First Remy Ong said and quote “but the thing is I didn’t know that I actually hit the dog,”
Then GP Teo Tiong Kiat said quote “he did not know he had hit two cyclists“.
Excuse me, were this 2 fellas blind?
What a load of baloney! Surely they can come up with a better excuse than this: “like I thought it was an alien invading Singapore so I deliberately ran it down” or maybe “I was sleeping and I have this habit of sleep driving“.
Let me put it this way. If they didn’t know they hit somebody or something, why did they go back to the scene of the accident? If they didn’t know they hit something, how do they know something had happened and where did it happened? A normal sane person will not drive back to retract the route unless he knew something had happened back there.
So I submit they knew they had hit something. As a driver of many years, it is not possible to know you had not hit anything. There has to be an impact and in the Doc’s case, there was a damaged bonnet, roof and wind screen. How does one drive and not notice something like that? Unless he is blind?
On the other hand, the bowler was driving a Porsche. The Porsche Boxster is a low body car. The driver will surely feel it when the vehicle goes over any hump or objects. His excuse was he thought he brushed against the tail of a dog. Hello, it could be a dog, it could also be a child but any moving vehicle brushing against something in which the driver can sense it means whatever it is could have been sideswiped by the force of the moving vehicle at the very least. So he should have stop to check. But he did not perhaps because he was blind as well?
I am disgusted at the excuse these people gave. Whether it is a dog or a human being, it is still a life. The decent thing for them, if they had for some reasons best known to themselves, not been able to stop to render assistance, is to own up later and admit they knew but was too cowardly to stop. At least, maybe they can live with themselves after that.