Prince Philip, 97, wrecked his Land Rover, he’s fine but ‘shocked and shaken’


Royal wedding

Since Prince Philip retired from public life, we only get brief glimpses into how he’s spending his time. He doesn’t seem to be living with the Queen on any kind of permanent or long-term basis at this point – he spends most of his time at Windsor Castle, and only occasionally travels to Buckingham Palace or Sandringham. He likes to ride in the horse-drawn carriages around Windsor, and he only shows up for “royal events” when he feels like it. I’m sort of fine with all that? That man is 97 years old, let him enjoy a retirement. But do NOT let him drive a car, for the love of God. I can’t believe Prince Philip is still allowed to drive cars, but he is. And he crashed his Land Rover yesterday.

Prince Philip is ‘conscious but very shocked and shaken’ after flipping his Land Rover in a dramatic car crash near the Sandringham estate. The Queen is by the duke’s side following the collision which happened just after 3pm when he pulled out of a driveway onto the A149 in Babingley, Norfolk, which leads to Sandringham.

Images have emerged of a black Land Rover having rolled on its side following the crash with a people carrier. Police and ambulance rushed to the scene where two people – in the people carrier – were treated for minor injuries.

The duke was seen by a doctor at his medical facilities on the Sandringham Estate following the crash as a precaution but was given the all clear. A witness said they helped the duke out of the vehicle. He was conscious but very shocked and shaken, royal correspondent Nicholas Witchell said.

[From The Daily Mail]

Apparently, the “two people” in the car with Philip were women, and both were immediately hospitalized following the crash. Of course there’s a lot to say about his age, but I’d also like to take a moment to wonder if everyone was wearing their seatbelts? For Philip to walk away unscathed from a car flip seems to indicate that he was wearing a seatbelt. But the ladies? Hm. As for his age… yes, there’s only one thing to say: make him stop driving. He has security and personnel around him, surely one of them can drive. Also: apparently, the police are investigating the accident and there’s a very real possibility that the Duke could be charged with some kind of driving citation.

Update: I was confused by the initial reporting, as commenters pointed out, the two women injured were in the other car. And it’s not victim-blaming to wonder if everyone was wearing their seatbelts, Jesus. It’s common sense and a PSA: WEAR YOUR SEATBELTS.

There’s a really bad part of me that had a conspiracy theory about all of this, that perhaps Philip had been Weekend-At-Bernie’d for the better part of a year and this is how they were finally going to “officially” kill him off. I KNOW I AM GOING TO HELL.

Princess of Eugenie of York and Mr Jack Brooksbank Wedding

Photos courtesy of WENN, Avalon Red.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

166 Responses to “Prince Philip, 97, wrecked his Land Rover, he’s fine but ‘shocked and shaken’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Alissa says:

    yeah, they can definitely hire drivers so let’s please just do that.

  2. Neiledown says:

    A 9 month old baby was also in the other car. Strangely no one reported it until now probably because it raises the stakes. I was appalled by the amount of reporters that were commenting how ‘brave’ Philip was & no concern was shown for the passengers in the other car.

    It’s things like this that should remind us all how entitled the royals are & how the system works to shield them. Instead of constantly fawning over the royals & what they wear, we need to be more critical of the system.

    • Anon says:

      Yes, and nor was there initially any reporting whatsoever about whether the women in the other car were ok.

      The Mail was saying how amazing and brave he was for going to check they were all right. Big hand clap for meeting basic standards of human decency. Whether you believe it was your fault or not, that’s what anyone who wasn’t themselves injured ought to do.

    • LadyMTL says:

      I personally feel like no 97 year old should still be driving a car, royal or not. No matter how alert and cautious they themselves might claim to be, it’s just dangerous to be driving at that age. Thank goodness no-one was seriously injured.

      • jan90067 says:

        My dad is 91. He has no business driving at this point. And yet, he passed his license test (after 3 tries!). All they gave him was the written test, no road test. He *insists* that while he “may not react the same way” he did even 20 yrs. ago, he’s fine to drive.

        I see my dad, whom I love to bits, as someone who’s starting to get confused about some things, not remembering as well as he used to, a LOT slower to react. And I say “Uhn uhn, I”M driving”. I will not let him drive, no matter how many times he says, “I can do it!”. Because while I know he CAN, physically, he can’t do it with the high level of competency it requires. I shudder at the thought of him injuring himself, and even more at the thought of him hurting someone else, or worse!

        Sometimes, when you love someone, even if they get angry, you have to be firm. This is that time for TQ, NO MATTER how loud PP protests!

        PP has MORE than enough resources and people that can drive him everywhere. If the stubborn old coot insists on driving, he should be limited to their private estate roads where the only one he can hurt is himself. NO EXCUSE other than HIS PRIDE that lets him drive. Thank God those women and the baby weren’t hurt *too* badly. I hope they sue Phillip for a good sum (at the very least, the cost of the car and for whatever help they need to have while they recover).

      • MissML says:

        my MIL was 64 with advanced Parkinsons and was involved in multiple fender benders and wouldnt give up her license. We called her docs that did nothing. We called the state (Massachusetts) where she was deemed competent via a doctors note (she was not competent and had dementia to boot). It hurt us to call in to the state, she found out and she was not happy. The fact that she didn’t drive into a bus stop of children and walked away from an accident where her car was totaled was just lucky. She decided to stop driving after that.

        Its wild out there!

      • Kurtz says:

        Isn’t it funny how people all start rabbiting on about how elderly people shouldn’t be driving when one of them causes an accident. Yet when we see multiple fatal accidents caused by young men under 25 (statistically the most dangerous drivers) no one says “let’s raise the driving age to 26″. Certainly there are some elderly people that shouldn’t be driving, but there are a lot of young people that shouldn’t be driving too. Ageism is as dangerous and malicious as racism and sexism.

