[andyfox]

I agree with virtually everything you say. (Wow! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]) his story is completely unbelievable in light of the facts and the evidence. [Even worse, his first statement to police on the 19th contradicted the later one on the 25th. He never even mnetioned the other two guys (Markham and whatever the other guy's name was) trying to get her out of the car on the 19th.] The only thing I quibble with is "He admits that he drove the car." He lied about everything else, why wouldn't he lie about that? I would say "He claims that he drove the car." The impossibilities and inaccuracies of the story he told about what happened in the car, the fact that he did not appear wet or at all shaken when he first got back to the cottage, and did not mention the accident to anyone until the next morning--all this leads me to believe he didn't know about it until the next morning.

Again, though, I believe he was responsible for the woman's death, that the "inquiry" was a travesty, that he lied in virtually everything he said about it, and that he should have gone to jail.