'I was hospitalised by a flying cone under Edinburgh bridge'
'My mate heard the noise and turned round and the cone was right next to me, so someone had clearly thrown it off the George IV bridge.
Read More:
'There are loads of cones around there for the Pride parade, someone's just thrown one off and it's cracked me in the head.
'The security in Dropkicks put the gloves on and helped me out, got me some water, and then Street Assist and the police arrived and helped clean me up, the police took statements and then my sister came and picked me up and took me to the Royal Infirmary because the ambulance was going to be eight hours or something.
'I've got staples in my head and I'm getting scans because I can't really turn my head, my neck is completely jiggered.
'I can't work with it, which is kind of an issue.
"I'm going to have a five-six centimetre gash across the top of my head, a scar.
'I don't know what my neck is going to be like long-term but I can't hold my head up so I'm sitting on the couch all day with my head resting.
'The four things I do are walk the dog, go to the gym, play golf and then go to work and at the minute I can't do any of them. It's a nightmare, but it could have been a lot worse.
'I'm 6ft 1in, I'm quite big, I think if it was anyone smaller or more frail it would have been a lot worse.'
George IV bridge in Edinburgh (Image: Wikimedia) In November 2006 Australian national Andrew Smith threw a cone off the bridge which struck Irish student Kate Flannery, leaving her with a fractured skull and three broken vertebrae as well as damage to her spinal cord, which left her arms and legs paralysed for several months.
Following widespread media coverage and appeals by police, he turned himself in and was ordered to carry out community service having shown "genuine remorse".
In 2011 an appeal for witnesses was put out after a 10kg bag of sand was hurled from the bridge, and in the same year a student was fined £500 for throwing a cone off the bridge.
Mr Ward though says he has struggled to get answers from police about their investigations, with no media appeal issued and no update given to him.
He said: "I haven't heard from them.
'I've asked them twice for updates and they haven't got back in touch. I phoned them on Sunday because they wanted to know an exact time for the incident and I obviously didn't really know what was going on at the time but I went back and checked my FitBit and got the exact time of the impact from that.
'I phoned to let them know and they said the person who would be investigating it isn't on until next week. So I sent a big email in on Sunday night to ask if I could be updated by someone to know if they'd been looking at CCTV to find who did it and I've not heard anything back.
"I've spoken to two people who used to run a bar on that bridge and they've told the police that something should be done, a netting or something, because it's happening quite a lot.
'There's been a few times where people have thrown stuff but it's not actually hit anyone, but a couple of times people have been hit and it's been more severe than mine, thankfully, was.'
A Police Scotland spokesperson said: 'Around 1.40am on Saturday, 21 June, 2025, we were called to the Merchant Street area of Edinburgh following a report of a man injured from an item thrown from a bridge.
'Emergency services attended and the man was later taken to hospital.
'Enquiries are ongoing into the circumstances of this incident and anyone with information is asked to contact 101 quoting reference 0367 of 21 June, 2025.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Belfast Telegraph
30 minutes ago
- Belfast Telegraph
Nama Trial ends: What's next for Jamie Bryson and Daithí Mckay?
All three had repeatedly denied the charges. The charges relate to controversy following the sale of Nama's Northern Ireland portfolio. Nama, the so-called bad bank created by the Irish government to deal with the toxic loans of bailed-out lenders during the economic crash, sold its 800 Northern Ireland-linked properties to investment fund Cerberus for £1.2 billion. Jamie Bryson made headlines in 2015 when he used privilege in a finance committee meeting to claim that then first Minister Peter Robinson was benefiting from the sale of the portfolio. Robinson said the claim was 'without one iota' of evidence. Judge Gordon Kerr KC said he was satisfied that Mr Bryson, who has ambitions of pursuing a career as a barrister, had lied under oath in the trial – allegations he strongly denies. How did the trial unfold and what's next for the Nama story? Olivia Peden is joined by Belfast Telegraph Journalist Liam Tunney, who has followed the trial extensively.
ITV News
an hour ago
- ITV News
Mushroom murder trial: Erin Patterson guilty after serving relatives toxic death cap mushroom lunch
Erin Patterson has been found guilty of triple murder after serving her estranged husband's family poisonous mushrooms, as ITV News' Fred Dimbleby reports Australian woman Erin Patterson has been found guilty of murdering three of her estranged husband's relatives by deliberately serving them poisonous death cap mushrooms. The jury returned a verdict after six days of deliberations, following a nine-week trial that gripped Australia and media worldwide. She faces life in prison and will be sentenced at a later date, although no hearing has been scheduled yet. Patterson showed no emotion as the verdicts came back guilty, but blinked rapidly as they were read. She was also found guilty of attempting to murder Ian Wilkinson, who survived the meal. The deaths of Don and Gail Patterson and Heather Wilkinson shocked the quiet Australian town of Leongatha, Victoria, and quickly captured both national and international attention. At the centre of the tragedy was a seemingly innocuous family lunch on July 29, 2023, hosted by Erin Patterson, who had invited her former in-laws, Don and Gail (the parents of her estranged husband, Simon Patterson), along with Gail's sister, Heather Wilkinson and Heather's husband, Ian. Patterson, who shares two children with Simon, prepared a homemade beef wellington, a meal that would soon become the focus of a months-long murder investigation. The dish allegedly contained death cap mushrooms, one of the world's deadliest fungi. All four guests fell critically ill within 24 hours. Three later died in hospital, while Ian Wilkinson required a liver transplant after spending nearly two months recovering, including time in intensive care. Patterson initially denied wrongdoing, claiming she accidentally used a mix of mushrooms sourced from an Asian grocery store and dried fungi, which she said were gifted by a friend. However, police alleged inconsistencies in her account, including the disposal of a food dehydrator and deleted digital records, which became key points of scrutiny during the trial. Throughout the proceedings, the case stirred debate across Australia. The lack of clear motive, paired with public fascination and tabloid fervour, made the trial one of the most closely followed in recent Australian criminal history. What were the key moments in the trial? The prosecution alleged Patterson deliberately served a poisoned meal to her estranged in-laws and extended family. They argue she prepared a special untainted portion for herself. The defence argued the poisonings were a tragic accident, claiming Patterson unknowingly used contaminated mushrooms, became ill herself, and panicked afterwards, out of fear she would be wrongly blamed. Here are the key points of evidence the trial discussed: Food dehydrator: Patterson purchased a food dehydrator on April 28, 2023, just two hours after a known sighting of death cap mushrooms was posted online near Loch. The prosecution alleges she saw the post and collected mushrooms that day. Patterson testified she purchased the dehydrator to preserve and dry mushrooms, which she regularly stored in containers in her pantry to use later in cooking. Phone location: Cell tower data places her near Outtrim on May 22, 2023, shortly after death caps were recorded growing there. The prosecution claims this supports the theory she foraged for mushrooms twice during the short toxic season. Patterson admitted to using a mixture of store-bought mushrooms and dried ones from her pantry, but insists she never intentionally included toxic mushrooms and did not forage near Loch or Outtrim. The defence argues that mobile tower data can be imprecise and may show signals from within her home, undermining the claim that she traveled to foraging locations. Fake cancer: Patterson admitted during the trial that she lied to the lunch guests and lured them to the meal under the pretext that she had cancer and needed their support whilst she underwent surgery. The prosecution argues this lie was invented to cover her true motivations and reduce suspicion, suggesting she never expected them to survive the meal. The defence claims Patterson in reality was making plans to have gastric bypass surgery, in a bid to take control over concerns she had about her weight but was too embarrassed to share this with her guests. Different plates: Survivor Ian Wilkinson told the court that all guests were served on grey plates, while Patterson used an orange one - implying she knew not to eat the poisoned food. Patterson claimed she prepared only one batch of beef wellington and ate the same meal as her guests, she denied reserving a safe portion for herself. She claimed she does not own grey plates. Orange cake: After guests left, Patterson claims she ate large amounts of orange cake brought by her former mother-in-law, Gail Patterson, claiming she struggles with an eating disorder. Prosecutors challenged her claim that she made herself vomit afterwards, arguing that self‑induced vomiting would not eliminate the lethal amanitin toxin. Patterson told the court that she started to develop gastro-like symptoms hours after the lunch and took herself to hospital to receive fluids two days later. Withheld information: When Patterson was hospitalised with symptoms, she initially did not inform doctors that any remnants of foraged mushrooms may have been in the meal, something prosecutors say could have helped save lives. She testified that she did not immediately connect her own gastrointestinal symptoms with mushroom poisoning. CCTV disposal: On August 2, days after the fatal lunch, Patterson was seen on CCTV dumping the dehydrator. Prosecutors argue this was a deliberate attempt to destroy crucial evidence. Forensic analysis revealed remnants of death cap mushrooms inside the appliance. Patterson says she discarded and lied about the dehydrator not to hide evidence but out of panic after child protection services contacted her, fearing it could be used to justify taking her children away.
