FWIW having sat through many a sad inquest the article seems a reasonably accurate summary of a typical hearing, and objectively written.
Often the investigating officers and pathologist are the only ones to give evidence in person and the proceedings can be quite brief.
The article did quote from the family of Rvd Malleson and families, as appears to be the case here, don't always bear malice towards the driver for what happened or want further action taken.
I'm sure many of us cyclists feel the verdict and lack of criminal proceedings appear inadequate.
But if the "hack" had suggested such a thing, when it hadn't been said in the inquest or by the family, then that would be editorialising wouldn't it?
RIP Rvd Malleson.
FWIW having sat through many a sad inquest the article seems a reasonably accurate summary of a typical hearing, and objectively written.
Often the investigating officers and pathologist are the only ones to give evidence in person and the proceedings can be quite brief.
The article did quote from the family of Rvd Malleson and families, as appears to be the case here, don't always bear malice towards the driver for what happened or want further action taken.
I'm sure many of us cyclists feel the verdict and lack of criminal proceedings appear inadequate.
But if the "hack" had suggested such a thing, when it hadn't been said in the inquest or by the family, then that would be editorialising wouldn't it?