TT 2022 ??

[0bserver]

24 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

But no one is saying that the marshals involved should be publicly named.  Referring by role, anonymised to avoid ambiguity (eg marshal X, marshal Y) would be the normal way to do things in an accident report.  Of course those involved at the scene would know the identities - but they do already.

Without knowing what happened and the mistakes (nearly always plural) that were made, how do people know that lessons have genuinely been learned and corrective actions taken - and assess those actions to see if they are sufficient?

They go around pretending to have the powers of a Police Constable during road closures... with that power comes a high level of responsibility. If they fuck up then they should be named. 

It's called accountability.

[milestone 11]

41 minutes ago, Mr Helmut Fromage said:

I would have stopped the race sent the riders back against the natural direction of the course - asked a couple of drivers in fast cars to hoof it up there - care at Ballig - because CI Derek says preserve the scene - come back a couple of years later after keeping my head down, possibly tell the CSM on the Mountain to clear off - rub my hands together and shout “NOTHING TO SEE HERE”

That is what I would have done 

I seem to recall it being a practice session making the situation worse. No reason for the session not being halted.

[Kopek]

The CoC is an intermediary, the Police and subsequently, the Court is final arbiter in anything like this situation.

Anonymity will end when the prosecution call witnesses. Until then, the ACU can claim anonymity on their behalf but only till the Police are involved.

[Kopek]

Have the Police declared that they are not interested anymore?

There has to come a stage when 'blame' is apportioned, whether that is to the marshals, the Driver or the rider/riders has yet to come out. The sooner it does, the better. Bring this to a close?

If that is being delayed by ongoing legal arguments then that should not excuse us on Island people from our part in allowing this sorry situation to pertain.

Edited February 3, 2022 by Kopek

[Ghost Ship]

Any question of blame won't be decided in court though, will it?

I thought the ACU had already formally accepted liability in court and that all that now remained to be determined by the court was the quantum of damages.  Isn't that the position, or am I wrong?

I doubt that the (as I understand it) private report into what happened that was commissioned by the ACU will ever see the light of day - outside* the ACU.  It won't be relevant to the level of damages so I don't see why it would come out in court.

Obviously (or at least it seems obvious to me) the admission of liability by the ACU doesn't point the finger of blame at anybody - including the Clerk of the Course. It just means that the ACU as an organisation is willing to accept that in some way something that should have been under their control led to the accident.

In an ideal world the findings of the report would be made public, but I don't see that happening.  If - and I emphasise "If" -  a particular marshall was (or marshalls were) found to be involved in making the decisions that led up to the accident, I can't see their identities remaining anonymous on a place as small as the IoM even if they aren't named in the report.

I'm sure the ACU will have learned lessons from this.  I suspect they may be better equipped to "learn lessons" than the IoM Govt.

I think I'm quite impressed that the ACU have accepted liability and they haven't hung any individuals out to dry...  (And that does not mean I think everything is OK about this incident. It absolutely beggars belief that it could have happened at all, and I think the ACU had no other honourable course of action but to accept liability.)

What I don't really understand is why nobody else (like IoM govt or IoM Police) carried out any investigation and seem to have happily left it in the hands of the ACU.  But maybe I've misunderstood exactly who has done what...

 

*I presume IoM Govt and Police will have seen it.

Edited February 3, 2022 by Ghost Ship

[Omobono]

1 hour ago, Ghost Ship said:

Any question of blame won't be decided in court though, will it?

I thought the ACU had already formally accepted liability in court and that all that now remained to be determined by the court was the quantum of damages.  Isn't that the position, or am I wrong?

I doubt that the (as I understand it) private report into what happened that was commissioned by the ACU will ever see the light of day - outside* the ACU.  It won't be relevant to the level of damages so I don't see why it would come out in court.

Obviously (or at least it seems obvious to me) the admission of liability by the ACU doesn't point the finger of blame at anybody - including the Clerk of the Course. It just means that the ACU as an organisation is willing to accept that in some way something that should have been under their control led to the accident.

In an ideal world the findings of the report would be made public, but I don't see that happening.  If - and I emphasise "If" -  a particular marshall was (or marshalls were) found to be involved in making the decisions that led up to the accident, I can't see their identities remaining anonymous on a place as small as the IoM even if they aren't named in the report.

I'm sure the ACU will have learned lessons from this.  I suspect they may be better equipped to "learn lessons" than the IoM Govt.

I think I'm quite impressed that the ACU have accepted liability and they haven't hung any individuals out to dry...  (And that does not mean I think everything is OK about this incident. It absolutely beggars belief that it could have happened at all, and I think the ACU had no other honourable course of action but to accept liability.)

What I don't really understand is why nobody else (like IoM govt or IoM Police) carried out any investigation and seem to have happily left it in the hands of the ACU.  But maybe I've misunderstood exactly who has done what...

