A23 shut between Patcham and Pyecombe both directions

[Lady Whistledown]

Or ... slightly more innocently ... both of them might have decided that it might be best to await legal advice before either of them say anything.

Possibly, but if you're the one who had been in the passenger seat, wouldn't you just say so? The maximum sentence for causing death by dangerous driving is fourteen years imprisonment, so the only one worried about legal advice should be the driver. Two people are dead here: personally I would have thought it unlikely (if not impossible) that the pair who survived would have the clarity of thought to be that far ahead of proceedings in the immediate aftermath.

It's more likely in my opinion that they've both denied driving, and it's not been able to establish from their positions at the scene (they could have got out of the car, run off, been thrown clear, or- worst case scenario- I've even heard of cases whereby the driver has got out and placed an unconscious or dead passenger in the driver's seat), therefore both would be arrested so they could be interviewed about it. And have evidential breath test readings taken.

Where driver details are disputed, they'd interview both parties and any other relevant witnesses, and use forensic analysis and CCTV cameras to try and pinpoint who was at the wheel.

I don't know anything about the circumstances of today's incident, I should add.

 

[DT Withdean]

Maybe trying to find out which one was driving at the time?

Exactly. Then, if the car wasn't stolen, the passenger will have no more questions to answer.

 

[mcshane in the 79th]

What would happen if the driver said the passenger leaned over, yanked the steering wheel and caused the accident. No CCTV to prove otherwise and it's down to the word of the driver vs passenger. If the passenger is drunk too then surely that rather complicates matters for the police?

 

[Lady Whistledown]

What would happen if the driver said the passenger leaned over, yanked the steering wheel and caused the accident. No CCTV to prove otherwise and it's down to the word of the driver vs passenger. If the passenger is drunk too then surely that rather complicates matters for the police?

Well both parties would be interviewed and there would inevitably be small but significant inconsistencies in the accounts which might tend to prove or disprove one of the versions.

Then the accounts would be looked at in the context of the forensic analysis of the vehicle and scene. It's amazing what the crash investigators can find out from the evidence in the car and on the road. Tyre marks (for example) prove an awful lot, but you might also be looking for fingerprint and DNA analysis from the steering wheel, for example.

 

[happypig]

Quite often when people are interviewed by police or questioned in the witness box it becomes clear who is telling the truth because their story tends to hold up better; if someone is lying, their story tends to "unravel"