On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 19:28:32 +0000, magwitch wrote:
The description of the vehicle as marked "in bold red and green colouring"
is in the section headed "Mr Austine's evidence", not the section headed
"Councillor Rosenstiel's evidence", and it appears to be the investigator's
summary of the paramedic's more accurate description.

The plot thickens.

I must say I rather think the 'Ambulance' sign on the vehicle is most
compelling evidence... in fact on reflection, the colour combination
perhaps might be a red herring after all.

Right... I've not read the report, but I did look at the photo of the
vehicle - and it wasn't obvious that there *was* an ambulance sign on the
bonnet or sides. There appeared to be something stuck in the rear
passenger windows, but that could be missed if point of contact was
initally from the front (and then presumably front-quarter to have a word
with the driver).

If any ambulance sign was present up by the lights then it seems
reasonable that if the lights were missed then so was this sign.