Enemies of Reason Poundshop potshots at the media moral maze.

Call the cops? Don’t bother, the Mail knows…

Nice to see that the Mail has branched out from journalism into police work with this story about a fatal car crash.

The police are still investigating, but no need for the boys in blue to get involved, coroners to be contacted, inquests to be held... the Mail already know exactly what happened.

I don't know if Steve Myall, or the news agency chaps who supplied a lot of the copy, are experts in road traffic accidents. Certainly they would appear to be the leading experts in their field; why else pre-judge the outcome of a police investigation or inquest?

Seven die in horror crash after convicted drink-driver collides with family's car while overtaking

The key word there of course is 'convicted'. No-one can say whether the driver was drinking this time. Do you think the Mail readers will notice that little fact? We'll see later down when we get to the comments section.

So here we have a person previously convicted of a driving offence, apparently overtaking, and crashing into a 'family's car'. So he must have done it, right? Doesn't matter if it wasn't his fault; he's dead, and like with the now sadly departed Carol Barnes, whose privacy was raped even before she had died, journalists know they can say what they like. No libelling the dead = a green light to say what you like as irresponsibly as you like.

Jason Brain smashed into a VW Passat, killing its driver John Kirby, his wife Maggie and their daughter Julie.

No doubt about it. He smashed into their car. No 'collision'. Nothing like that. It was entirely his fault, according to the Mail.

Brain, 35, died along with the three passengers in his Peugeot 306 – his daughter Natasha, 15, Ryan Bott, 20, and 31-year-old mother-of-one Michola Jones.

Whoa! He's got a family too?! But why isn't his car described as a 'family car'? Doesn't it matter if the Mail are trying to paint him as a villain?

Police said the cars could have had a combined impact speed of 120mph when they crashed on the A429 between Stow-on-the-Wold and Moreton-in-Marsh on Friday night. It was Gloucestershire's worst ever road accident.

That 120mph would mean both were travelling within the speed limit.

Seven years ago, while drink-driving, Brain fled the scene of an identical crash on the same stretch of road. He smashed head-on into another VW while trying to overtake a lorry. A mother and baby in the VW escaped but the husband was cut free by firemen.

So it must have been him, right? Because people, when they're convicted of an offence, always do exactly the same thing in the same place again, don't they?

A breath test showed he was twice the alcohol limit. He was given two years' probation, despite it being his third motoring offence in ten years. One neighbour described him as a "real boy racer."

The neighbour said that just before Friday night's tragedy, "he'd been driving round all over the place and racing up and down the street. He loved to drive fast."

One neighbour did describe him as a boy racer. Did the others? Ah no, but one did. So he must have been.

The crash happened at 9.20pm on a winding stretch of single-carriageway. Police believe that Brain was trying to overtake a third successive car when he hit the Kirbys' Passat.

Police believe. Well why do they even bother believing anything? The Mail's got this one sorted. It knows every single thing that happened and doesn't need to bother about troublesome details like facts.

The commenters weigh in with their views, convinced of the facts...

It says a lot about our 'justice' system. Had he been denied, quite rightly, his licence and this order rigorously applied, this lovely family would have still have still been enjoying life.

- Michael Walsh, Liverpool, UK

Yeah, but his family can rot in hell eh!

What a dreadful dreadful accident, all caused by one irresponsible idiot. Drink drivers should be given NO second chances.

- Debbie Viggiano, Swanley Village

Well I tend to agree that there should be stiff penalties for drink driving. But no second chances? While people who commit crimes of violence are rehabilitated?

It is long overdue, that perhaps psychiatric evaluation tests are conducted on all drivers prior to even being issued with a driving license.The gentleman (and I use the term in the broadest possible sense), who was responsible for this slaughter, should never have been allowed behind the wheel of any vehicle, ever.
It is time to treat drunk driving, and dangerous driving of this nature as 'homicide' and not as an accident. Accident it certainly was not.

Yes, the evidence of, well no evidence whatsoever except some second-hand stuff from the coppers, is overwhelming, isn't it.

This guy should have been targeted by the police instead millions are prosecuted by speed cameras for doing 35 in a 30. UK 2008 a perverse country seemingly devoid of common sense, lost on the alter of political correctness.

- Pete, Beverley

Yes that's right. Speeding is OK when it's me doing it. Everyone else = bad. Anyway, speed wasn't a factor in this incident, if we are to believe the police. Surely clamping down on dangerous driving (including speeding) is a good thing? Not if you're a Mailite. Speed cameras are somehow 'politically correct' and therefore as bad as paedophiles.

I feel incredibly sorry for all involved, except Brian.

- Bob, UK

Don't you wait till the corpse gets cold, Bob. You stick the boot in, despite no evidence.

Drunk drivers should be locked up for minimum 12 months on their first offence and their license taken away for 6 years. And if they hurt someone while driving drunk they should be charged wih attempted murder. Getting in a car and driving drunk is like closing your eyes and shooting a loaded gun around a group of people. But maybe he wasn't actually driving drunk this time round - yeah right.

- Ex Pat, USA

I agreed with everything till the last sentence. Why assume that drink was a factor this time? There's no evidence.

Such a senseless tragedy. When will judges realize that people who drive drunk are dangerous. Too often drunk drivers are excused from their behavior. Driving drunk equates into threatening the lives of innocents with a loaded weapon. People who drive drunk need to have their driving privileges permanently revoked and given jail time.

- Mayfield, SC-USA

Drink drivers are idiots who endanger others, and should get strong penalties, as far as I'm concerned. People who drive like nutters and overtake aggressively should be charged with the offences and have their licences taken away. But the lack of sympathy for this man's family, the assumption of guilt, the jumping to conclusions... well, it could only be the Mail.

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

Related posts:

1. Why I don’t bother with Mad Mel
2. So what do we call these scum?
3. Why bother writing about the media?
4. Modern journalism: Let’s not bother to fucking check
5. The Mail: No principles