The Fatal Bend
At 23:15 on a wet November night, you attend a single-vehicle collision on a rural R-road. A car has left the road at a bend and struck a tree. A 17-year-old rear-seat passenger is pronounced dead at the scene. The driver is absent. The car is registered to a 34-year-old local man. At 00:45 the registered owner walks into the station with a cut to his forehead, smelling of alcohol, and says he was not driving: 'A fella I know asked for a lift; he ran off.' He will not name him. There are no witnesses, but a dashcam is visible in the wreck and a phone is on the verge. The road is unlit and the surface is wet; there are tyre marks and debris over 40 metres. The family of the deceased are at the hospital. The local newspaper has already posted about 'a hit-and-run'. You are the inspector on call.
1. Set out your immediate priorities at the scene and in the station, with reasons.
Read the worked answer
Scene preservation and evidence. I would confirm the scene is cordoned, log all arrivals, and request forensic collision investigators. The tyre marks, debris field, road surface, lighting and weather are perishable evidence. I would preserve the dashcam, the phone on the verge, and the vehicle, and arrange photography and mapping. I would identify and canvass any houses or cameras along the route.
The suspect. The registered owner is a suspect, not a witness. I would caution him, arrest him on reasonable suspicion of offences including dangerous driving causing death, failure to stop and suspected intoxicant driving, and have him medically assessed. I would ensure solicitor access and detention reviews. His cut and alcohol level are evidence and health issues at the same time.
The deceased and family. I would appoint a family liaison officer, confirm identification through proper procedures, and ensure the family are told before any public confirmation. The coroner must be informed. The family should not learn details from the newspaper.
Command and media. I would notify the Superintendent and set up an incident log. The media line should be factual, express sympathy, appeal for witnesses and dashcam footage, and avoid naming the suspect or speculating about charges.
2. The suspect refuses to provide a breath specimen and says he needs to see a doctor for his head. How do you proceed lawfully?
Read the worked answer
Medical need first. A cut to the forehead after a fatal collision could indicate head injury. I would have him examined by a doctor before pressing him on testing. Refusing a specimen is not a reason to deny medical care, and force must not be used to obtain a specimen.
Testing. If the doctor considers him fit, I would follow the statutory breath, blood or urine procedures, caution him, and record any refusal in writing with the time and exact words. A refusal may itself be an offence, but the medical position must be documented. If the doctor considers him unfit for a breath test, I would ask the doctor about blood or urine testing and record the clinical opinion. I would not direct a procedure that the doctor says is medically unsafe.
Investigation. I would continue the arrest for the driving offences, preserve the medical records, and obtain a statement from the doctor. The refusal and the medical evidence may both be relevant later. I would also pursue the dashcam, phone and any CCTV, because the case should not depend on a specimen that may not be available.
3. How would you manage the family and the public narrative without prejudicing the investigation?
Read the worked answer
Family. A family liaison officer should make contact, explain what is known and not known, and provide a single point of contact. I would avoid speculation about speed, alcohol or who was driving. The family should be supported at the hospital and told about the coroner process. Their privacy should be protected, especially if the deceased is a minor.
Media. I would issue a short factual statement confirming a fatal collision and appealing for witnesses and dashcam footage. I would not comment on the suspect's account, his alcohol smell, or the refusal of a specimen. I would monitor social media and correct clear misinformation without arguing online.
Investigation integrity. I would remind members not to post about the case and to preserve their notes. The public narrative should not become a trial by media. If the newspaper publishes inaccurate material, the correct response is a factual correction through the proper press office, not an off-the-record briefing. The test is whether a jury could later hear the case fairly.