Independent gives his opinion to JAOC
Coroner’s Informal Assessment – Key Observations Regarding Mechanism of Fatal Injury
“I’ve worked as a funeral director for 18 years, with seven of those directly involving duties for the coroner — including recovery of deceased individuals from road traffic accidents involving buses and lorries. In every case where someone was struck and run over, the physical result was unmistakably consistent: catastrophic flattening. Blunt force trauma does not produce precision. It crushes everything in its path.
That’s why this case raises serious red flags. The deceased’s chest cavity retained its full profile — there was no evidence of crush injury at all. The neck, however, had a clean severance. No damage to the jaw, no cranial flattening, no distortion of bone structure. Just a near-surgical separation.
I measured a standard bus tyre — approximately 20 to 25 centimetres in width. It’s physically impossible for a tyre of that size, under normal conditions, to cleanly sever a human head without crushing surrounding areas. No known traffic incident involving buses produces decapitation in this manner.
I’ve seen footage. In one clip, a young bystander picks up the severed head, recoils in horror, and drops it. Aside from being detached, the head showed no other injuries. That’s not consistent with any case I’ve ever handled where a pedestrian was struck.
The police urged the public not to circulate imagery — likely because, in this case, the photos are the evidence. They challenge the official narrative.”
wJAOC COMMENT
Ordinarily, fatalities involving this level of severity would prompt clear public safety warnings, detailed investigative disclosures, and coordinated responses across agencies. Instead, the opacity surrounding Michael’s case suggests either a systemic failure or deliberate suppression. It raises pressing questions: Was there industrial negligence? Are political interests involved? Is reputational damage being managed behind closed doors?
In response to this institutional hush, I’ve launched a series of targeted Freedom of Information requests aimed at unearthing withheld details — from internal emails and safety assessments to ministerial meetings and agency communications. This isn’t just about one case; it’s about demanding accountability in a system that too often defaults to silence when transparency is most vital. Until there are answers, I won’t stop digging.
Follow my freedom of information requests by clicking the links and following me :
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/inquiry_regarding_cowgate_fatal#incoming-3074014
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/foi_request_council_response_to#outgoing-1891045.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/foi_request_cowgate_fatal_collis#outgoing-1891044

An update from Edinburgh Council 8/08/25
Requests from the council and the Police due 1st of August 2025.
If any police officer or spokesperson knowingly made false or misleading statements in connection with the Cowgate incident, several legal and procedural avenues are available depending on the nature and impact of the falsehood:
- Misconduct in Public Office: If an officer knowingly lied in an official capacity, they could face criminal charges under common law. This offence carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, though typical sentences range from months to several years.
- Perverting the Course of Justice: Deliberate falsehoods that obstruct or mislead an investigation may qualify as this serious offence. It includes fabricating evidence or knowingly making false statements that influence legal outcomes.
- Perjury: If false statements were made under oath (e.g. in court or sworn affidavits), perjury charges may apply. This is a criminal offence punishable by imprisonment.
Civil and Regulatory Remedies
- Police Complaints: You can file a formal complaint with Police Scotland’s Professional Standards Department or escalate to the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (PIRC). If dishonesty is proven, it may result in disciplinary action, dismissal, or referral for prosecution.
- Judicial Review: If a false statement influenced a public decision (e.g. closure of investigation, refusal to release footage), you may seek judicial review in the Court of Session to challenge the lawfulness of that decision.
- Freedom of Information (FOI): FOI requests can expose inconsistencies between internal communications and public statements. If discrepancies are found, they can support escalation to oversight bodies or legal action.
MEDIA CONTACTED AND NO REPOSNSE
- Edinburgh Evening News
- Scotsman
- Daily Record