VIDEO: On the hunt for Jade Clark crash driver (From Thisisdorset)

I wonder if the police have contacted all the crash repair garages in Hants and Dorset?

This tragic headline is fast becoming a media circus.

We don't need a fly on the wall, reality TV drama, we want to see this cowardly idiot brought to justice, and punished as such.

This poor girls parents and family deserve that, not sensationalism!

Along with a few other people, I e-mailed Crimewatch asking them if they would feature this search and I've had an e-mail back today informing me that they have a page feature on their website ... clearly everyone is doing everything they can to find this driver... I just wish they would do the right thing and go to the Police ... this must be agony for Jade's family who must have so many questions...

The trouble is, this XC90 driver has already been judged as 100% guilty by the public, media and also the police it seems with their comments of "we will find you, the net is closing in". As is so often the case, when a car is involved with a motorcyle or bike, the consequences are always far worse for the rider therefore the vehicle driver always is assumed to be at fault.

But what if this poor girl was at fault, suddenly veering into the path of the car driver without warning so evasive action was impossible - maybe suddenly changing lanes? With the moped at 30MPH and a car at potentially 70MPH, evading action may have been impossible in a split second? But everyone automatically assumes the XC90 driver is at fault.

At the moment, the ONLY thing that can be taken as read is the XC90 driver left the scene of an accident. It CANNOT be assumed that he or she is guilty of anything else.

With this appalling media circus and witchunt it is no wonder the driver is not coming forward because they are already deemed to be 100% guilty of causing the death of a young girl. Quite disgraceful what this has now turned into.

Bonkeydollocks wrote:
The trouble is, this XC90 driver has already been judged as 100% guilty by the public, media and also the police it seems with their comments of "we will find you, the net is closing in". As is so often the case, when a car is involved with a motorcyle or bike, the consequences are always far worse for the rider therefore the vehicle driver always is assumed to be at fault.

But what if this poor girl was at fault, suddenly veering into the path of the car driver without warning so evasive action was impossible - maybe suddenly changing lanes? With the moped at 30MPH and a car at potentially 70MPH, evading action may have been impossible in a split second? But everyone automatically assumes the XC90 driver is at fault.

At the moment, the ONLY thing that can be taken as read is the XC90 driver left the scene of an accident. It CANNOT be assumed that he or she is guilty of anything else.

With this appalling media circus and witchunt it is no wonder the driver is not coming forward because they are already deemed to be 100% guilty of causing the death of a young girl. Quite disgraceful what this has now turned into.

The very fact that the driver of the (presumably) (light- coloured) Volvo XC90 drove off and left the scene clearly indicates that the driver themself felt responsible, and didn't want to face the consequences for whatever reason. If they had nothing to hide, they would not have driven off.

Piston_Broke wrote:

Bonkeydollocks wrote:
The trouble is, this XC90 driver has already been judged as 100% guilty by the public, media and also the police it seems with their comments of "we will find you, the net is closing in". As is so often the case, when a car is involved with a motorcyle or bike, the consequences are always far worse for the rider therefore the vehicle driver always is assumed to be at fault.

But what if this poor girl was at fault, suddenly veering into the path of the car driver without warning so evasive action was impossible - maybe suddenly changing lanes? With the moped at 30MPH and a car at potentially 70MPH, evading action may have been impossible in a split second? But everyone automatically assumes the XC90 driver is at fault.

At the moment, the ONLY thing that can be taken as read is the XC90 driver left the scene of an accident. It CANNOT be assumed that he or she is guilty of anything else.

With this appalling media circus and witchunt it is no wonder the driver is not coming forward because they are already deemed to be 100% guilty of causing the death of a young girl. Quite disgraceful what this has now turned into.

The very fact that the driver of the (presumably) (light- coloured) Volvo XC90 drove off and left the scene clearly indicates that the driver themself felt responsible, and didn't want to face the consequences for whatever reason. If they had nothing to hide, they would not have driven off.

