A woman accused of driving dangerously has denied causing the crash, which injured her partner and rolled her mangled car into a ditch.
Home carer Victoria Irvine, from Aberdeenshire, was one of the drivers in a horror collision involving her vehicle and a BT Openreach van.
At the start of her trial, Irvine denied a charge of causing serious injury by dangerous driving.
The 27-year-old’s red Seat Leon collided with the van, before spinning off into a ditch at the side of the B9077 South Deeside Road, Durris.
Gordon Fraser, Irvine’s partner and a front-seat passenger in her car, was trapped inside the vehicle for a time and was later found to have suffered an “open fracture” to his right arm.
He also suffered wounds to his head, forehead and eyebrow.
Other passengers, which included a child, were fortunately not seriously injured.
‘Collision would not have taken place if you had performed a safe overtake’
On the first day of the trial before Sheriff William Summers at Aberdeen Sheriff Court, the jury of seven men and eight women heard evidence from Kristian Dudek, the driver of the BT van.
Under questioning from fiscal depute Ruaridh McAlister, he told the court he had been overtaking a cyclist on a long straight section of the road, and that Irvine’s vehicle had been behind him.
He said: “I think I checked the mirrors and put my indicator on and started to overtake the bicycle.
“I was overtaking the bicycle and I think I managed to do that and then I got a massive impact in the back of my van and saw a red car spinning.
“The red car ended up in a ditch.”
Mr Dudek also described trying to help the occupants of the car following the crash, and said one male passenger had initially been “trapped” inside.
Asked if he had seen Irvine indicate before pulling out, he said: “I can’t remember, but I don’t think so, otherwise I wouldn’t be overtaking the bicycle”.
Cross-examining the witness, defence agent Liam Mcallister asked Mr Dudek if, given the passage of time, he could be certain he had checked his mirrors before pulling out.
Mr Dudek replied: “I definitely checked my mirrors”.
‘The steering wheel was going crazy’
Asked about a blind spot in the van, he accepted there was one but said: “I checked the mirrors twice, so if there was something in the blind spot, I would have seen”.
Mr Mcallister put it to the witness that Irvine’s car had already started to perform an overtake and he just hadn’t noticed. He replied: “I’m not sure about that, to be honest”.
Mr Dudek added he was “100% sure” he had indicated before pulling out.
The defence lawyer said: “I have to suggest to you this collision would not have taken place if you had performed a safe overtake, do you accept that?”
He replied: “I think I did all I’m supposed to do”.
Mr Mcallister retorted: “Except perhaps properly check your blind spot”.
The witness countered: “Well I think I did”.
Evidence was also given by Raymond Simpson, who had been cycling in front of Mr Dudek’s van at the time.
He told the court: “I saw the van overtake me and then all of a sudden I heard a bang and then things started coming flying towards me. There was a tyre and all kinds of objects.
“It was really smokey. I fell off my bike and into a ditch.”
‘It was like he took a right turn and went right into the side of me’
The fiscal depute asked Mr Simpson about the timing of the bang in relation to the positioning of the van and what parts of it he could see.
He said: “The back and the side of the van”.
A third witness, Kirsty Johnson, witnessed the crash ahead of her as she drove along the road in the opposite direction and described having to perform an “emergency brake”.
She told the fiscal depute: “There were two cyclists travelling towards Aberdeen.
“The BT van went to pull out to overtake them and there was a red car behind them that went to overtake and it clipped and rolled.”
Mr McAlister asked: “Can you recall which vehicle pulled out first?”
She replied: “The van”.
Asked how far into the overtake the van was at the point of the collision, Ms Johnson said: “It was literally side-by-side with the cyclists”.
‘Are you trying to make up an explanation to get out of trouble?’
Defence agent Liam Mcallister put it to the witness that, due to the passage of time, it was “entirely possible” that she could not be certain about the order of things happening.
She agreed.
Irvine chose to take to the witness stand herself and told the court that she could see the van in front of her but not the cyclists ahead of it.
She explained that she decided to overtake the van as it was going “quite considerably” slower than the 60mph speed limit.
She went on: “I mirror, signalled, manoeuvred, pulled out and it was like he took a right turn and went right into the side of me.
“I was onto the other carriageway on my way to pass the van and I just felt the impact.
“I did what I could to keep it straight but veered off the road.
“The steering wheel was going crazy.
“I got such a shock, it was so quick. There was no time for me to react or do anything.”
Asked where she was at the point the van started to pull out, she said: “Already on the other carriageway”.
‘You are the cause of this collision’
Fiscal Ruaridh McAlister put it to Irvine that if the other witness’ evidence about the position of the van at the point of collision was correct, her version of events must be incorrect.
She replied: “Their version is incorrect”.
He asked: “Are you trying to make up an explanation after the event to get yourself out of trouble?”
Irvine answered: “No”.
Asked if she had gone over the speed limit in the course of her overtake, she replied: “I could have. I’m not sure”.
The fiscal said: “Because of your poor decision to overtake that day, you are the cause of this collision”.
She replied: “I don’t accept that”.
The trial continues, with closing speeches expected before the jury retire to consider their verdict.
For all the latest court cases in Aberdeen as well as crime and breaking incidents, join our Facebook group.