      • entine says:

        maybe statistics don’t show it, but I hope they do do give up driving before getting in bad accidents. I am grateful that my 85 year old dad gave up driving when we found out abut his glaucoma, and before he hurt anyone. HE had been driving for many years, shamefully somtimes under the influence of alcohol and nothing happened to him ever, ever. I was so afraid that he’d be killed going to his ranch early in the morning crossing a very busy roadway which doesn’t have elevated pases at some points, like where he used to cross.

      • MissML says:

        You have a great point Kurtz. I think everyone should be subjected to driving tests every so often with a review of violations. Probably elderly drivers aren’t the ones texting and driving either.

      • Himmiefan says:

        Good point, Kurtz.

      • A says:

        @Kurtz, to be fair, I don’t think the two things are equatable in any sense. For one thing, there are genuine health concerns related to the elderly driving that aren’t present with young people, at least not as a result of their age.

        For another, young people are actually penalized for their poor driving. They pay higher insurance premiums. There are much more stricter rules regarding drinking, as well as distracted driving for young people. There are age restrictions in a lot of different places for the level of driving license you’re allowed to get depending on your age. Where I am, if you’re below the age of 18, you need to have a mandatory two years of driving instruction before you can graduate from a learner’s permit.

        We understand as a society that these rules are in place for their safety, as well as the safety of those around them. Realizing that age affects your expertise isn’t ageism, it’s just the reality.

        @MissML, are you sure about that? Because the majority of the people I know who are the most distracted by their cellphones aren’t actually young people under the age of thirty. It’s people who are fifty plus. A quick cursory look at this comments section shows just how many old people there are who refuse to do basic safety things like wearing a seat belt–something everyone under the age of thirty understands is mandatory to ensure your safety as a passenger. I think that people in every age group have their blindspots, and we owe to each other to look out and be honest about those things.

    • Cerys says:

      Absolutely. The occupants of the other car seem to be forgotten about by the fawning royal reporters. I’m glad Phillip is alright but my sympathies are with the others.

    • PrincessK says:

      Also one of the women suffered a broken arm and some other injuries.

      • Maria says:

        And a broken arm can be very debilitating for a while especially
        If she is the mother of the baby. Imagine having a broken arm and looking after a baby?

    • AnnaKist says:

      Are they going to do the silly old bugger for negligent driving like they would any other old-age pensioner who should no longer be left in charge of a motor vehicle? In all the news reports I’ve seen down here – 🇦🇺 – today, they’ve said that there was someone in the other vehicle wh was taken to hospital with ‘’minor injuries’’. Hope they’re all okay. Yeah, even the entitled prince. Jeez, get a driver. Tsk.

      • jumbo says:

        I am pretty sure he will be prosecuted for driving without due care and attention. The other driver may also be prosecuted if they were found to have been speeding.

        I have read, though don’t know if it is true, that sometimes a very elderly person will escape prosecution if they voluntarily agree to give up their driving licence.

    • Snowflake says:

      Now the policeman made him take a breathalyzer so he didn’t get that much special treatment

    • jumbo says:

      The baby is fine – I have seen some reports of that.

    • Marjiscott says:

      Phillip wasn’t “Brave”, he was foolish.

    • Natalie S says:

      Yup. 100%.

    • Ader says:

      Wow. Thanks for posting this. I used to enjoy royal stuff, but I think I’m going to have to take a step back. It really ticks me off that that’s how it was handled.

  3. Pose83 says:

    Thank goodness a 97 year old, highly privileged man is fine. There was a 9 month old in the other car, btw.

    • Clare says:

      The reporting on this is, unsurprisingly, outrageous. There are whispers that Philip the racist may be charged with a driving caution – but let’s me honest, this will quickly be swept under the rug. Eye roll.

      • Anon says:

        There is bound to be a civil claim as well for the women’s injuries and the damage to their car. “One to settle”, as I say to certain clients….

    • PrincessK says:

      It seems as though it was not all fine, the Palace along with some sections of the media ar trying to play it down. Prince Philip was reportedly yelling…”My leg! My Leg!”, and this is someone who has had a double hip operation. Also one of the first people who helped rescue him said that in the process he had Philips blood on his hands. So when will the full account emerge I wonder.

      • MissM says:

        The blood probably came from being cut by glass. He couldn’t have been in serious condition because they didn’t take him to a hospital, the checked him over at home. I was cut by glass in an accident a few years back and I looked like I had been seriously injured when it was just a minor cut. It took a lot of convincing to get the paramedics to leave me be.

  4. Becks1 says:

    Reading that story, it sounds like the two women who received medical attention were in the other vehicle, not the land rover with phillip?

    also, what the hell is a people carrier, anyway?

    glad no one was seriously injured.

    • Janey says:

      Its what you could describe as a large SUV, basically a car you get a lot of people in, like a seven seater.

    • saba says:

      Yes, the two women were in the other car: a 28 year old and a 45 year old. There was also a baby, under a year old with them. They were very likely wearing seat belts as otherwise their injuries would have been far worse than a broken wrist and lacerations (likely from broken glass).

      People carrier in the UK is what you might refer to as a minivan in the US, I think. Prince Philip was driving the equivalent of an SUV.

    • anony83 says:

      I totally had to google it and it sounds like they are what we in the US would call a 15 passenger van (or any van larger than a minivan but smaller than a bus).

      Also, I know from years of driving those sorts of vans in college that people frequently do not wear their seatbelts in them. Kind of like kids on a school bus – in a regular car, we’d all have our seatbelts on and the kids would be in booster seats or whatever but put us in a large enough group and suddenly we don’t bother anymore?

      Its such a common thing and I know I’ve done it, so its hard to judge. But hopefully things like this remind people that they need to be safer. And I’m rooting for the two women to make a full recovery. And that they take Prince Phillip’s license away!

