting responsibility.
 
In one of her witness statements, Sacoolas said she 'instinctively moved to the right side of the road' and was not aware she was on the wrong side of the road 'until after the collision'.
BBM


When we drove in Ireland, we were constantly reminding ourselves out loud to “stay left, stay left.” Responsible American drivers do whatever is necessary to override the instinct to move to the right, especially after making a turn.

JMO
 
Harry Dunn: Anne Sacoolas sorry for 'tragic mistake'

A US government employee has apologised for her "tragic mistake" which resulted in the death of Harry Dunn, an inquest has heard.
An inquest has heard, but only from a written statement. Why is Anne Sacoolas not required to turn up in person? Disgraceful in my opinion. That poor family just want her to do the right thing and have their day in court with her present speaking, not having a written statement read out from the other side of the world. Just my opinion. I'm very upset for the Dunn family. All my own opinions.
 

"Anne Sacoolas

insisted she

'drove like an American'

on day she careered into Harry Dunn's oncoming motorbike outside RAF base -

as killer US diplomat is absent from teen's inquest.


View attachment 509768


Do we know how long it was until another motorist past by?
 
Do we know how long it was until another motorist past by?
I don't know, the BBC article says immediately:

"
"Immediately after the accident, I hysterically flagged down a motorist and begged her to get help.

"While she called 999, I called my husband to contact the base for help, because we were so close to the base entrance. The base was the first to respond.""

If she had a phone to call her husband, why didn't she call 999? Or why not call the base first, if they were nearer, and then flag someone down. It seems a bit weird to me
 
I don't know, the BBC article says immediately:

"
"Immediately after the accident, I hysterically flagged down a motorist and begged her to get help.

"While she called 999, I called my husband to contact the base for help, because we were so close to the base entrance. The base was the first to respond.""

If she had a phone to call her husband, why didn't she call 999? Or why not call the base first, if they were nearer, and then flag someone down. It seems a bit weird to me
I read something that I cannot quote here, that says something different.
 
If she had a phone to call her husband, why didn't she call 999?
If she "drove like an American", not remembering on what side she should drive, I doubt she would have remember the British emergency number, and instead used the American "911". Would a call to "911" be transferred to "999", to call "112", the European emergency number seems to work in the UK too.
 
An inquest has heard, but only from a written statement. Why is Anne Sacoolas not required to turn up in person? Disgraceful in my opinion. That poor family just want her to do the right thing and have their day in court with her present speaking, not having a written statement read out from the other side of the world. Just my opinion. I'm very upset for the Dunn family. All my own opinions.
Since I wrote this, it appears since then she has appeared in person but only on screen from her own country. How is this allowed? Why can't she give the family some relief by turning up in person? The family, in my opinion, will be left with anger issues that something is never finished or have come full circle. Just my opinion.
 
In one of her witness statements, Sacoolas said she 'instinctively moved to the right side of the road' and was not aware she was on the wrong side of the road 'until after the collision'.
BBM


When we drove in Ireland, we were constantly reminding ourselves out loud to “stay left, stay left.” Responsible American drivers do whatever is necessary to override the instinct to move to the right, especially after making a turn.

JMO

It really does take intense processing, especially when you first start the reverse driving.
I remember landing at Heathrow to start a new job in the UK. My boss decided I should drive myself from the airport to Berks.

At least, I only had one accident.
 
I wonder if the fact that she had her son with her in the car (in the front seat?) could have contributed in some way to her "instinctively move to the right side" that she was used to drive on. It's not in any way an excuse, but perhaps a reason why she may have lost her concentration for a second.

Maybe wearing some kind of visual "mnemonics tool", for example a bracelet, on the hand corresponding to the side of the road you should drive on when driving on the "wrong" side from what you normally do. I would guess that when making a left- or rigth-hand turn (depending where you are driving) is where the familiar "automatic driving response" can cause a driver to end up on the wrong side of the road.
 
Does anyone know, definitely, if they drive on the left side within the base too ? It would surely make more sense
 
Accidents happen. But doing a runner and refusing to face up to your mistakes in such a cowardly way is the thing that's unforgivable.
I'm in agreement. I would think that anyone who has many, many years driving on the right under their belt, can and do make a conscious effort to remind themselves every time they turn at an intersection, or on into a parking lot, stay left, stay left, etc. However, that mantra probably goes right out the window when presented with something out of the ordinary, like a near miss or a collision and you revert to your old ways. That being said, the fact that she left him there is the issue that is so grievous that should warrant more than a suspended sentence. Perhaps being banned to ever step foot in the UK again.
 
That being said, the fact that she left him there is the issue that is so grievous that should warrant more than a suspended sentence. Perhaps being banned to ever step foot in the UK again.
If you by "left him there" mean that AS left Harry Dunn on the road where the accident happened, that is not correct, as the police interviewed her at the scene of the accident, and also the day after when they informed her about his death. AS told the police then that she was planning to stay in the UK, but about a week later she, and her family, was back in the US.

The question is, was the return to the US something AS and/or her husband requested, or were they ordered back to the US by their employer/s? It seems that both AS and her husband had jobs that probably were security classed, and their employers might not have wanted them exposed, but if that was a reason, it backfired. Whether or not AS might have been willing to go back to the UK for a trial, the whole issue had became too politically sensitive to allow her doing that, as that would have been seen as an admission getting her back to the US had been a wrong move.
 
If you by "left him there" mean that AS left Harry Dunn on the road where the accident happened, that is not correct, as the police interviewed her at the scene of the accident, and also the day after when they informed her about his death. AS told the police then that she was planning to stay in the UK, but about a week later she, and her family, was back in the US.

The question is, was the return to the US something AS and/or her husband requested, or were they ordered back to the US by their employer/s? It seems that both AS and her husband had jobs that probably were security classed, and their employers might not have wanted them exposed, but if that was a reason, it backfired. Whether or not AS might have been willing to go back to the UK for a trial, the whole issue had became too politically sensitive to allow her doing that, as that would have been seen as an admission getting her back to the US had been a wrong move.
If they were ordered back by their employer you are correct that it backfired since it painted her in a bad light. Diplomats have enjoyed immunity from prosecution for decades in nearly every country. It's a pretty broad brush unfortunately leaving those harmed unable to get their justice.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
332
Guests online
1,562
Total visitors
1,894

Forum statistics

Threads
597,658
Messages
18,068,706
Members
230,421
Latest member
MelliWard
Back
Top