James Campbell: Daniel Andrews can’t complain away questions on Blairgowrie car accident

Daniel and Catherine Andrews are free to reject a top cop’s finding into their Blairgowrie car accident, but claiming it’s a conspiracy theory won’t wash with the public.

Daniel and Catherine Andrews are within their rights to reject Dr Raymond Shuey’s finding about their 2013 Blairgowrie car accident.

But to claim the Herald Sun was out-of-line reporting the findings by a former Assistant Commissioner for Traffic and Operations doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

The idea that any newspaper would or should ignore the written conclusions of an expert witness is absurd.

Especially when that expert witness has concluded: “The statements from both Daniel and Catherine Andrews that their vehicle stopped at Melbourne Rd are not consistent with impact consequences, nor the report by (witness) Brad Morgan of the squeal of tyres prior to impact”.

Or that: “The effective vehicle stopping distance of 19.2m following impact is indicative of a speed of 45km/h prior to impact.”

This is clearly a matter of legitimate public interest especially as Dr Shuey found the decision to withhold a police summary of the crash from the collision victim’s lawyers, “appears to have been deliberate”.

Sorry, Mr and Mrs Andrews but dismissing this as “conspiracy theories dressed up as journalism” just won’t wash.

When the case that caused the creation of this document eventually reaches court are media outlets supposed to just ignore it?

Daniel and Catherine Andrews can complain as much as they like, but like it or not, the questions about this accident are not going away.

Originally published as James Campbell: Daniel Andrews can’t complain away questions on Blairgowrie car accident