      • Piggysarah says:

        People carriers are 7 seaters normally and are family cars. I highly doubt seat belts were not being worn.

      • Anon says:

        A people carrier in the UK is a large family car with maybe 7 seats. It is not a 15 seat van.

        And as I said below, stop with the victim blaming. Injuries like this are incredibly common to people wearing seatbelts.

      • Lunde says:

        People carriers are 7 seater minivans. In Britain it is also illegal not to wear a seatbelt and for children not to be in carseats.

      • Lorelei says:

        But the other car was a small Kia…that couldn’t possibly fit 7 people? I’d assumed it was the gray car pictured to the left in the photos of the Land Rover on its side, and no way is that a minivan.

        Speaking of which, how on earth would a crash with a Kia flip a Land Rover? I thought they were supposed to be so heavy and sturdy and Kias are…not.

      • KEEKS says:

        Land Rovers typically roll like his did. They are top heavy. He needs to surrender the license as of now. Sorry, too old.

    • Lucy2 says:

      Thank you, I too was wondering about “people carrier”. I hope everyone is ok.

      He is too old to be driving.

  5. Bryn says:

    What the hell…why is he still driving. Kind of ridiculous

    • Beth says:

      It’s ridiculous when I see elderly people in public that have trouble seeing, talking and are slow moving but they still end up in the drivers seat of a car. A 97 year old should not driving

    • Kelly says:

      It’s crazy! My great uncle drove until he literally sideswiped half a dozen parked cars and they realized he was mostly blind and took away his license. No one should drive that long, especially if you have the resources for a driver.

      Side note, I got into a car accident almost 2 weeks ago and I still have a lot of pain in my ribs and you can see the cut on my neck from the seatbelt. He’s going to be a long time hurting, especially since he flipped his car.

    • MissM says:

      It is ageist to assume that the accident happened due to his age. He was driving in the country, not Central London. They also said that this was a notoriously bad intersection where a lot of accidents have happened in the past. Are we going to look at those people and say that they should give up driving too? Accidents happen and we know very little about what occurred.

      • Tina says:

        What we do know (that he left a side road to go onto the main road, where he clearly did not have the right of way) suggests that the RTC was his fault, regardless of age.

    • Tigerlily says:

      Once my late Dad was in his mid 80′s, the family coordinated so that he didn’t have to drive. Either one of my sisters, bro in law or nephews would pick him & mom up for social events with the carrot of him being able to have a rum/coke being dangled (for social events not church). At first he was not happy but he did come to enjoy being chauffeured. He had all his marbles and was in fairly good health but he had angina that could come on quickly.
      With my late grandfather, he was in his early 90′s, lived in a small town & had a conditional license that enabled him to drive to church, for groceries/doctor & to the local farmers market to sell his Fuller Brush stuff. Even so…..don’t most accidents happen close to home?

      It’s tough for normal seniors as losing their drivers license signals the end of their independence but for Prince Philip he just needs to use a driver.

  6. Anon says:

    Up to date information is that he was alone in his car and was coming out of a side road when he hit a car which was going along the main road, which had two women and a baby in it. Highly likely to be his fault – when you come out of a side road it’s on you to make sure that the road is clear and there’s no obligation on the other car to slow down expecting you to go out. I have seen reports that he was blinded by the sun and didn’t see the other car. That’s on him. You join the main road when you can see the main road is clear.

    Also: there is absolutely no reason to suppose that the women were hospitalised because they weren’t wearing seatbelts (whichever car they were in). They could have been hit by broken glass, or been hurt when the airbags inflated or anything. To suggest otherwise is victim-blaming.

    • Piggysarah says:

      Totally agree anon. One of the women had a broken wrist the other suffered cuts, fairly common car accident injuries. If they hadn’t been wearing seat belts it would have been a lot worse. As it’s illegal not to wear a seatbelt I am sure we would have heard if they hadn’t have been

    • Piggysarah says:

      Double post

      • Anon says:

        The main road he was joining has a 50 or 60pmh speed limit. The total impact speed is his speed plus theirs. If they were travelling close to the speed limit – which they were perfectly entitled to do without expecting someone to randomly pull out in front of them – they were involved in a 50/60mph crash even assuming he was going at minimal speed. It is hardly surprising that they were hurt. More of a miracle they weren’t more seriously injured.

      • saba says:

        @Anon Agree. I’ve seen people blame the women (mostly because he’s a royal, tbh), but looking at the diagrams and the road rules, it appears to be his fault as he was joining the road when they had right of way. He should have yielded to them.

      • Anon says:

        It was totally his fault. It looks from the damage like his car was sideways on to theirs – the classic T boner.

        For a driver on a main road to T-bone a car pulling out from the side, the car pulling out from the side has basically done so right in the path of the car on the main road. If he was joining their lane to go in the same direction but had pulled out somewhat earlier, they would have hit the rear of his car. If he was going across their lane to join the opposite lane but had pulled out somewhat earlier, he would probably have made the other lane, so no collision at all.

    • Jessica says:

      All of this.

    • Ocho says:

      I totally agree with everything Anon and Piggysarah are saying. I was watching BBC News last night, and they failed to mention the baby. I am first hearing about it first now, in the Celebitchy comments. The coverage was very positive and referential to Prince Philip. BBC should do better.

    • Ellaus says:

      I totally agree with both of you Anon and Piggy sarah.
      The coverage was horrible, all focused on P.P , with no regards of the women and child con the other car.
      He was lucky to be driving a sturdy Range Rover and clearly has a great health *for a 98 yo* , 98 is the golden number. However healthy and capable you are at this age, all of your senses are dimished, and your reaction speed is slower…. He shouldn’t be allowed to drive on public roads. If he still wants to be independent and feel younger, he should do it in his private grounds. If he wants to riak his integrity, well, it is his prerrogativa, but he shouldn’t be risking other people’s lives.