Thank you, you have very nicely endorsed my whole point....people are judging to be 100% guilty simply because they (wrongly) left the scene. They might just have felt they would automatically be held responsible for the very reason I mentioned in my first post.....that generally in accidents involving a vehicle and a bike, the finger is immediately pointed at the vehicle driver.

Panic and anxiety in the middle of a tragedy trigger impulse / split-second responses that, with the benefit of hindsight, are not always the correct ones.

The driver left the scene of an accident. We absolutely don't know they were the direct cause of this tragedy or that they were simply unable to take avoiding action.

Unfortunately, leaving the scene and not coming forward in over 3 weeks has not helped the person in any way and implies some guilt in the public and media. But that is all it is....an implication and we should remember this....

Bonkeydollocks wrote:

Piston_Broke wrote:

Bonkeydollocks wrote:
The trouble is, this XC90 driver has already been judged as 100% guilty by the public, media and also the police it seems with their comments of "we will find you, the net is closing in". As is so often the case, when a car is involved with a motorcyle or bike, the consequences are always far worse for the rider therefore the vehicle driver always is assumed to be at fault.

But what if this poor girl was at fault, suddenly veering into the path of the car driver without warning so evasive action was impossible - maybe suddenly changing lanes? With the moped at 30MPH and a car at potentially 70MPH, evading action may have been impossible in a split second? But everyone automatically assumes the XC90 driver is at fault.

At the moment, the ONLY thing that can be taken as read is the XC90 driver left the scene of an accident. It CANNOT be assumed that he or she is guilty of anything else.

With this appalling media circus and witchunt it is no wonder the driver is not coming forward because they are already deemed to be 100% guilty of causing the death of a young girl. Quite disgraceful what this has now turned into.

The very fact that the driver of the (presumably) (light- coloured) Volvo XC90 drove off and left the scene clearly indicates that the driver themself felt responsible, and didn't want to face the consequences for whatever reason. If they had nothing to hide, they would not have driven off.

Thank you, you have very nicely endorsed my whole point....people are judging to be 100% guilty simply because they (wrongly) left the scene. They might just have felt they would automatically be held responsible for the very reason I mentioned in my first post.....that generally in accidents involving a vehicle and a bike, the finger is immediately pointed at the vehicle driver.

Panic and anxiety in the middle of a tragedy trigger impulse / split-second responses that, with the benefit of hindsight, are not always the correct ones.

The driver left the scene of an accident. We absolutely don't know they were the direct cause of this tragedy or that they were simply unable to take avoiding action.

Unfortunately, leaving the scene and not coming forward in over 3 weeks has not helped the person in any way and implies some guilt in the public and media. But that is all it is....an implication and we should remember this....

I do understand your point, but the police investigation into this dreadful accident has already concluded that Jade's scooter was upright at the time of the collision, and it is extremely rare that the blame for a collision caused by someone running into the back of another motorist can be attributed to the driver of the vehicle in front. As you say, we cannot be 100% certain that the Volvo driver actually caused this accident, but he/she obviously knew something serious had occured, and to drive off and leave the poor girl helpless simply beggars belief.

Bonkeydollocks wrote:
The trouble is, this XC90 driver has already been judged as 100% guilty by the public, media and also the police it seems with their comments of "we will find you, the net is closing in". As is so often the case, when a car is involved with a motorcyle or bike, the consequences are always far worse for the rider therefore the vehicle driver always is assumed to be at fault.

But what if this poor girl was at fault, suddenly veering into the path of the car driver without warning so evasive action was impossible - maybe suddenly changing lanes? With the moped at 30MPH and a car at potentially 70MPH, evading action may have been impossible in a split second? But everyone automatically assumes the XC90 driver is at fault.

At the moment, the ONLY thing that can be taken as read is the XC90 driver left the scene of an accident. It CANNOT be assumed that he or she is guilty of anything else.

With this appalling media circus and witchunt it is no wonder the driver is not coming forward because they are already deemed to be 100% guilty of causing the death of a young girl. Quite disgraceful what this has now turned into.

only guilty people and drunk drivers and cowardly scum leave the scene of an accident, apologists like you make me sick.
how about the young girl was riding quite legally on the public highway when some idiot drives into the back of her , then runs off like a rat.
I want to be in court the day the scum gets sent down, to see what a rat looks like.

I suspect the driver has by now secured an alibi for their whereabouts on the night in question, and the Volvo has had a deliberate front end smash elsewhere in the country, hiding any minor damage caused by the scooter accident, and explaining the need for repairs or scrapping.
Hopefully the cops have some paint chips or some other forensic evidence to conclusively eliminate or prove any suspected vehicle.
Otherwise this could be a very long wait indeed.

Sir Alan wrote:

Bonkeydollocks wrote:
The trouble is, this XC90 driver has already been judged as 100% guilty by the public, media and also the police it seems with their comments of "we will find you, the net is closing in". As is so often the case, when a car is involved with a motorcyle or bike, the consequences are always far worse for the rider therefore the vehicle driver always is assumed to be at fault.

But what if this poor girl was at fault, suddenly veering into the path of the car driver without warning so evasive action was impossible - maybe suddenly changing lanes? With the moped at 30MPH and a car at potentially 70MPH, evading action may have been impossible in a split second? But everyone automatically assumes the XC90 driver is at fault.

At the moment, the ONLY thing that can be taken as read is the XC90 driver left the scene of an accident. It CANNOT be assumed that he or she is guilty of anything else.

With this appalling media circus and witchunt it is no wonder the driver is not coming forward because they are already deemed to be 100% guilty of causing the death of a young girl. Quite disgraceful what this has now turned into.

only guilty people and drunk drivers and cowardly scum leave the scene of an accident, apologists like you make me sick.
how about the young girl was riding quite legally on the public highway when some idiot drives into the back of her , then runs off like a rat.
I want to be in court the day the scum gets sent down, to see what a rat looks like.

Maybe comments like yours are exactly why the XC90 driver has not come forward?

And your theory that she was "riding quite legally on the public highway when some idiot drives into the back of her", is just that...only a theory. It isn't fact - but that's what 99% of people have convinced themselves of.

I so hope the driver comes forward of their own accord because this lynch mob mentality serves no purpose in any way and is probably a key reason for them not soing so

Bonkeydollocks wrote:
The trouble is, this XC90 driver has already been judged as 100% guilty by the public, media and also the police it seems with their comments of "we will find you, the net is closing in". As is so often the case, when a car is involved with a motorcyle or bike, the consequences are always far worse for the rider therefore the vehicle driver always is assumed to be at fault.

But what if this poor girl was at fault, suddenly veering into the path of the car driver without warning so evasive action was impossible - maybe suddenly changing lanes? With the moped at 30MPH and a car at potentially 70MPH, evading action may have been impossible in a split second? But everyone automatically assumes the XC90 driver is at fault.

At the moment, the ONLY thing that can be taken as read is the XC90 driver left the scene of an accident. It CANNOT be assumed that he or she is guilty of anything else.

With this appalling media circus and witchunt it is no wonder the driver is not coming forward because they are already deemed to be 100% guilty of causing the death of a young girl. Quite disgraceful what this has now turned into.

You're a cretin.

Whether it was the car driver's fault or not is irrelevant. It was rendered irrelevant when they left the scene.

That is the crime for which they are being pursued.

Controversial But True wrote:
This tragic headline is fast becoming a media circus.

We don't need a fly on the wall, reality TV drama, we want to see this cowardly idiot brought to justice, and punished as such.

This poor girls parents and family deserve that, not sensationalism!

Without the media circus as you so call it they would have less of a chance. The driver has obviously decided not to come forward after killing someone and needs to be brought to justice. If that includes appealing to the general public then so be it.

Huey wrote:
I suspect the driver has by now secured an alibi for their whereabouts on the night in question, and the Volvo has had a deliberate front end smash elsewhere in the country, hiding any minor damage caused by the scooter accident, and explaining the need for repairs or scrapping.
Hopefully the cops have some paint chips or some other forensic evidence to conclusively eliminate or prove any suspected vehicle.
Otherwise this could be a very long wait indeed.

I agree with Huey

your-mum wrote:

Bonkeydollocks wrote:
The trouble is, this XC90 driver has already been judged as 100% guilty by the public, media and also the police it seems with their comments of "we will find you, the net is closing in". As is so often the case, when a car is involved with a motorcyle or bike, the consequences are always far worse for the rider therefore the vehicle driver always is assumed to be at fault.

But what if this poor girl was at fault, suddenly veering into the path of the car driver without warning so evasive action was impossible - maybe suddenly changing lanes? With the moped at 30MPH and a car at potentially 70MPH, evading action may have been impossible in a split second? But everyone automatically assumes the XC90 driver is at fault.

At the moment, the ONLY thing that can be taken as read is the XC90 driver left the scene of an accident. It CANNOT be assumed that he or she is guilty of anything else.

With this appalling media circus and witchunt it is no wonder the driver is not coming forward because they are already deemed to be 100% guilty of causing the death of a young girl. Quite disgraceful what this has now turned into.

You're a cretin.

Whether it was the car driver's fault or not is irrelevant. It was rendered irrelevant when they left the scene.

That is the crime for which they are being pursued.

So you are entirely agreeing with my third paragraph then. Interesting (and unnecessary) personal attack on someone you share the same view with.....

"This collision has shocked officers, which is why we are so committed to finding this person."

So, they don't bother trying to find people if they aren't shocked by a crime?

Piston_Broke wrote:

Bonkeydollocks wrote:

Piston_Broke wrote:

Bonkeydollocks wrote:
The trouble is, this XC90 driver has already been judged as 100% guilty by the public, media and also the police it seems with their comments of "we will find you, the net is closing in". As is so often the case, when a car is involved with a motorcyle or bike, the consequences are always far worse for the rider therefore the vehicle driver always is assumed to be at fault.

But what if this poor girl was at fault, suddenly veering into the path of the car driver without warning so evasive action was impossible - maybe suddenly changing lanes? With the moped at 30MPH and a car at potentially 70MPH, evading action may have been impossible in a split second? But everyone automatically assumes the XC90 driver is at fault.

At the moment, the ONLY thing that can be taken as read is the XC90 driver left the scene of an accident. It CANNOT be assumed that he or she is guilty of anything else.

With this appalling media circus and witchunt it is no wonder the driver is not coming forward because they are already deemed to be 100% guilty of causing the death of a young girl. Quite disgraceful what this has now turned into.

The very fact that the driver of the (presumably) (light- coloured) Volvo XC90 drove off and left the scene clearly indicates that the driver themself felt responsible, and didn't want to face the consequences for whatever reason. If they had nothing to hide, they would not have driven off.

Thank you, you have very nicely endorsed my whole point....people are judging to be 100% guilty simply because they (wrongly) left the scene. They might just have felt they would automatically be held responsible for the very reason I mentioned in my first post.....that generally in accidents involving a vehicle and a bike, the finger is immediately pointed at the vehicle driver.

Panic and anxiety in the middle of a tragedy trigger impulse / split-second responses that, with the benefit of hindsight, are not always the correct ones.

The driver left the scene of an accident. We absolutely don't know they were the direct cause of this tragedy or that they were simply unable to take avoiding action.

Unfortunately, leaving the scene and not coming forward in over 3 weeks has not helped the person in any way and implies some guilt in the public and media. But that is all it is....an implication and we should remember this....

I do understand your point, but the police investigation into this dreadful accident has already concluded that Jade's scooter was upright at the time of the collision, and it is extremely rare that the blame for a collision caused by someone running into the back of another motorist can be attributed to the driver of the vehicle in front. As you say, we cannot be 100% certain that the Volvo driver actually caused this accident, but he/she obviously knew something serious had occured, and to drive off and leave the poor girl helpless simply beggars belief.

I have a very reliable source who told me that she was already on the ground when the Volvo hit her. I wish I didn't know the details I now know but from what I've heard the Volvo isn't responsible for her death. Leaving the scene of a serious accident like this isn't on, but the way the Echo have reported this whole incident is out of order. Yesterday there was a line they printed that stated "The Volvo that knocked Jade Clarke off her moped".This hasn't been established and from what I've heard isn't the case.

All the police have said is that they are looking for a Volvo that left the scene which they believe was the first car to hit her.

I wonder if this vehicle was on it's way to catch a ferry,
I hope the police have checked those on the next ferry out.

With all the CCTV cameras around I would have thought it must have been caught on camera somewhere with damage to the front.

speedy231278 wrote:
"This collision has shocked officers, which is why we are so committed to finding this person."

So, they don't bother trying to find people if they aren't shocked by a crime?

Pointless comment as usual

Has anyone asked psychic Robert Broadhurst-Browne, who was crowing about his 'gift' on Sunday?
He was interviewed by Faith Eckersall who should have his address.

http://www.bournemou
thecho.co.uk/news/10
290869._I_caught_a_k
iller_on_the_tube___
_psychic_Robert_Broa
dhurst_Browne_talks_
about_his_gift/#comm
entsList

ragj195 wrote:

Piston_Broke wrote:

Bonkeydollocks wrote:

Piston_Broke wrote:

Bonkeydollocks wrote:
The trouble is, this XC90 driver has already been judged as 100% guilty by the public, media and also the police it seems with their comments of "we will find you, the net is closing in". As is so often the case, when a car is involved with a motorcyle or bike, the consequences are always far worse for the rider therefore the vehicle driver always is assumed to be at fault.

But what if this poor girl was at fault, suddenly veering into the path of the car driver without warning so evasive action was impossible - maybe suddenly changing lanes? With the moped at 30MPH and a car at potentially 70MPH, evading action may have been impossible in a split second? But everyone automatically assumes the XC90 driver is at fault.

At the moment, the ONLY thing that can be taken as read is the XC90 driver left the scene of an accident. It CANNOT be assumed that he or she is guilty of anything else.

With this appalling media circus and witchunt it is no wonder the driver is not coming forward because they are already deemed to be 100% guilty of causing the death of a young girl. Quite disgraceful what this has now turned into.

The very fact that the driver of the (presumably) (light- coloured) Volvo XC90 drove off and left the scene clearly indicates that the driver themself felt responsible, and didn't want to face the consequences for whatever reason. If they had nothing to hide, they would not have driven off.

Thank you, you have very nicely endorsed my whole point....people are judging to be 100% guilty simply because they (wrongly) left the scene. They might just have felt they would automatically be held responsible for the very reason I mentioned in my first post.....that generally in accidents involving a vehicle and a bike, the finger is immediately pointed at the vehicle driver.

Panic and anxiety in the middle of a tragedy trigger impulse / split-second responses that, with the benefit of hindsight, are not always the correct ones.

The driver left the scene of an accident. We absolutely don't know they were the direct cause of this tragedy or that they were simply unable to take avoiding action.

Unfortunately, leaving the scene and not coming forward in over 3 weeks has not helped the person in any way and implies some guilt in the public and media. But that is all it is....an implication and we should remember this....

I do understand your point, but the police investigation into this dreadful accident has already concluded that Jade's scooter was upright at the time of the collision, and it is extremely rare that the blame for a collision caused by someone running into the back of another motorist can be attributed to the driver of the vehicle in front. As you say, we cannot be 100% certain that the Volvo driver actually caused this accident, but he/she obviously knew something serious had occured, and to drive off and leave the poor girl helpless simply beggars belief.

I have a very reliable source who told me that she was already on the ground when the Volvo hit her. I wish I didn't know the details I now know but from what I've heard the Volvo isn't responsible for her death. Leaving the scene of a serious accident like this isn't on, but the way the Echo have reported this whole incident is out of order. Yesterday there was a line they printed that stated "The Volvo that knocked Jade Clarke off her moped".This hasn't been established and from what I've heard isn't the case.

All the police have said is that they are looking for a Volvo that left the scene which they believe was the first car to hit her.

I trust this 'reliable source' has told the police this? Funny then that the driver should flee the scene if they were 100% blameless. Very odd indeed.

The Liberal wrote:

ragj195 wrote:

Piston_Broke wrote:

Bonkeydollocks wrote:

Piston_Broke wrote:

Bonkeydollocks wrote:
The trouble is, this XC90 driver has already been judged as 100% guilty by the public, media and also the police it seems with their comments of "we will find you, the net is closing in". As is so often the case, when a car is involved with a motorcyle or bike, the consequences are always far worse for the rider therefore the vehicle driver always is assumed to be at fault.

But what if this poor girl was at fault, suddenly veering into the path of the car driver without warning so evasive action was impossible - maybe suddenly changing lanes? With the moped at 30MPH and a car at potentially 70MPH, evading action may have been impossible in a split second? But everyone automatically assumes the XC90 driver is at fault.

At the moment, the ONLY thing that can be taken as read is the XC90 driver left the scene of an accident. It CANNOT be assumed that he or she is guilty of anything else.

With this appalling media circus and witchunt it is no wonder the driver is not coming forward because they are already deemed to be 100% guilty of causing the death of a young girl. Quite disgraceful what this has now turned into.

The very fact that the driver of the (presumably) (light- coloured) Volvo XC90 drove off and left the scene clearly indicates that the driver themself felt responsible, and didn't want to face the consequences for whatever reason. If they had nothing to hide, they would not have driven off.

Thank you, you have very nicely endorsed my whole point....people are judging to be 100% guilty simply because they (wrongly) left the scene. They might just have felt they would automatically be held responsible for the very reason I mentioned in my first post.....that generally in accidents involving a vehicle and a bike, the finger is immediately pointed at the vehicle driver.

Panic and anxiety in the middle of a tragedy trigger impulse / split-second responses that, with the benefit of hindsight, are not always the correct ones.

The driver left the scene of an accident. We absolutely don't know they were the direct cause of this tragedy or that they were simply unable to take avoiding action.

Unfortunately, leaving the scene and not coming forward in over 3 weeks has not helped the person in any way and implies some guilt in the public and media. But that is all it is....an implication and we should remember this....

I do understand your point, but the police investigation into this dreadful accident has already concluded that Jade's scooter was upright at the time of the collision, and it is extremely rare that the blame for a collision caused by someone running into the back of another motorist can be attributed to the driver of the vehicle in front. As you say, we cannot be 100% certain that the Volvo driver actually caused this accident, but he/she obviously knew something serious had occured, and to drive off and leave the poor girl helpless simply beggars belief.

I have a very reliable source who told me that she was already on the ground when the Volvo hit her. I wish I didn't know the details I now know but from what I've heard the Volvo isn't responsible for her death. Leaving the scene of a serious accident like this isn't on, but the way the Echo have reported this whole incident is out of order. Yesterday there was a line they printed that stated "The Volvo that knocked Jade Clarke off her moped".This hasn't been established and from what I've heard isn't the case.

All the police have said is that they are looking for a Volvo that left the scene which they believe was the first car to hit her.

I trust this 'reliable source' has told the police this? Funny then that the driver should flee the scene if they were 100% blameless. Very odd indeed.

Not funny in the slightest if they are of the opinion they are already deemed 100% guilty of being the cause regardless of what actually happened and what the facts actually are. And that a baying lynch mob will be waiting for them prior to a court of law hearing FACTS and firm statements from witnesses who actually saw what happened and police evidence from hours of thorough investigation and painstaking measurements from the scene.

Thank goodness our legal system works on the firm principle that an individual is innocent until proven guilty. And that the baying lynch mob mentality has not compromised the person getting a fair trial now, once they are found.

Could the volvo have been heading to the ferryport at poole ?

I cant believe that with all the cctv cameras there are that they cannot find the supposed volvo in question, im sure only a few of these cars would have travelled along that stretch of road in a given period of time, so surely some cctv footage with number plates must be available?

On the BBC website right now a quote from a senior police officer on the case:

....speaking directly to the driver of the Volvo XC90 involved in the collision, Det Insp Marcus Hester, of the force's major crime investigation team, said: "Please come forward and speak to us. We know that your collision with Jade did not kill her....

Interesting last sentence?

Has anyone (Echo/Dorset Police) considered an appeal for all light coloured Volvo XC90 drivers who have yet to be interviewed, to attend a local police station with their vehicles? This would save the police a lot of time travelling between addresses and it would allow the police to focus on owners that haven't come forward.

Same principle as blanket DNA testing really.

The Liberal wrote:

ragj195 wrote:

Piston_Broke wrote:

Bonkeydollocks wrote:

Piston_Broke wrote:

Bonkeydollocks wrote:
The trouble is, this XC90 driver has already been judged as 100% guilty by the public, media and also the police it seems with their comments of "we will find you, the net is closing in". As is so often the case, when a car is involved with a motorcyle or bike, the consequences are always far worse for the rider therefore the vehicle driver always is assumed to be at fault.

But what if this poor girl was at fault, suddenly veering into the path of the car driver without warning so evasive action was impossible - maybe suddenly changing lanes? With the moped at 30MPH and a car at potentially 70MPH, evading action may have been impossible in a split second? But everyone automatically assumes the XC90 driver is at fault.

At the moment, the ONLY thing that can be taken as read is the XC90 driver left the scene of an accident. It CANNOT be assumed that he or she is guilty of anything else.

With this appalling media circus and witchunt it is no wonder the driver is not coming forward because they are already deemed to be 100% guilty of causing the death of a young girl. Quite disgraceful what this has now turned into.

The very fact that the driver of the (presumably) (light- coloured) Volvo XC90 drove off and left the scene clearly indicates that the driver themself felt responsible, and didn't want to face the consequences for whatever reason. If they had nothing to hide, they would not have driven off.

Thank you, you have very nicely endorsed my whole point....people are judging to be 100% guilty simply because they (wrongly) left the scene. They might just have felt they would automatically be held responsible for the very reason I mentioned in my first post.....that generally in accidents involving a vehicle and a bike, the finger is immediately pointed at the vehicle driver.

Panic and anxiety in the middle of a tragedy trigger impulse / split-second responses that, with the benefit of hindsight, are not always the correct ones.

The driver left the scene of an accident. We absolutely don't know they were the direct cause of this tragedy or that they were simply unable to take avoiding action.

Unfortunately, leaving the scene and not coming forward in over 3 weeks has not helped the person in any way and implies some guilt in the public and media. But that is all it is....an implication and we should remember this....

I do understand your point, but the police investigation into this dreadful accident has already concluded that Jade's scooter was upright at the time of the collision, and it is extremely rare that the blame for a collision caused by someone running into the back of another motorist can be attributed to the driver of the vehicle in front. As you say, we cannot be 100% certain that the Volvo driver actually caused this accident, but he/she obviously knew something serious had occured, and to drive off and leave the poor girl helpless simply beggars belief.

I have a very reliable source who told me that she was already on the ground when the Volvo hit her. I wish I didn't know the details I now know but from what I've heard the Volvo isn't responsible for her death. Leaving the scene of a serious accident like this isn't on, but the way the Echo have reported this whole incident is out of order. Yesterday there was a line they printed that stated "The Volvo that knocked Jade Clarke off her moped".This hasn't been established and from what I've heard isn't the case.

All the police have said is that they are looking for a Volvo that left the scene which they believe was the first car to hit her.

I trust this 'reliable source' has told the police this? Funny then that the driver should flee the scene if they were 100% blameless. Very odd indeed.

The police already know this based on the witness statements they took. The driver might have fled the scene because of any number of reasons. Just because they're not 100% blameless it doesn't mean they're 100% responsible.

