Glasgow bin lorry families launch private prosecution bid

Three of the families of the Glasgow bin lorry victims have launched their bid to privately prosecute driver Harry Clarke.

Lawyers lodged a Bill of Criminal Letters with the Lord Advocate, Frank Mulholland QC yesterday.

The family of Jack and Lorraine Sweeney and their 18-year-old granddaughter, Erin McQuade, announced they were going ahead with the private prosecution after a fatal accident inquiry into the incident found it could have been avoided if Mr Clarke had disclosed his medical history.

The family solicitor, Paul Kavanagh, of Gildeas Solicitors said that a Bill for Criminal Letters has been delivered to the Lord Advocate.

He said: “We have sought the concurrence of the Lord Advocate and look forward to receiving a response within seven days.

“This is the initial process that the family hope ultimately will lead to the prosecution of Harry Clarke in the criminal courts.”

Last year’s FAI, led by Sheriff John Beckett QC, found Mr Clarke “repeatedly lied in order to gain and retain jobs”.

He concluded: “The most effective measure to prevent such an occurrence would be to seek to avoid drivers becoming incapacitated at the wheel.

“Responsibility in that regard lies with drivers themselves and Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA).

“It may well be that the single most useful outcome of this inquiry would be to raise awareness of the dangers involved in driving if subject to a medical condition which could cause the driver to lose control of a vehicle.”

Mr Mulholland said at the time the FAI did not undermine the Crown’s decision.

He said: “No evidence emerged at the fatal accident inquiry that the Crown was unaware of.

“There was nothing that emerged in the judgement of Sheriff Beckett that the Crown was unaware of and nothing in Sheriff Beckett’s judgement undermines the decision taken not to prosecute the driver of the bin lorry.”

He added: “The Crown well appreciates that this decision was not a popular one but the Crown cannot take decisions on the basis that they are popular but wrong in law.

“That would be unconstitutional, an abuse of process, and would rightly result in severe criticism by the court and a loss of confidence in the Crown.”