      • Ennie says:

        Yeah at first I thiught he had the accident in one if the private roads within their proprieties, not that he was actually driving in a city or public road. Appalling that they would let him do that, even if he’s headstrong or would feel thatbhis indepwndence was taken from him or whatever. Isn’t nthere some kind of exam for allowing elderly people to drive? It isn’t like he’ll starve if he cannot go to the market in his car.

      • Sun in Libra says:

        Agreed. And it’s not ageist to say a 97 year old should not be driving, especially a big suv. I’m reminded of the elderly man years ago that lost control of his car at the Santa Monica farmers market and killed 10 pedestrians. And that man was a decade younger than Prince Philip!

  7. OSTONE says:

    How irresponsible for him to still drive at 97! I don’t care if he is a Duke or a Prince or whatever, he shouldn’t be driving! Neither should Elizabeth if I am being completely honest.

    • smcollins says:

      Agreed! Call it ageist if you want but no one pushing 100 years old should be behind the wheel of a car, let alone an SUV. I don’t care who they are.

    • Arpeggi says:

      He could drive within the limits of his estate if he really feels like going for a drive but yeah, he should never be allowed to drive on public roads, he’s too frail, slow and just too darn old! I also wonder how his eyesight is, they look milky in closeup pictures.

    • Chaine says:

      Someone take away the keys from Peepaw!

    • Lorelei says:

      It is ridiculous! I have a lot more sympathy for normal people who find it hard to give up their licenses, because it can be so isolating and they become totally dependent on other people for things they feel they can do themselves (and have been doing themselves for their entire adult lives).

      But PP? He has drivers and doesn’t have to worry about getting groceries, etc. so there is NO WAY he should have been driving on public roads. FFS.

      Fine if he wants to tool around the grounds of Sandringham, but for him to be on highways is insane.

    • Christin says:

      Completely agree. It would be like letting a “capable” 10-year-old behind the wheel. Too risky.

  8. Scal says:

    Considering the Land Rover rolled to one side and then the other and no one went to hospital-Yes I think they were all wearing seatbelts.

    He’s to old to be driving. I’m just glad no one got hurt-esp the driver of the other car and the baby.

  9. Digital Unicorn says:

    There was a 9 month old baby in the other car, who fortunately was fine and I hope he does get a driving ban as he was reckless – I shudder to think at what speed he joined the road but reports have also said that its a notorious accident spot so he’s not the first. If he wasn’t in a land rover it could have been much worse for all involved. I have issues with old people driving as I have had too many close experiences with them and there has been several high profile accidents over here in the past few years that have been caused by older drivers.

    As for the women who were in the car with him – there are many reasons for wearing a seat belt, something the RF know about all too well.

  10. Eve says:

    I don’t care if this will make me sound ageistic but after a certain age people should not be driving.

    • Bryn says:

      I totally agree. I know people will say oh that’s ageism or whatever but seriously? That man looks like he’s one foot in the grave, he’s almost 100! He’s married to the freakin queen of England, someone should be driving him if he needs to go somewhere. Glad the other people were ok.

    • Jessica says:

      Completely agree. It’s just a fact that your physical (and mental, if you experience dementia) faculties start to deteriorate as you age. Beyond a certain age you just should not be operating a large piece of heavy and potentially dangerous machinery, which is what a vehicle is. And certainly not if you are a privileged prince, husband of a Queen, who always has drivers at your disposal.

      • Bryn says:

        Yup, selfish and irresponsible on his part

      • Anon says:

        In fairness I have litigated a lot of car accidents where people of all ages made the same mistake. The reality is that a lot of people pull out without looking.

        However I do agree that at 97 you really ought to give careful thought to whether you should be driving (what sort of roads you go on, whether there are other options – which he clearly has). When my dad developed Parkinsons at a much younger age the family basically staged an intervention and took his keys away. He was very upset but my mum put her foot down because she was only interested in the risks to other people.

    • LNG says:

      There needs to be mandatory testing after a certain age. You have to take a test to get a license, you should have to take a test to keep it. Right now, unless someone causes an accident, the burden of having their license taken away due to age is on their family/people close to them, which is ridiculous. It is incredibly difficult to take independence away from a parent and kids are often in denial about these things.

      I once litigated a claim where a woman in her late 80s caused an accident (a ridiculous accident, not one of those “it cold have happened to anyone” ones) and she turned out to be so impacted by Alzheimer’s that she didn’t know what day it was and couldn’t even speak on the phone. It is completely insane that she was still had a license.

    • Arpeggi says:

      Yeah, at some point I’m tired of hearing agism being thrown out as if the elderly were perfectly capable to do everything they did in their 40s just as well: they can’t!

      We set limits on what the youngest can do because we agree that a typical child or a teenager won’t have the judgment, mental/physical capacities or experience required to handle a certain task or responsibilities, can we acknowledge that things are exactly the same on the other extremity? Older folks can make wonderful contributions to society, they can do many things BUT, they also have limitations in certain areas. It’s part of living and it’s ok.

    • Insomniac says:

      Completely agree; other people’s safety is at risk. One of the articles I read yesterday said “There’s no word yet on the cause of the accident” and I thought “Uh, how about one of the drivers being 97 years old, FFS?”

      And I never saw any mention of the baby until now either. Hmmm…

  11. Melissa says:

    The women weren’t in the Philip’car. They were in the Kia and one lady had a broken wrist and the other suffered cuts to her knee and there was also a 9 months baby.

  12. RBC says:

    My nephew offered to drive my 76 year old mother around because he felt she was too “old” to drive(lovely gesture but she passed her last test with no problems).Well the look she gave him would have given a polar bear frostbite. Many seniors are fiercely independent and even hinting they are not capable can be taken as an insult.
    Can you imagine telling Prince Phillip he should not drive anymore?

