Glasgow Bin Lorry incident

I'm sure we all remember the bin lorry that ran away and killed all those people in Glasgow city centre in Christmas 2014.
At the time I remember some of the conspiracy sites out there publishing grainy, hard to see properly, pictures of the man they said was the driver,
The general consensus being that this was an Islamic terror attack (The same method had been already used multiple times on the continent).

Then there was the bit about protecting the identity of the driver for quite some time, secret hearings...Well, not secret, but the reporting in the media was embargoed.


Eventually we were told that the driver was a white, British man of no particular religion who lied about his health problems then subsequently collapsed behind the wheel causing the disaster to unfold.


Ok, that may well be fair enough, but I wonder.

Firstly, he wasn't prosecuted for his crime of failing to give notice of a notifiable condition, actively lying in the process of securing both his licence and the job.

The Driver and Vehicle Licencing Authority in the UK states on it's website that "You could be fined up to £1,000 if you don’t tell DVLA about a condition that might affect your ability to drive safely. You could also be prosecuted if you have an accident."

Now, no one could deny the seriousness of this particular "Accident" could they? So why in the name of all that is holy would the Crown Prosecution Service decide that a prosecution of this man is "not in the Public Interest?"


It gets stranger, Today we learned that the families of some of the victims tried to bring a private prosecution against the driver and that the Scottish Law Lords (Judges Lady Dorrian, Lord Menzies and Lord Drummond Young) Dismissed an appeal by the families against an earlier ruling preventing them from bringing the case.


The question is, why? This driver is a nobody. He isn't the sibling of an MP or Lord, as far as I know he isn't a billionaire or anyone else with any influence...So why is he so protected by the legal system?

I have an idea, I don't have any proof, it's little more than a theory, so if you disagree, that's fine, but maybe try to explain why you think it is wrong and what better fits the bill in your opinion.


The Theory.

The accident WAS an act of Islamic terror.
In the immediate aftermath, the authorities thought that telling the truth would result in a huge backlash against the innocent muslim members of society who had nothing to do with this at all.

They withheld the identities until they could formulate their plan.

Harry Clarke was chosen as the patsy and given the choice of taking the fall in the full knowledge that he wouldn't get prosecuted, would be resettled under a pseudonym with enough money to retire or...having something bad happen to him.

So he agreed, while the original perpetrator was whisked off in secret to somewhere horrible to be dealt with by MI5 or suchlike and this is why the families of the victims seem to be unable to get any tiny grain of justice against the man they were told caused their loved ones deaths.

From what I understand private prosecutions are something of a rarity in Scotland and of Scottish Law does have some unique tenets and statutes that are not found elsewhere in the UK. This doesn't excuse any of this of course. I suppose the families can still theoretically try to go the Supreme/EU Court route.

originally posted by: CulturalResilience
From what I understand private prosecutions are something of a rarity in Scotland and of Scottish Law does have some unique tenets and statutes that are not found elsewhere in the UK. This doesn't excuse any of this of course. I suppose the families can still theoretically try to go the Supreme/EU Court route.

Yes, it does seem to be a somewhat onerous process up north. That doesn't explain why the original prosecution by the state didn't go ahead though. Seems to me a perfect example of an open and shut case with huge public interest in seeing "justice" done.

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: CulturalResilience
From what I understand private prosecutions are something of a rarity in Scotland and of Scottish Law does have some unique tenets and statutes that are not found elsewhere in the UK. This doesn't excuse any of this of course. I suppose the families can still theoretically try to go the Supreme/EU Court route.

Yes, it does seem to be a somewhat onerous process up north. That doesn't explain why the original prosecution by the state didn't go ahead though. Seems to me a perfect example of an open and shut case with huge public interest in seeing "justice" done.

Indeed. This is a conspiracy site after all and we would be in error to discount any possibility without having it disproved.

a reply to: SprocketUK

This guy (Harry Clarke) is a complete loop! He has never shown any remorse for what he did (if he did it at all?)

I like you theory but im thinking maybe there has been some MKultra mind control at play here?! I mean just look at what he said after the incident

It would be good if I could just stay here until after the funerals

What type of selfishness is this?

