Nothing about Durham Giants post says that he actually witnessed any part of the incident.

I'd adapt it to read as ...

"[iSomeone who wasn't there, didn't see the incident, has no first-hand knowledge of the incident whatsoever and speculates wildly based on second-hand knowledge that he doesn't believe anyway ... then tells us that speculation is inadmissible[/i".

no but i have had two first hand accounts, seen the dead horse and pictures of the scene

so are your insurers covering the damage caused by that horse shaped tree that fell out the sky you told them about?

That, among other comments, particularly made me titter. We've got "lads" round here that are in their seventies

The alleged police comments are unbelievable. If events happened as reported the driver was evidently failing to drive with due care and attention. But, if the car hit the horse at 60-70mph and just carried on how did the lads, who were presumably taken by surprise and confused manage to run an catch up with the car? What was the speed limit - was ih national limit - if so what were the lads doing with the horses on the road? If not and there were warnings about horses, why did the police say what they are alleged to? All seems odd to me.

Horses are allowed on a road with a derestricted limit, as far as I know are allowed on any road except a motorway.

Anybody is entitled on any public road, anywhere, any time*.



Every driver must drive at such a speed that he can stop safely within the distance he can see to be clear.



It really is as simple as that.





* [size=85Obviously subject to legal restrictions, eg motorways etc., but none seem to apply here[/size

Hang on. She hits a horse at 60mph and it flies in the air, crashes down on her vehicle and she just drives off? A bloke at work once collided with a deer and it made a right mess of his motor. Sounds iffy to me!

Bearing in mind the exageration in speed is to be expected, as it's been repeatedly shown that people cannot estimate speeds of a vehicle when being prewarned that is what they are being asked to do, there is no chance when it's 'sudden', the whole issue here seems to boil down the the womans driving technique.



Imagine that it hadn't been a horse, but that it had been a pedestrian walking along the road. The woman would have had even less chance of seeing them, and would have had even less damage inflicted on their car.



To me, it boils down to her driving at an inappropriate speeds. Simple as that.



Driving without due care and attention.

If you're not getting any response from Plod, report the death of the Horse to the RSPCA.



They'll probably take up the case, and have a reputation for (pardon the pun) not letting go once they get their teeth into something.

Whilst the driver could be accused of a lot of things, cruelty to horses ain't one of 'em. You're flogging a dead horse with this one.

What did he do about the dead horse in the road?



He can't have just wandered off and left it for others to sort out, surely?

I should imagine shifting it would have been childs play for the lads who ran after the car driving at about 60 to 70 MPH and forced it to stop.

It wouldn't be the driver who was subject to the complaint. The complaint would be against the police officer for not following up a clear case of dangerous driving because it was just a horse that got killed.

Indeed.

Did the police officer have any connections with Tesco?

Just a thought.

Er, did he take the carcass?

He was a "Normal Plod", apparently, so would only have had a panda car, so I reckon he didn't take it.

If it had been a panda that had been hit, could have been a different story, granted.