Bonkeydollocks wrote:
On the BBC website right now a quote from a senior police officer on the case:

....speaking directly to the driver of the Volvo XC90 involved in the collision, Det Insp Marcus Hester, of the force's major crime investigation team, said: "Please come forward and speak to us. We know that your collision with Jade did not kill her....

Interesting last sentence?

Can't we ignore what the police say and focus on what the echo prints? That's the way it seems to work on here.

Keep up the hunt. Your diligence will pay off.

Bonkeydollocks wrote:

Sir Alan wrote:

Bonkeydollocks wrote: The trouble is, this XC90 driver has already been judged as 100% guilty by the public, media and also the police it seems with their comments of "we will find you, the net is closing in". As is so often the case, when a car is involved with a motorcyle or bike, the consequences are always far worse for the rider therefore the vehicle driver always is assumed to be at fault. But what if this poor girl was at fault, suddenly veering into the path of the car driver without warning so evasive action was impossible - maybe suddenly changing lanes? With the moped at 30MPH and a car at potentially 70MPH, evading action may have been impossible in a split second? But everyone automatically assumes the XC90 driver is at fault. At the moment, the ONLY thing that can be taken as read is the XC90 driver left the scene of an accident. It CANNOT be assumed that he or she is guilty of anything else. With this appalling media circus and witchunt it is no wonder the driver is not coming forward because they are already deemed to be 100% guilty of causing the death of a young girl. Quite disgraceful what this has now turned into.

only guilty people and drunk drivers and cowardly scum leave the scene of an accident, apologists like you make me sick. how about the young girl was riding quite legally on the public highway when some idiot drives into the back of her , then runs off like a rat. I want to be in court the day the scum gets sent down, to see what a rat looks like.

Maybe comments like yours are exactly why the XC90 driver has not come forward? And your theory that she was "riding quite legally on the public highway when some idiot drives into the back of her", is just that...only a theory. It isn't fact - but that's what 99% of people have convinced themselves of. I so hope the driver comes forward of their own accord because this lynch mob mentality serves no purpose in any way and is probably a key reason for them not soing so

and i recall the police saying jade was upright at the time of the collision , so pray tell me apologists for a rat , how come shed ended up knocked off her bike.
It seem to me you know more about this that you are letting on maybe it was you who was driving and are trying to weave some sort of defence or possibly you know the driver.
you certainly waste a lot of time defending a person who has no defence, who as i say ran away like a rat, pure Scum

Why is this taking so long?

When it became apparent that it was probably a Volvo XYZ or whatever, a call to the DVLA would result in a search of their database (30 mins max)
& a list produced. Divide this up amongst the appropriate police forces and they probably have a handful each to inspect. Result in 1 week maximum.
What have they been doing all this time?

Plus why bother looking at black cars when it was reported as light colour or silver?

EGHH wrote:
With all the CCTV cameras around I would have thought it must have been caught on camera somewhere with damage to the front.

phonehome, I think we have to be patient with the police in enquiries of this kind, which can be quite complex for many reasons.Just two examples,the police having once visited all owner / drivers of vehicles of this description, would need to consider that the vehicle involved could be foreign registered. In that scenario every car ferry port's CCTV would be relevant, whether it was arriving or departing. This would be a mammoth and time consuming task, so would checking all shipment records.
Also another probability is that the owner / driver approached a containerized self-storage depot, anywhere in the UK for rental,and loaded the vehicle later under cover of darkness, for the foreseeable future. This would involve the police nationwide who need a lot of cooperation from these companies as well as verifying all customers details. Enquiries like this can take months , but one day just one small piece of evidence will make all the difference.

phonehome wrote:
Why is this taking so long?

When it became apparent that it was probably a Volvo XYZ or whatever, a call to the DVLA would result in a search of their database (30 mins max)
& a list produced. Divide this up amongst the appropriate police forces and they probably have a handful each to inspect. Result in 1 week maximum.
What have they been doing all this time?

Plus why bother looking at black cars when it was reported as light colour or silver?

Most entertaining comment of the week.

I assume you are trying to be obtuse in some ironic way?