Driver inattention blamed for fatal collision, court hears

An accident reconstruction expert has told the Supreme Court that driver inattention was the primary cause of a collision more than 15 years ago that resulted in two deaths.

Troy Emerson Clinton of Brereton Village #2, St Philip, is accused of causing the deaths of Akalia Natasha Weir and a female minor by driving motor vehicle Z 72 on Lower Estate Road, St Michael, on April 21, 2011, at a speed and in a manner dangerous to the public.  

As the trial continued in the No. 5 Supreme Court 

before Justice Pamela Beckles, retired sergeant Roger Mayers told the court that upon visiting the scene of the collision near the Lears roundabout that night, he found substantial external damage to the van, including to its front windscreen, left front wing, left headlamp and left front wheel.  

He noted that the van hit the right corner of the front of the trailer, which was located on the left side of the roadway and was facing in the opposite direction, with the front facing the roundabout or “what we would say in Barbados, it was parked on the wrong side of the road”.  

Mayers said: “The measurements revealed that the width of Lower Estate Road at the scene of the collision was 21 feet. The point of impact between the left front section of the trailer and the left front section of the motor van was located eight feet from the left side of the road if going in the direction of Belle Road. 

“The front section of the trailer moved approximately three feet, three inches from its original location. The motor van was located four feet from the point of impact. The trailer was eight feet, four inches in width and 39 feet, four inches in length.”

The former police officer told the court that there was fluorescent tape located on the rear of the loader, which could be seen from a reasonable distance by motorists approaching it from the rear, but there was none of this tape to the front of the parked trailer.  

Mayers stated that despite not having fluorescent tape to the front, the trailer was “reddish orange in color”, was parked under a street lamp which was 30 feet away, and which, according to him, provided adequate lighting of the roadway and the trailer.  

“The driver of the motor van continued on his left and proper side until he was approximately, in my opinion, less than five feet away from the parked trailer when he attempted to avoid colliding with it by pulling to his right. This action or inaction by the driver of the motor van was unsuccessful and resulted in the left front section of the van colliding with the left front section of the loader.  

“The maximum engagement phase of this collision resulted in substantial contact damage to the left front section of the motor van and injuries to the passengers, who were all seated in the seat behind the driver. It is also during this maximum engagement phase that the right front section of the loader moved approximately three feet from the stand it was originally located on.”

Noting that there was an absence of skid marks at the scene, Mayers conclude that brakes had not been applied.  

“The absence of skid marks by the tires of motor van Z 72 is a good indicator that the driver had no prior knowledge of what was about to confront him. And if he did, he had little time in which to react to the hazard by applying brakes. In my opinion, this collision was caused by the driver of motor van Z 72 whose attention, in my opinion, was diverted whilst approaching the loader.”

The retired sergeant later expressed that he did not believe that excessive speed was a factor in the incident.  

Noting that on average, headlights gave drivers a view of 60 feet in front of the vehicle, Mayers added: “With headlights on and spotting straight ahead, you should see it easily. It may be difficult to see if you are not paying attention or doing something that caused you to not see ahead but with a red object ahead, you should see it.”  

Principal State Counsel Romario Straker is prosecuting the case, in which Senior Counsel Andrew Pilgrim and attorney Lesley Cargill-Straker represent Clinton. A jury of nine women is hearing the evidence.  

(JB)