Wales Online
2 hours ago
- Wales Online
Woman found guilty of murdering husband's family with poison mushroom meal
Woman found guilty of murdering husband's family with poison mushroom meal Erin Patterson has been convicted of three counts of murder Erin Patterson arriving in the back of a prison transport vehicle at Latrobe Valley Magistrate's Court in Morwell, Australia Australian woman Erin Patterson was on Monday found guilty of murdering three of her estranged husband's relatives by deliberately serving them poisonous mushrooms for lunch. The jury in the Supreme Court trial in Victoria state returned a verdict after six days of deliberations, following a nine-week trial that gripped Australia. Patterson faces life in prison and will be sentenced at a later date. Patterson, who sat in the dock between two prison officers, showed no emotion but blinked rapidly as the verdicts were read. Three of Patterson's four lunch guests — her parents-in-law Don and Gail Patterson, and Gail's sister Heather Wilkinson — died in hospital after the 2023 meal at her home in Leongatha, at which she served individual beef Wellington pastries containing death cap mushrooms. She was also found guilty of attempting to murder Ian Wilkinson, Heather's husband, who survived the meal. It was not disputed that Patterson served the mushrooms or that the pastries killed her guests. The jury was required to decide whether she knew the lunch contained death caps, and if she intended for them to die. The guilty verdicts, which were required to be unanimous, indicated that jurors rejected Patterson's defence that the presence of the poisonous fungi in the meal was a terrible accident, caused by the mistaken inclusion of foraged mushrooms that she did not know were death caps. Prosecutors did not offer a motive for the killings, but during the trial highlighted strained relations between Patterson and her estranged husband, and frustration that she had felt about his parents in the past. The case turned on the question of whether Patterson meticulously planned a triple murder or accidentally killed three people she loved, including her children's only surviving grandparents. Her lawyers said she had no reason to do so — she had recently moved to a beautiful new home, was financially comfortable, had sole custody of her children and was due to begin studying for a degree in nursing and midwifery. Article continues below But prosecutors suggested Patterson had two faces — the woman who publicly appeared to have a good relationship with her parents-in-law, while her private feelings about them were kept hidden. Her relationship with her estranged husband, Simon Patterson, who was invited to the fatal lunch but did not go, deteriorated in the year before the deaths, the prosecution said. The simplest facts of what happened that day and immediately afterwards were hardly disputed. But Patterson's motivations for what she did and why were pored over in detail during the lengthy trial, at which more than 50 witnesses were called. The individual beef Wellington pastries Patterson served her guests was one point of friction, because the recipe she used contained directions for a single, family-sized portion. Prosecutors said that she reverted to individual servings, so she could lace the other diners' portions, but not her own, with the fatal fungi — but Patterson said that she was unable to find the correct ingredients to make the recipe as directed. Nearly every other detail of the fateful day was scrutinised at length, including why Patterson sent her children out to a film before her guests arrived, why she added additional dried mushrooms to the recipe from her pantry, why she did not become ill when the other diners did, and why she disposed of a food dehydrator after the deaths and told investigators that she did not own one. Article continues below Patterson acknowledged some lies during her evidence — including that she had never foraged mushrooms or owned a dehydrator. But she said that those claims were made in panic as she realised her meal had killed people. She said she did not become as ill as the other diners since she vomited after the meal because of an eating disorder. She denied that she told her guests she had cancer as a ruse to explain why she invited them to her home that day. Before the verdict, Australian news outlets published photos of black privacy screens erected at the entrance to Patterson's home. The case has provoked fervour among the public and media, and the courtroom in the rural town of Morwell was packed throughout the trial.
