Photographs from Alencon Link accident

3:07pm Tuesday 8th January 2013 in Local

Images from Basingstoke accident Images from Basingstoke accident

HERE are some images, taken by Richard Garfield, of the accident today on Alencon Link in Basingstoke.

In one picture, the occupant of the car, having been cut out, is being removed on a stretcher.

 

Related links

Comments(14)

erbert says...
5:11pm Tue 8 Jan 13

Why do you feel the need to include pictures? The highways agency and fire brigade are soon to start putting up 'screens' to stop rubberneckers on motorways. Unfortunately it won't stop over eager reporters taking pictures of accidents on A and B roads.

Report this post »

JJ38JJ says...
11:41am Wed 9 Jan 13

I agree 100%. No reports of the cause, the disruption, the consequences, etc. Just "look at these pictures we've got hold of". Shame.

Report this post »

Best_Name_Ever says...
1:00pm Wed 9 Jan 13

So horrific car accidents are photoworthy. Really nice work Gazzette - you should be ashamed, as should Richard Garfield. How about a response from the Gazzette justifying these photographs as 'news'?

Report this post »

Sam_Walker123456 says...
5:04pm Wed 9 Jan 13

I do not expect you will get a response from The Gazette, but I would have no problem justifying these photos if I was the editor of a local paper. The media always publishes pictures of accidents because we want to see them!
erbert, rubberneckers are a danger to other road users. As to over eager reporters, people keep posting comments that The Gazette journalists are not eager enough.
JJ38JJ, the photos are a follow up to the written report posted online earlier in the day.
Best_Name_Ever, yes horrific car accidents have always been and will always remain photoworthy and newsworthy. Why do you think there are rubberneckers? The sad truth is probably because many of us have a morbid curiosity about other peoples' misfortunes.

Report this post »

James1970 says...
8:23pm Wed 9 Jan 13

I agree with Sam Walker. I was on a bus that passed the wreckage and wanted to see what was happening. Now I know. The photo does not show anything gruesome so why all the fuss?

Report this post »

robertspet8 says...
9:41am Thu 10 Jan 13

Although I do not share the outrage expressed by the first three contributors I do share JJ38JJ's desire for more information. I would like to know how a serious accident could possibly happen on a short stretch of 30mph single carriageway.
I do not find the pictures at all sensational but very helpful to my understanding of the seriousness of the accident.

Report this post »

Best_Name_Ever says...
1:06pm Thu 10 Jan 13

I think there is a difference between looking as you are passing (rubbernecking) and slowing down/stopping to take pictures. However, if you need these pictures to underestand the seriousness of an accident, then there you have them. I still think it is intrusive.

James1970 - if someone took a picture of a car accident involving a family member of yours and you could see how badly the car was wrecked, how would you feel? Not fussed I guess. We are just different people.

Report this post »

robertspet8 says...
1:46pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Best_Name_Ever says...'I think there is a difference between looking as you are passing (rubbernecking) and slowing down/stopping to take pictures. However, if you need these pictures to underestand the seriousness of an accident, then there you have them. I still think it is intrusive.'
So are you suggesting the journalist was just passing and did not go there, as part of his job, with the intention of investigating a reported incident of possible public interest?
Where would you draw the line between legitimate reporting and unwarranted intrusion? Neither of the pictures show anything offensive or disturbing.
If we applied, to all of our media, the criteria that you are expecting The Gazette to observe in this instance then many news pictures and film footage would not be shown. What about items such as the Tsunami in Japan? The coverage of that was harrowing, disturbing and very intrusive - are you saying that should not have been shown? And what about war, famine, etc? Some of the coverage is appalling intrusive but I would not want it stopped - remember Michael Buerk's first report from Ethiopia which shamed the world into taking action.
So your call for The Gazette to be any less intrusive in their coverage of a road traffic accident in Basingstoke looks like you are moaning about them yet again just for he sake of it. What do you have against The Gazette - this is rhetorical and I don't want an answer!

Report this post »

Best_Name_Ever says...
9:15pm Thu 10 Jan 13

robertspet8 My differing opinion to you has obviously offended you and for that I apologise. I am not sure quite where the accusation I have something against the Gazette comes from, but it has obviously touched a nerve with you. With regard to your comments, I do not suggest from one minute that there was a Gazette reporter passing the incident, all I am saying is that taking pictures whilst the victims are still being removed from the scene are, in my own opinion, intrusive. That is all. My own opinion. Notwithstanding this, I do take your point about the reporting of global disasters, I had just not thought to compare them to a road traffic accident on a road in Basingstoke.

Report this post »

robertspet8 says...
3:37pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Best_Name_Ever, I am not easily offended on my own behalf but I always try to stick up for the underdog - especially one who cannot defend himself. In this case this is The Gazette reporter who was only doing his job. I thought you has accused him of, 'slowing down/stopping to take pictures' to use your exact words, but I now accept you did not mean this to apply to his actions.

Report this post »

Best_Name_Ever says...
7:03pm Fri 11 Jan 13

I did not realised the Gazette needed to credit their own journalists with taking pictures and because of this, I mistakenly thought the photos had been taken by an eager member of the public and who had slowed down or stopped to take them then passed them on to the Gazette, who then promptly published them. I apologise to Richard Garfield, who I now realise was only doing his job and will remember in the future to think before I hastily post.

Report this post »

BugBear says...
5:35pm Sat 12 Jan 13

People are naturally curious and its a newspapers job to report the news, so I have no issues with The Gazette displaying this picture but I would have issues with hypocrites who say they would not look when in fact we all know they would.

Report this post »

Best_Name_Ever says...
8:25am Mon 14 Jan 13

Sigh. You know everyone in the whole world inside out Bugbear. I applaude your skills.

Report this post »

Sam_Walker123456 says...
10:21am Mon 14 Jan 13

BugBear wrote:
People are naturally curious and its a newspapers job to report the news, so I have no issues with The Gazette displaying this picture but I would have issues with hypocrites who say they would not look when in fact we all know they would.
Nobody in these comments has said they wouldn't look so you do not have to take issue with anyone.

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree