The driver ‘laughed ghostly’ while the terrified passengers begged him to stop

A driver, “he laughed at the same time and ignored the pleas of his terrified passengers to let them out, according to a court.

William Ratter was convicted of a threatening behavior, through his “erratic” negative to stop, after a trial on Thursday.

Haroldswick’s 55 -year -old man in UNT argued with the fiscal prosecutor, he fell from the witness position and said the position was “meaningless.”

But Sheriff Ian Cruickshank was persuaded by the evidence, which included a video of the night automobile trip in which the “manic” laughter of Ratter and the “shout” could be heard by the desperate pleas of their passengers.

The incident occurred in the early hours of July 23, last year, after a dance in Baltasound Hall, as part of UNTFEST.

A group of four colleagues, who had been working for the historical environment of Scotland in Saxavord Spaceport, attended the dance and were trying to return to their accommodation in Haroldswick.

They thought the bus was free, but when they arrived they were told that it cost £ 5.

Without cash, they decided to return, a trip they expected to take a couple of hours.

Then, when a car threw and offered them an elevator, the court heard they were happy to take it.

One of the passengers, appearing as a witness through Video-Link, said: “Everything seemed quite friendly, so we accepted grateful.”

The witness, a 36 -year -old woman, said the driver was unknown to the group but appeared as “Willie.”

Asked by fiscal attorney Duncan Mackenzie who described the driving of Ratter, she replied: “Quite fast and erratic.

“We ask you to decrease the speed.

“We were quite scared.

“After what began as a positive interaction, we all begin to feel quite nervous.”

The witness said that she and other passengers asked her to decrease speed, but instead he laughed and seemed to accelerate.

She said she felt “trapped” in the car and tried to beg to the driver decrease.

When the prosecutor asked him how Ratter had responded, the witness described his laugh as “manic” and said “he didn’t seem lucid.”

“What made it even more scary,” he added.

At this point on the trip, the witness began to film with his mobile phone, what he said was to provide evidence “If something really terrible happened.”

The brief clip reproduced in court, and the witness confirmed that the sound of laughter and screams spread.

Another passenger, a 26 -year -old woman who now works in children’s care, said Ratter’s driving made her feel “very anxious and annoying.”

When asked if he sounded “terrified” in the video, he agreed.

The witness said that his smart watch recorded a maximum speed of 57.5 mph during the trip, which was sinuous roads of a single road.

Defense agent Tommy Allan asked the witnesses how much they had been drinking and if they had been aware that Ratter’s car lacked his escape by doing it extremely noisy.

He suggested that they could have been “in excess”, since they were not familiar with the roads or the Ratter car.

Allan tried to make a motion so that “no case responds,” as he suggested, Ratter had not been “threatening” or “abusive” as indicated in office.

However, Sheriff Cruickshank denied it and the audience continued.

Ratter, also known as Ballard, was the only defense witness.

He affirmed that the elevator had been offered as an “act of goodness”, and was a “nonsense” that faced the charges.

The 55 -year -old man said he had left that night taking photos of a castle and insisted that he had not been drinking.

The defendant denied that his driving had been reckless or excessively fast, and even insisted that his car was unable to lead to such speeds.

“It’s like putting a rider in a donkey and telling him to win the Grand National,” he said.

Ratter said his laugh was not “manic”, but rather a “nervous giggle.”

He said he was nervous because all the screams and screams “brought memories of my ex -wife.”

Ratter said he had not been able to listen to the supplicant of his passengers for much of the trip.

And when he finally listened to them, he said it was not safe to stop.

He said he stopped as soon as it was safe to do it.

During a heated exchange, the prosecutor had to remember the defendant: “I am I who asked the questions here.”

Shortly after, Ratter fell from the witness position.

In short, Mr. Allan accepted what happened was “unfortunate” and that the passengers “had not reacted well” to the situation.

However, the lawyer suggested that he did not mean that he had committed a crime and asked the Sheriff to give Ratter the benefit of the doubt.

Sheriff CruickShank said he did not accept that Ratter did not know the repeated requests to stop, and as such found him guilty.

However, the Sheriff modified aspects of the position, since it did not believe that the evidence provided that Ratter had been driving at “extremely excessive speed” or “knitting from one place to another”/

Sheriff CruickShank postponed the hearing for the preparation of reports before the sentence.