He had also been quoted by one the nurses that he was concerned about getting sick pay from his employer?

I dont know whether this is just someone who is an extreme sociopath or something else is at play?

a reply to: AMNicks

Good points.

He certainly doesn't sound like any remotely normal person if the quotes attributed to him are accurate.

They should take this case to the European courts after the way he flouted his driving ban , this man has no remorse


GLASGOW bin lorry crash driver Harry Clarke has reportedly been arrested over claims he drove his car last month despite being banned from the road.

www.eveningtimes.co.uk...

a reply to: SprocketUK

Makes you wonder how often this happens.www.abovetopsecret.com...

Hi All I am currently in the British army and recently been doing some CRBN training (chemical, Rad, bio, nuclear). The instructor we had been trained in Porton Down and had spent some time there. He informed us that the Buncefield Blast was due to a terrorist attack and that investigators had found a crude C4 type device and a body that they was never able to identify (it was not any of the workers at the refinery).

a reply to: Kester

Wow. Missed that one.

Certainly an interesting post.

a reply to: SprocketUK

It is also possible that the guilty party DID, in fact make it known that he had a complaint of some sort, but that his employers refused to acknowledge it or deal with the matter in the correct fashion, leaving him in his post for too long, while they either arranged his redundancy, or a transfer to a different part of their operation. If he was working for the council, or for a contractor to the council, it is possible that this management failure might have reflected badly on someone in the management (someone with connections) or damaged the business financially, to the detriment of its shareholders/owners (again, possibly some people of influence). Perhaps a deal was done between the driver and the management, and the management and the courts, to dissuade any negative financial consequences, by having the driver paid off, and the courts.

It would hardly be a shocker, given what we know about the difference between law and justice, for this to be the case.

Evening all,

I to heard the theories at the time but honestly anyone that is involved in Criminal cases will have countless stories of the Crown Prosecution service doing some unbelievable weird things. Prosecution attempts when all evidence points to nothing and refusing to pursue when the evidence seems to be over flowing, I can only chalk this up to just another one for the loony bin (Pardon the pun).. However

The only certain thing I can say is that I "see" a situation where Islamification of Europe is a very real thing and had this been exposed as a terrorist attack at the time then what we have seen with mass uncontrolled migration the last year or so would have had a fairly big hurdle to get over.

I had done a case study on a Bus accident a few years back where a Bus driver in Lincolnshire had what is now known as a foot fault error, (Basically he thought he was pushing the brake but was in fact on the gas) it is a very real threat that automatic drivers face esp when tired or doing lots of driving as Bus drivers and HGV drivers do. The driver in that situation got a custodial sentence of 4-5 years from memory due to the loss of life and that was just a mistake, since then training and procedures changed.

The driver of the bin crash LIED and that is what caused the loss of life.. These two situations are very similar but for different reasons and I would say the Bin driver has way more of a case to answer to as he knew he was unfit to drive. Just this fact a loan should question why was he not prosecuted..

Without looking into it more was there anyone else on board at the time, be it a cleaning team etc??

edit: found link to the bus crash, 5 year sentence for causing 5 deaths...
news.bbc.co.uk...


RA

a reply to: TrueBrit

That's a strong possibility now that you mention it, Brit. One that could very well explain the strangeness of this case. Thanks.

a reply to: slider1982

There does seem a disparity. I hadn't heard of the Lincoln crash before. Thanks.

originally posted by: SprocketUK
a reply to: slider1982

There does seem a disparity. I hadn't heard of the Lincoln crash before. Thanks.

Indeed, and further more both drivers would have similar responsibility during their roles, the Lincoln incident has to be looked at as it was a minor oversight and lack of procedural awareness that caused the crash. The driver in this instance did not wake up on that morning knowing he had a chance of this happening. Mr Clarke however did have prior notice that there was a problem with his health and that in turn did directly lead to loss of life.

I will be also be looking at the recent Croydon tram crash that killed a number of people where it is suggested the operator fell asleep and caused the tram to derail. I fully expect if this is the case that he will need to serve a custodial sentence...

The more I have looked into this case the last few hours the more I see stuff not adding up, he may well have been a dust cart driver but did he have any connections?, it seems odd that the prosecution system has seemed to protect him when anyone else would have been thrown under the bus (again no pun intended)..


RA

a reply to: slider1982
Yes, I have been wondering if there was a link to Masonry in the way that it was alleged Thomas Hamilton was connected, but to be frank, the whole thing is very dark.

As for the tram crash, I am amazed there isn't a dead man's handle to stop this sort of thing on trams.
I did 20 years on the railway and the only dead man's failure I heard of was on the underground where a driver hung his bag from it, stopping it from returning.

My rake on it, is that the Procurator Fiscal's office was too quick off the mark to say he would not be prosecuted, due to their belief that an unknown medical condition was to blame. Likewise, his identity was protected initially because it was decided that the man should not face undue pressure from the media/public, if what had happened was not really his fault..lets face it, anyone can have a heart attack at the wheel of a vehicle..tragic if others die, but an unpreventable accident nonetheless.

However, I do believe the PF came to this conclusion too early, all they assessed in the immediate aftermath was that there was no alcohol or drugs involved, and at that point his medical condition was not fully known. They should have waited until after the Fatal Accident Inquiry, prior to making any decision about future prosecutions because when it emerged that he had not advised the DVLA of his condition, that he had previous episodes whilst driving public transport and had then lied on his application form to Glasgow City Council, there would have been more than enough evidence to prosecute him, as the accident then became totally preventable...he shouldn't have been bloody driving!

But of course to save face and not do a U-turn, the PF's office upheld their original decision. That in turn made a farce of the FAI, in as much that Harry Clarke was advised that he didn't have to answer questions for fear of incriminating himself in any future trial...the b'stard wouldn't even say sorry.

It also transpired that after the accident he applied to the DVLA for his HGV license and yet again neglected to tell them his history or indeed about the accident and because he was initially granted anonymity, he nearly got away with that too, fortunately the FAI was publicly reported and he was immediately suspended from his job (on full pay) and had his licence revoked. Furthermore, he was summoned to an Employment tribunal to explain his deception, and the old git resigned on the day the hearing was scheduled, so he was effectively paid up until that date.

Yes, he was caught driving again on his suspended licence and worse still he had committed fraud by lying to his insurance company that he had not been involved in any accidents in the last 3 years, nor did he tall them that his licence had been revoked. He was due back in court at a later date, and I assume, as I haven't heard anything about that yet, that they were waiting to see what the outcome of the private prosecution case was, which of course has been denied now, so hopefully this nasty, selfish arrogant tosser, will get the book thrown at him for his subsequent offences, as he managed to avoid any consequences for the first offence..the deaths of 6 people..

So I don't think there is any conspiracy, just that the PF's office thought they were doing the right thing in the immediate aftermath of the accident by protecting the driver, with the knee jerk reaction that he would not be prosecuted and then when the facts came to light, rather than get egg on their face, they upheld the original decision...

RIP Justice

a reply to: destination now

When you put it like that, it does seem to be the most reasonable explanation.

Well said all in all, I'll take off the foil hat I've been wearing

a reply to: SprocketUK

Well we get lied to so often, it's very easy to get caught up in things, and when things don't seem to add up, it's very easy to assume that 2 + 2 really does make 5

Being in the west of Scotland though and being a regular visitor to Glasgow the entire event was so shocking and of course just a year after the helicopter crash at the Clutha bar, which killed so many people and just 2 days from Christmas, I remember my first thought being, I really hope that driver hadn't been drinking and to be fair, when it was established early on that he hadn't been and it was a medical issue, I initially agreed with the way it was handled, that the driver was not identified etc, though in view of the findings of the Fatal Accident Inquiry, I just wish the PF had held back on making the decision not to prosecute, no one would have wanted to see him prosecuted had it simply been an unknown medical condition, but the facts of the case proved to be different and he most certainly should have been.

Hopefully karma will catch up with him