Sacoolas elected not to give evidence after bid to shut out KC, Dunn family told
Anne Sacoolas’s evidence in Harry Dunn’s inquest was delayed twice after last-minute talks were held to attempt to secure her attendance.
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The family of Harry Dunn were told Anne Sacoolas was willing to attend the inquest remotely provided their lawyer did not ask questions.
Sacoolas’s evidence was delayed twice during the inquest in Northampton, after eleventh hour talks were held to further invite her to attend.
The Dunn family were told that the 45-year-old could have potentially agreed to give live evidence, but only on the condition that questions came only from the coroner and not the family’s lawyer Patrick Gibbs KC.
Family spokesman Radd Seiger told the PA news agency the parents rejected the proposal.
This appeared to us to be yet another attempt to have Mrs Sacoolas do things in our justice system that suited her
Sacoolas left the country shortly after the crash which killed Mr Dunn outside RAF Croughton in August 2019 after diplomatic immunity was asserted on her behalf.
Speaking about the last-minute talks, Mr Seiger said: “What on earth were they thinking of?
“Who would seek to restrict a grieving family’s opportunity to understand how their son died in that way.
“This appeared to us to be yet another attempt to have Mrs Sacoolas do things in our justice system that suited her.
“As much as the family wanted to hear from her, they are principled people and believe in doing things according to the rules.”