Sussex wrote:
Skull wrote:
Sussex, maybe you should call this a shaggy dog story?

Now that's an idea.
As for the story, well I think any driver that dumps an old dear anywhere is a big fool at best, and as for dumping one that can't see, can only be descibed as a [edited by admin].
But maybe it's a lesson to us all in that all actions have consequences.

I find it hard to believe that the driver would just abandon the woman in the middle of a roadway. If she had witnesses to this event I am sure they would have been more than happy to back up here story under the circumstances. This being the case I would imagined that the regulatory committee would have used the opportunity to suspend the driver as an example to us all while jumping on the moral high ground.
This whole story smacks of bullshit but shows what can happen when you are up against a member of the public with a vivid imagination and no way to prove your innocence. You have two choices, one give the council the middle finger or throw yourself at their mercy. The system they use is not designed to give you a fair and proper hearing. The minute you answer a complaint you make it real, it should be your word against theirs, case closed. Without any evidential fact the whole story amounts to accusation and innuendo.
When reading a story like this everyone immediately jumps on the moral high ground, the truth is we use this ground only when we can afford it and when it suits us. My experience of life is that the moral argument is used when someone is getting the [edited by admin] kicked out of them for all the right reasons, only they don’t get the opportunity to tell their side of the story.