    • Bryn says:

      i get wanting to be independent but there has to be a limit. A 97 year old who’s in poor health and has the means to have a driver should not be on the road himself.

    • saba says:

      His sense of entitlement should not be given priority over other people’s safety.

    • Arpeggi says:

      You can show how fiercely independent you are by deciding to take public transport on your own if you don’t have the proper reflexes to be able to drive. Being hospitalized for weeks as a result of a car crash will take that independence away much faster than accepting some help once in a while

    • Moneypenny says:

      Of course it wouldn’t be easy to do, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t the right thing to do. I’d rather tell Prince Philip he can’t drive than tell a family that Prince Philip killed their loved one.

    • Fleur says:

      TBH, I don’t care if it offends the elderly. 97 year olds can barely walk independently, bath independently. They should not be driving. Period. A 75 year old driving is very different from a 97 year old driving.

  13. aquarius64 says:

    If an investigation finds Philip is at fault he needs to catch a charge. In the royal family only the queen has sovereign immunity. This better be done right before accusations fly saying Phillip got a pass because of his position .

  14. Janey says:

    The latest is that he was temporarily blinded by the sun, which is low at this time of year. I don’t like my morning commute for that reason. I think at his age your ability to make quick decisions and have quick reactions is severely reduced and so I agree that in his case he should no longer be driving. Its also likely as he was pulling out of a junction that his speed was especially slow, no report on the speed of the other vehicle he hit but I heard on the news this morning that the road the other car was travelling on is a fast road. Anyway, he really should employ someone to drive him.

  15. Seraphina says:

    Why would they get in a car driven by a 97 year old???? The mental alertness and coordination required to drive a car is fir many too much after a certain age. And that is different for everyone.

    I always tell my kids an automobile is a moving weapon. One slip, they can take a life ir someone else’s. This is negligence and I blame all involved. Grown adults who shohld know better. And if a baby was involved, that raises the stakes even higher.

  16. Sparkly says:

    I don’t care how much it upsets them, once you hit 80 or so, you have no business driving — or at the very least should be tested twice a year. I read several ‘rebuttals’ from old people about this in an advice column, and they were saying things like, “I know my reflexes aren’t the same anymore. That’s why I drive at least 10 miles under the speed limit and keep both feet on the gas and brake at the same time so I’m sure not to mix them up.” SHE THOUGHT THAT ACTUALLY MADE HER A GREAT DRIVER!!! Every single one of them mentioned how they drive “well below the posted speed limits” like that made it okay. That’s just as dangerous!

    • Bryn says:

      Yeah driving under the speed limit, especially on a highway is just as dangerous as speeding. And the two feet thing..holy 🙄

    • Arpeggi says:

      If I’m being totally honest, I’d like to see everyone having to pass a road test every 10 years, then every 5 years once you reach 60 and every year or two once you reach 75. Would it be only because the amount of vehicles on the road and the laws change so much throughout your lifetime, knowing that you have to be tested every so often would help curb bad habits from forming

    • jumbo says:

      so you drive 20 in a 30 and 30 in a 40 and 40 in a 50? That would make you popular. Slow driving can be a hazard in itself.

    • jumbo says:

      Sorry post duplicated itself.

  17. Debbie D says:

    He looks like a walker

  18. Emily says:

    He looks like he could die at any moment. In a grocery store, on the toilet, walking his dogs. The last thing he should be doing is driving, especially when he has staff who can drive.

  19. Margo Smith says:

    I’m sorry but if your 97 YOU SHOULDNT BE DRIVING. Dude, you’re a prince. You have drivers!

  20. Embee says:

    Yesterday a man came into my firm to get some advice about real estate. During the course of our meeting he shared some really alarming information about his driving habits. Sadly, I feel compelled to report him to social services, for his own safety and the rest of us. In this man’s case he’s alone and the driving (which he does all day for entertainment) cannot be delegated. Prince Phillip has no such excuses. I understand the desire to be free but it cannot be at the cost of other’s safety. “Your freedom ends where my nose begins” as they say!

  21. Marjorie says:

    I wonder if this was a “silver alert” situation, as we call it in the US when an addled senior citizen escapes their caregivers and boosts.the family car. Where did he need to go anyway? Go pick up a pack of cigs and some beer?

    • tempest prognosticator says:

      I was wondering the same thing. Maybe he ‘escaped’ his minders.

    • Its Ok says:

      I think that was probably the case. They always have a protection officer in the car with them. He reportedly asked where they were after the accident as well. The fact that there was no RPO in the car says a lot.

    • Tigerlily says:

      Makes sense, as you say always an RPO with him. Hope no one gets fired for losing him. People with dementia can be pretty cagey. My late uncle used to get out of a secure facility & he’d be found taking a bus to his old house. Was kind of sad.

  22. Kittycat says:

    The government in between Brexit drama should take away his license.

    At 97 its past time.

  23. Aang says:

    97 is too old to drive. I think a new driver test should be required every few years after 75 or 80. I met a holocaust survivor yesterday, he was an engineer, mathematician and biophysicist. A genius, still sharp as a tack and mobile. Easily passed for 15 or twenty years younger than his 97 years. I was truly shocked when I saw him pull out his keys and walk to his car. It is just too old to drive.

    • Lexa says:

      I think I read that they do get tested every three(?) years after they turn 70 and he was up to date on that.

      • Rosie says:

        Don’t think so, my Dad’s 80 and he hasn’t had a re test.

      • spidee!!! says:

        You have to renew your licence every three years after 70, and make declarations regarding your health. In some case you would need a medical certificate to confirm your fitness to drive.

  24. Polly says:

    The two women were in the other car, not in Phillip’s car. The suggestion that they weren’t wearing seat belts is kind of gross. There’s no reason to believe they weren’t so why speculate when the British press is already glossing over their injuries like they they don’t matter.

    • LNG says:

      Kaiser thought they were all in the same car when she wrote the initial story. When one person walks away with no injuries and two others in the same vehicle are injured it is perfectly reasonable to wonder whether the two who were injured were wearing seatbelts

      • Harrierjet says:

        In the UK you are required to wear a seatbelt at all times with very few exceptions. It’s odd to see the suggestion that people don’t wear them because it’s not often an issue – I say this because wearing a seatbelt particularly in the UK, has been drilled into me since day dot!

      • LNG says:

        You’d be shocked by how many don’t, particularly young people (Source: I deal with motor vehicle accidents for a living). I agree it is surprising, I’d guess it’s been the law in most countries since before many of us were born, but it is still an issue sadly.

  25. Flying fish says:

    A child was in the other car was well. The child was not injured. That is being downplayed and the women in the other were injured.
    I am annoyed by the fact that all the reports seem more concerned about Philip than the people in the car he hit. Apparently, Philip’s well bring is more important that others.
    He is 97 years old driving a car with his security officer sitting next to him, why was his security officer not driving him. At 97 years old, he should not be driving.

  26. Rosie says:

    To be fair the local council had already arranged a meeting to look at lowering the speed to 50 mph on that road. Those A roads with lots of side turnings are deadly and although the speed limit might be 60 but people regularly exceed it. You look both ways and then go and a car appears out of nowhere. Country drivers are notorious for driving like nutters (not suggesting that’s the case with these ladies!!). However these conditions are exactly why someone of his age shouldn’t be driving. Did you see the pictures of him driving the Obama’s and the Queen around Windsor. I’d love to know what they were thinking.

    • Anon says:

      Please if you are ever accused of causing a car accident, don’t ever use the “he came from nowhere” defence. You will lose. A car travelling at 60mph does 29 yards a second. If the visibility along the road is 100 yards, the car was visible to you for 3 seconds before you pulled out. In road traffic accident terms that is a long time. More than enough to find that you should have seen the car.

      • LNG says:

        So true. People can have the impression that a car came out of nowhere, but rarely is it actually true. It only proves that you weren’t paying sufficient attention.

    • Rosie says:

      Seriously on a country road that isn’t straight, especially if they are doing above the speed limit, they can come out of nowhere. I am extremely cautious but it can still difficult. One road I use, I have to try to see over a hump backed bridge which some drivers treat like part of a rally course, it’s easier in some ways to drive at night because you can see the lights coming. Anyway they are lowering the speed limits on country roads and putting in rumble strips because it is a problem. My friend was nearly run over and the car was doing nearly 90 on a country road, it came from nowhere.

  27. Other Renee says:

    Does Philip even have a license? Not that this matters. He’d be driving anyway. I read somewhere that although the Queen drives, she has never been required to actually have a license.

    The old coot has no business driving at his age. But who on earth would have had the balls to tell him to stop? He wouldn’t have listened.

  28. Swack says:

    Can’t believe at 97 they don’t have a driver for him. I can’t wait until I no longer have to drive and can have someone take me where I want to go. I tell my grandchildren that every time they ask me to take them somewhere (when their parents are working) that I will get my payback and they will be driving me around eventually.

    • Beth says:

      I’ve never been able to drive because of my disability, and it might sound easy to just tell someone to take you somewhere, but it’s not. They’re busy too, and can’t just leave work, wake up early, or stop their own plans just to give someone a ride, even if you pay them. Enjoy your freedom of driving and not having to wait around until someone else can bring you somewhere. It’s so inconvenient to be unable to drive, but people like Prince Philip can afford someone whose job is only to be his driver.

  29. ChillyWilly says:

    The fact this man is still driving at 97 is a disaster waiting to happen. He is very lucky he didn’t kill anyone. This is on QEII and their chiildren. They should have taken his driving privileges long ago. I think Philip is a racist old coot but this isn’t his fault. He obviously isn’t able to make responsible choices at this pont. I would sue the crap out of him if he broke the wrist and put my baby in damger.

  30. AlmaMartyr says:

    Strange to speculate that the women weren’t wearing seat belts. It’s illegal here not to wear a seat belt and while I’ve seen my fair share of poor drivers, it’s been a really long time since I’ve seen people not wearing seat belts (sure it happens though!).

    My last two cars, both people movers, basically won’t let me drive without a seat belt. They beep really loudly and constantly until everyone is plugged in – there’s no way I could drive for very far without it. My parents Kia does the same thing, so seems likely that this Kia would too.

    • Tigerlily says:

      It’s illegal not to wear seatbelt where I live too but there are always boneheads who don’t like “government telling them what to do” so they don’t use a seatbelt. (eye roll) My daughter in law was badly injured when she & my son were t boned when another motorist blew a stop sign in rural area. She was thrown out the passenger window and one of her arms was cut to ribbons, she had a head injury as well. Since they live in a rural area, the local fire dept is volunteer and take awhile to arrive. My son called hubby & I after the accident happened & we arrived on scene before fire/cops & ambulance. When I saw her lying on the road I thought she was gone. Our three grandchildren (age 6, 3 and newborn then) didn’t have a scratch as all were buckled in appropriate child car seats. Unfortunately they saw their mom lying on the road before air ambulance came and got her. I can’t say enough buckle up and ensure your children are as well.

  31. Darby says:

    I can only imagine someone yelling Phillip he can no longer drive.. and then he just says “my wife is the bloody Queen!” and then the Queen has to tell him he can’t drive anymore!!! Yikes.. might be a rough week domestically!

  32. Mellie says:

    My Grandmother will be 98 in September, she’s still very spry, reads like crazy, can have a very intelligent conversation, is up on current events, lives in an apartment on her own, but hasn’t driven for 15-18 years. There is no need. So if she can make it without driving, then this guy can do the same.

  33. Lily says:

    Keir Simmons, Royal Reporter for NBC asked a really important question today: “Why did it take Norfolk Police department til this morning to mention there was a 9 month year old baby in the collision involving the Duke of Edinburgh?”
    The devil works hard, but the palace machine works harder. I mean all last night it was “thank god he’s ok, god bless this brave man who was shaken and scared” – none of the statements even mentioned there was a BABY in the car or how those two ladies must be feeling after suffering injuries and going to the hospital. This is why more people are becoming anti-monarchists in Britain when even the law enforcement bow down to this unelected body.

  34. Other Renee says:

    For those of you asking why he doesn’t just use a driver, it’s not the issue. Old people don’t want to lose their sense of independence and freedom. My uncle lost his at 79 after an accident and he said he wanted to die. He was gone less than a year later. My husband told his 90+ year old father to stop driving as it was apparent he was a danger on the road, and he was furious. He said it’s taking away his freedom. He finally relented but not without resentment.

    It’s traumatic for people to relinquish this freedom, they know it’s admitting they’re closer to the end of life and they often forget or ignore the consequences to other people. Til it’s too late.

    • ex-Mel says:

      Exactly. And in Philip’s case there are other “issues” complicating the matter. He gave up a career he enjoyed – and where he could be the “boss” – to marry Elizabeth and become a consort by “profession”, naturally subordinated to the monarch. Elizabeth supposedly has done everything in her power to alleviate the situation for him by making him the “boss” at home. But I can easily imagine that driving on his own is more than mere stubbornness or lack of thought – especially since the Queen, too, drives herself.

    • Marjiscott says:

      Sorry, for all your protests, but it’s just common sense. Period.

    • A says:

      Right, but at what point does their sense of independence and freedom come at the direct expense of someone else’s well-being?

      This accident seems relatively minor, in that all the people involved are fine and not any worse for wear. But it could, quite easily, have been something worse. It’s traumatic to contend with one’s mortality as a senior. But there’s a limit, and that limit is when your refusal to look at reality and your own limits means endangering other people.

  35. PrincessK says:

    More bits of the story are now emerging, interesting how the bit about the baby was initially left out, probably as damage limitation. Initial reports said that his protection officer was in the car with him, now we know that he was all alone in the car. Philip has access to loads of drivers and is supposed to always have someone in the car with him, but apparently these days he likes to deliberately give his protection officers the slip. If someone had been with him this may not have happened.

    I wonder if this behaviour is related to his age and a feeling of having been in a life long cage, like an animal with minders, and nearing the end of his days wanting to break free. Awful.

    • Lorelei says:

      Wait, he didn’t have a protection officer with him?? I thought an RPO had to be with them at all times?

      This is making it look like he took off without anyone knowing!

  36. Maria says:

    If i had access to a paid driver, I wouldn’t drive either. He has the privilege of having drivers that can take him anywhere. Not exactly your average senior who loses his licence.

  37. qtpi says:

    I watched a lady that had a handicap sticker park in the electric vehicle spot. And she had a HUGE van. It took a painful amount of time for her to climb up inside of it. Very sloooooowwwwww movements. So how is her reaction time to avoid an accident? That made me very scared to know we drive the same roads.

    He has no business driving outside of their many vast private grounds. Imagine if he had actually killed 3 citizens yesterday.

  38. Molly says:

    At first I thought it was a fender bender from an old guy putzing around what’s essentially a residential road. Then the photos came out, and OMG. Rolled over, airbags deployed, broken windows, smashed body. That was a serious crash. He may be “fine” in that he’s not gushing blood or have a femur sticking out, but he most certainly did not walk away unharmed.

  39. Nic919 says:

    The Sun has an article that includes first hand witness information and he clearly confirms Phillip was alone in the car when he helped him out. So where was the RPO? They also mentioned that the baby was first person they attended to after the collision.

    I can’t see how he keeps his licence after this. It’s not like he doesn’t have access to drivers 24/7. And a potential action by the other driver cannot be ruled out either. There were injuries and if she was working or going back to work shortly this accident could affect that.

    • Lorelei says:

      @Nic919 I hope the other driver gets an *enormous* settlement, enough to buy a new car and pay for all work missed as a result of this. Plus a nanny to help for the entire time she is stuck in a cast because who can take care of a nine-month-old with a broken arm.

      I can’t believe anyone was calling him “brave.” Bravery would have been him being reasonable enough to know his own limitations and stop driving long before this ever happened, no matter how personally difficult that might have been. FFS

      • jan90067 says:

        I’m wouldn’t be surprised if there will be a “quiet resolution” (ie: BIG payout) to make sure that a lot of details DON”T make it to the public.

      • sunny disposition says:

        @jan90067

        I suspect that, too. That collision must have been a high-impact collision as it flipped a heavy Range Rover. No pics of the victims and no official statements from them. Either they got paid and I don’t mind them getting some money out of this. Or they were intimidated. Or bit of both.

        For educational purposes please watch about 1 min of this video in order to get some ideas about speed and impact and car damages in speedy car accidents.

        Start from 0:50 – 2:00

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVl-6-A9ZO4

  40. Elisabeth says:

    My grandfather is 94. He voluntarily stopped driving about 6 years ago. While he is a very good driver, he said he can’t trust that his reflexes are what they used to be.

    Take note Phil

  41. Mali says:

    Oh geez, when my 85 year old grandmother came home with a dent in her car and she didn’t know how it happened. We all said no more driving and took the keys. Just because a person can drive after a certain age, doesn’t mean they should 😐
    I’m actually really mad he hit another car with a baby inside and the royal press is just giving him a pass when he should be actually charged with something.

  42. OriginalLala says:

    My grandfather drove well into his 80s – even though he was very diligent and only drove locally (no highways etc), his reflexes were not as fast as they should be and he got into a terrible crash. It was not his fault but he was unable to react quickly enough when he saw the danger. He gave up his licence then but I shudder to think about how much worse it could have been….

  43. Nuzzy says:

    Casino Royale did it first. Man, everyone thinks they can be the next Bond. Just give it to Idris, already!

  44. Pip says:

    A horrible 90 year old man who was friends with my (also horrible) mother blacked out more than once at the wheel – totally unconscious, losing control of his bladder. She wouldn’t do anything about it so I reported him – twice – to the DVLA, expecting them to take his licence. I couldn’t believe it when he continued to drive for about five more years. It only came to light after he died that they HAD in fact taken his licence away, after the first incident I told them about, however he carried on driving until the day he died.

    As I said, he was a horrible old man.

    &, yes, the reporting of this story has been absolutely exasperating – the British press in worst obsequious forelock-tugging mode. Also, the country is in the middle of the biggest dumpster fire of our lifetimes & THIS story is still the headline piece, even 24 hours later.

    Britain is an unholy mess at the moment.

  45. MeghanNotMarkle says:

    The first report I read of this yesterday (well before most outlets had it) didn’t even mention a second vehicle being involved. I didn’t get a chance to read any follow-up until now. Geez. I really hope that mom is ok. Having any kind of injury when you’re a lowly peasant with a baby is tough.

    • sunny disposition says:

      Judging by the fact that that little light-weight small Kia car and that Range Rover (heavy) collided and apparently the Range Rover flipped over I guess it must have been a very high speed high impact collision. Else the heavy Range Rover wouldn’t have been flipped over by a collision with a light-weight Kia car. And there are no pics of that Kia car, are there? And no reports about the injuries of the Kia party, are there? No statements from them? That alone is suspicious. I guess there is some big extensive shove-them-under-the-rug battle plan behind the scenes.

      Edit:

      Apparently the victims just suffered cuts and a broken wrist and the baby is uninjured. I am nevertheless unimpressed and I am not buying it. the collision flipped a Range Rover. that can’t have been a light crash.

  46. Skylark says:

    This is rage-making. He’s so lucky that the outcome was as is and no one was seriously hurt but, bottom line, that accident happened because of arrogant entitlement on his part. There’s no justification whatsoever for him taking the decision to get into that car on his own when he has staff on hand 24/7 to drive him wherever he wants/needs to go.

    I hope, at the very least, he’s ‘banned’ (officially or otherwise) from driving on public roads.

  47. LISA TAYLOR says:

    As a child of a 93 year old dad who still tries to drive … there is absolutely no question that the reflexes, reaction time, vision, muscle tone AND decision making abilities/judgement ARE all faltering at those advanced ages. It will be a disgrace if he is found behind the wheel again. Just because he can drive it does not mean that he should! Innocent lives are at risk and that would be the real loss if an accident were to happen.

  48. Riley says:

    As someone who had to take they keys from an elderly parent, I find this deeply disturbing. Not driving when you’re in his position is not life changing and I’m disgusted that he had access to car keys. He could have killed someone!

  49. Citresse says:

    If Philip is not well enough to attend public appearances then why would anyone believe he can drive?

  50. A says:

    The more details emerge from this incident, the worse it looks, and it’s shaping up to be a case study on the lengths people will go to in order to shield a member of the RF from responsibility for their actions.

  51. resilience says:

    Sucks for the ladies, so he was alone in he car without his RPO, I think somone escaped their minders.

  52. Pip says:

    Just for everyone’s info, the BBC is just reporting that it’s received many complaints about its coverage of this crash, all focused on them ignoring the passengers of the other vehicle & also the emphasis given to the story.

    PS: Hahaha – the papers have photos of her maj taken yesterday, driving on public roads without a seatbelt. This is a bad time for the BRF to be behaving in such a tone-deaf way.

  53. D says:

    And now it looks like he’s been driving around in his new Land Rober today… Apparently some photos were taken of him at the wheel! Wtf

  54. jumbo says:

    I can just imagine the behind closed doors conversations at Sandringham this weekend, and the language of the Royal Protection Officers.

  55. sunny disposition says:

    He should have stopped driving years ago. In that situation he was in the wrong as the other party had right of way. And what about the victims? Shove everything under the rug?

  56. Deeanna.millford says:

    As soon as they said Phillip was alone I figured something was off.

    For those in the U.S. who may be dealing with an elderly loved one, look up “Go Go Grandparents” online. A fabulous service using Lyft and Uber drivers who are specially trained to deal with the elderly. They will come to the door and assist the passenger to the vehicle, deal with walkers, rollators, etc.

    It is just a slight bit more expensive than the normal Lyft or Uber fare. For that extra amount it has several advantages such as being able to telephone them for service as opposed to needing to have a smart phone. In addition, at initial registration a third party can enter their contact info and they will receive a text when the passenger is picked up and another text when the passenger is dropped off at the destination.

  57. Bryn says:

    Yeah because he pulled out in front of them, they had the right away pretty sure

  58. Swack says:

    @Bryn, agree with you, but I don’t know British driving regulations. My grandson was in an accident where he was turning left onto a main road and was hit by the other car. His car was hit so hard in the rear that it bent the wheel at a 45 degree angle. While I believe the other drive should have been held responsible (was for 25%) because there were no indications that she tried to stop and turned into him, he was still held resposible (for 75% of it) because he was turning left. I wouldn’t trust anything the daily mail says.

  59. s says:

    If you join a main road from a side road or junction, as Philip was doing, it’s the responsibility of the joining driver to judge when to go and if they can get their speed up without slowing down or causing a hindrance to oncoming traffic already on the road. It’s not the responsibility of the vehicles already on that road as they have priority due to having right of way. Phillip was in the wrong here.