 

*I presume IoM Govt and Police will have seen it.

As I understand it  the issue involving Mr Mercer has not been settled yet ,  and possibly the dissolution and winding up of the TT marshals association  may be part of it , one thing for certain , any payouts will come from the Isle of Man be it in one form or another , but I just wish someone would come clean ,and justify exactly whats happening ,as its destroying any good will the government and the ACU had with the marshals 

[Kopek]

The Police cannot or would find it difficult to prosecute the ACU, no matter what they have admitted to.

A prosecution could only be against an individual(s).

I don't know if that individual has been identified to the point of prosecution?

That an individual has not been identified as predominately responsible is an insult  to our Islands  justice system and leads to yet more questions about the continuance of these races?

As far as I know, no one has identified the individuals involved, that, on the Island is unimaginable, someone, somewhere, Facebook or some such should have named the people involved but that certainly has not reached MF to post these names. They may be guilty or not, that is for the Courts but a name or two is  not beyond MF. Why so???  Who is keeping this info from us? The ACU, the  marshals assoc, the Govt? Who???

It's old news now blame and shame?

Quote

 

 

[Ghost Ship]

I really can't see the benefit of naming the people responsible for the accident - assuming it's possible to identfy that person or those persons - on a place as small as the Isle of Man.

Some years ago I was involved in aiding the production of an independent investigation into the death of a patient at my NHS trust.  Names were named and names were blamed (although not to any great level of culpability - staff were just involved in the incident).

A year later one of the "names" who was a friend of mine as well as a colleague killed himself.  I've often wondered if his being named contributed to that.

So long as the ACU have identified what has gone wrong and take steps to try to ensure it won't happen again, I'm not sure that any benefit from "naming names" exceeds the potential bad consequences.  Who needs a witch hunt?

I suspect (although I do not know... ) that Steve Mercer's legal team will have access to the report so he will know what went wrong.  He's the person with a real right to know why his life got fucked up.

Edited February 4, 2022 by Ghost Ship

[tuono]

12 hours ago, paswt said:

Have PM'd you with details of the two fatal incidents when the police did not attend until the following day.

To be fair, the days of leaving bodies in gardens until the end of the session are long gone and fatalities are dealt with with a lot more dignity and respect these days.

[paswt]

3 minutes ago, tuono said:

To be fair, the days of leaving bodies in gardens until the end of the session are long gone and fatalities are dealt with with a lot more dignity and respect these days.

The deceased riders I referred to were picked up by the helicopter shortly after the incident and were accorded the dignity and respect they deserved. 

 

[0bserver]

9 hours ago, Ghost Ship said:

I really can't see the benefit of naming the people responsible for the accident - assuming it's possible to identfy that person or those persons - on a place as small as the Isle of Man.

If you kill someone on a public road then you get named. This situation is no different. Don't want to be named then don't take the risk of doing it. 

There's no comparison between a professional service like the NHS and the rag tag bunch of amateur known as the 'orange army'. 

 

9 hours ago, Ghost Ship said:

I suspect (although I do not know... ) that Steve Mercer's legal team will have access to the report so he will know what went wrong.  He's the person with a real right to know why his life got fucked up.

There's a legitimate public interest on it being open and transparent. If the GMP have to know what they are letting take place on their roads. 

 

Secrecy and cover ups help nobody except those who are at fault. 

[hissingsid]

The Mercer case has left a nasty taste in a lot of people’s mouths.    I really feel for him and hope he is making some recovery after the horrendous injuries he sustained.   He signed up to race not to what happened.

[Max Power]

3 hours ago, 0bserver said:

If you kill someone on a public road then you get named. This situation is no different. Don't want to be named then don't take the risk of doing it. 

There's no comparison between a professional service like the NHS and the rag tag bunch of amateur known as the 'orange army'. 

 

There's a legitimate public interest on it being open and transparent. If the GMP have to know what they are letting take place on their roads. 

 

Secrecy and cover ups help nobody except those who are at fault. 

So what would you do with the identity information if you had it? 

[Max Power]

2 hours ago, hissingsid said:

The Mercer case has left a nasty taste in a lot of people’s mouths.    I really feel for him and hope he is making some recovery after the horrendous injuries he sustained.   He signed up to race not to what happened.

It has yes, and I know some won't see this, because it doesn't suit their argument, but he and the others who set off in contravention of instructions given at their briefing, without question, must bear at least a part of the responsibility for what transpired. They were all experienced riders and not newcomers, several of whom had been in that situation before. 

You can say that they were obeying an instruction, but as we know, people make mistakes. 

[0bserver]

23 minutes ago, Max Power said:

So what would you do with the identity information if you had it? 

The same I do with other information in the news. Digest it and move on.