I can't find anything besides her account that is evidence of a memory gap. Surely if that's her only defence then the onus is on the defence to prove that it's credible?
You'd think a medical assessment or history would have come up? She can't have just said "can't remember" to every question and got off?
It's even easier to kill cyclists with impunity than I thought.
I can't find anything besides her account that is evidence of a memory gap. Surely if that's her only defence then the onus is on the defence to prove that it's credible?
You'd think a medical assessment or history would have come up? She can't have just said "can't remember" to every question and got off?
It's even easier to kill cyclists with impunity than I thought.