Reply to thread

Message

By the prosecution whose case was about the period of the accident and not the period prior to the accident when he got the alerts. Basically they said he knew he had low blood sugar when he rammed into the beer garden. But at the time he was obviously in a coma with a sugar level of 1.1 and so he could not have known that he was heading toward the pub. Of course does not excuse the fact that as a long term diabetic he should have known better and not driven. But the magistrate said the prosecutions case was not about that

[QUOTE="Quickstatus, post: 2758779, member: 49035"] By the prosecution whose case was about the period of the accident and not the period prior to the accident when he got the alerts. Basically they said he knew he had low blood sugar when he rammed into the beer garden. But at the time he was obviously in a coma with a sugar level of 1.1 and so he could not have known that he was heading toward the pub. Of course does not excuse the fact that as a long term diabetic he should have known better and not driven. But the magistrate said the prosecutions case was not about that [/QUOTE]

Verification