- Joined
- 22 Jan 2007
- Messages
- 16,874
- Reaction score
- 2,358
- Country
That news report doesn't contain footage, just an image. Have you seen the footage of the windows being smashed, as claimed?one of us is confused.
That news report doesn't contain footage, just an image. Have you seen the footage of the windows being smashed, as claimed?one of us is confused.
So what? You seem to have decided it is impossible with your pronouncements.So you know how hard it will be to prove that the wash from the tractor caused additional quantifiable damage, to items that were not already destroyed (in value) by the flood.
you might want to look at the link again. maybe scroll down a bit.That news report doesn't contain footage, just an image. Have you seen the footage of the windows being smashed, as claimed?
Nope, still not seeing it, apologies if it's obvious.you might want to look at the link again. maybe scroll down a bit.
We know that a wall collapsed causing a "tidal wave".
me too.What I saw in the video, wasn't so much a tidal wave, as a fairly gentle rise in water level. Those working in the existing water, simply strolled to up the road, to a higher level. A gradual rise, causes much less damage, than a 'tidal wave'.
me too.
then why are you posting? Just ignore the thread. Surely you don't object to people commenting on the information as reported?So what? You seem to have decided it is impossible with your pronouncements.
I'm saying let's wait and see what evidence, if any, people have..
If he pleads not guilty, its going to a be a challenge to pin criminal damage and dangerous driving.
I still haven't seen any evidence on CCTV of smashing windows. Just a door being pushed open.I can see driving without due care.
I can't see how someone can argue damage to property that is damaged. What is the value of the damage? what is the work needed to fix the damage specifically caused. Was it reasonably foreseeable that his vehicle would cause such a wash?
How could we possibly know that?what was the value of the damage caused?
what was the condition of the property being damaged?
what was the value of property being damaged immediately before the damage?
So it doesn't seem to be me.one of us is confused.
You aren't just commenting, you seem to be objecting to the notion he could be guilty as charged.Surely you don't object to people commenting on the information as reported?
what was the value of the damage caused?
what was the condition of the property being damaged?
what was the value of property being damaged immediately before the damage?
I'm sure the insurance company will be keen to claim from him. They will know a value.How could we possibly know that?