Family 'utterly heartbroken' as man dies after Aberdeenshire crash
The collision happened on the A982 South Road at Peterhead, Aberdeenshire, on May 13.
William John Horne, 67, who was driving a white Volkswagen, was taken to Aberdeen Royal Infirmary with serious injuries and died on Sunday, June 8, police said.
READ MORE: Labour MSP Davy Russell sworn in to Scottish Parliament after by-election win
The people in the other vehicles: a white Kia Ceed and a red Seat Alhambra; were treated for non-serious injuries.
Horne's family paid tribute to him in a statement issued via Police Scotland.
They said: 'Our family is utterly heartbroken by the tragic loss of William John Horne.
'We want to give our sincere thanks to the first responder, police, paramedics and all the wonderful staff at Aberdeen Royal Infirmary ICU for their care and attention to William.'
Horne was from the Peterhead area.
Constable John Grant, of the north east road policing unit, said: 'Our thoughts are with William's family who have asked for privacy at this difficult time.
'Inquiries are ongoing to establish the full circumstances and anyone with information who can assist and has not already spoken to officers is asked to get in touch.'
Anyone with information is asked to call Police Scotland on 101, quoting incident number 2279 of Tuesday May 13 2025.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
When vice was policed by church & fornication was everyone's business
Several people claimed to have witnessed the scene, which seems unlikely unless the masonry was as holey as Swiss cheese. But it certainly reveals the climate of state-sanctioned snooping that prevailed during an era when 'privacy', if mentioned at all, was considered a sinister cover for wickedness. In her fascinating new social history, Dr Tiffany Jenkins peers through the keyhole of the past to examine the Western world's changing attitudes towards public and private life. By the early 18th century, we learn, a clear distinction between the social and personal had evolved with the (male-dominated) business of politics, commerce, and ideas conducted in Parliament, marketplaces and coffee houses. Read more Meanwhile, for the wealthy at least, the domestic realm became more clearly delineated with curtains, partitioned rooms and distinct bedchambers. Grand houses even had separate service corridors to spare the gentry from encountering last night's reeking chamber pots as they were whisked away by servants (whose own sole source of privacy would have been a lockable wooden box). As the centuries progressed, the sanctity of the private sphere became a battleground and Jenkins offers an entertaining account of controversies that have raged over people's right to defend their homes, their mail or their conversations against prying eyes and ears. During the 1840s, the interception of private letters sent to Italian political exile Giuseppe Mazzini provoked outrage, with Scottish thinker Thomas Carlyle likening the practice to 'picking men's pockets'. Half-a-century later, the newly minted snapshot camera was marketed as offering the 'thrill' of taking someone's picture 'without their knowledge' and women who'd unwittingly been photographed in the street by so-called Kodak fiends were aghast to find their faces appearing in adverts for soap or tobacco. When Broadway star Marion Manola was surreptitiously snapped onstage with her legs clad in nothing but tights, she went to court to prevent the images being ogled by 'every fellow who could afford' them prompting accusations that, having happily displayed her pins on a public stage, she hadn't a be-stockinged leg to stand on. The hypocrisy charge remains a popular paparazzi defence against high-profile complainants. Take Prince Harry, who won substantial damages for press intrusion only to be dubbed 'the biggest invader of privacy in royal history' over the explosive revelations in his memoir, Spare. Another tabloid trope is that 'the public interest' trumps privacy and a notorious 1960s scandal offers a case in point. When news broke that the British Secretary of State for War, John Profumo, was having an affair with model Christine Keeler, acres of prurient coverage were justified on the grounds that her involvement with a Soviet naval attache threatened national security. Not everyone agreed and the event helped trigger the tabling of a parliamentary privacy bill calling for 'the right to be left alone'. Monica Lewinsky was accorded no such privilege over her affair with Bill Clinton. Her humiliating interrogation before the Starr committee, with the world's press salivating over every salacious detail, was legitimised as exposing the deceitfulness of a man unfit for presidential office but for the young White House intern, it felt like a violation. Today, as people splurge ever more intimate details of their lives over reality TV and 'lifestream' blogs, the plea to be left alone may seem anachronistic. ('If Prince Harry really wants his privacy, he must shut up!' suggested TalkTV's royal correspondent Rupert Bell.) But Jenkins warns this ignores the complexities involved, arguing that the hard-won distinction between our public and private lives needs to be defended as - for all the righteous talk about transparency - the ability to live at least part of our lives free from observation is precious. The private sphere, she writes, is where we 'take off our public masks' and 'can make mistakes with those we trust' - though this sanctuary is under threat at a time when people's unguarded remarks are triumphantly laid bare. Indeed, Jenkins raises the spectre of a quasi-Stalinist ethos in which 'divulging private conversations is incentivised, rather than stigmatised as reprehensible snitching', especially north of the Border where, she writes, the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act makes ours 'the only country in the Western world where the state has the power to police speech in the privacy of the home'. Read more You might argue that racist, sexist or homophobic remarks are an obvious evil deserving of exposure but Jenkins asks us to think carefully about the implications of a regime in which private speech (including WhatsApp messaging) is controlled, pointing out that 'a society in which we must filter everything we say through a kind of internalised show trial … inevitably encourages conformity and uniformity'. There are conflicting concerns, not least over freedom of information and Jenkins doesn't pretend an unregulated private realm is an unmitigated good, noting that in the 1970s, some radical feminists opposed privacy rights on the grounds they served male supremacy. They had a point, too: bringing rape and domestic abuse out of the shadows and into the courts was among the triumphs of the women's movement. But she lists their well-intentioned insistence that 'the personal is political' among the factors that eroded societal respect for people's privacy, leading to a burgeoning surveillance culture that reached new heights during the pandemic lockdowns. Agree or not, this is a debate we urgently need to be having. Hugely ambitious in its scope, Strangers and Intimates offers an accessible history of philosophical, ecclesiastical and judicial thought across more than four centuries. It also ventures into highly sensitive contemporary territory and raises questions that may challenge those who think outlawing free speech is progressive. They should definitely read this book.
BBC News
2 hours ago
- BBC News
Man arrested over fire at former Perth primary school
A teenager has been arrested over a fire at a former primary school in eyewitness described seeing a "tornado of fire and smoke" at the old Balhousie Primary School building on Muirton Place shortly after midnight on Scottish Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS) dispatched six crews and two height appliances to the scene, with firefighters continuing to battle back the blaze into the early 18-year-old man has been arrested in connection with wilful fire-raising. Two crews and a height appliance remain on the scene on Sunday morning to carry out dampening down work, the SFRS were not thought to be any casualties, but a number of properties were evacuated as a precaution, Police Scotland said. One eyewitness told BBC Scotland News: "I drove past at about 01:30 and the roof had collapsed."There was a full fire-smoke tornado engulfing the building."The flames began to subside about an hour later and the red glow was almost completely gone by about 03:30."She added staff at a local garage had provided coffee and water to emergency responders, while a nearby branch of McDonald's had handed out food. Dunkeld Road, Balhousie Street and Muirton Place were closed off and drivers and pedestrians have been warned to avoid the residents were warned to keep their windows and doors closed due to smoke coming from the Primary School was closed in 2023 when pupils were moved to the new Riverside Primary. It is the second major fire to hit a building in the city in the space of a week after a tenement on the corner of South Street and Scott Street was destroyed last Saturday.A man died and an eight-year-old girl was taken to hospital, while Perth and Kinross Council said the building would have to be completely demolished due to the damage.
Daily Record
5 hours ago
- Daily Record
I feel strongly about Bomber in Rangers vs SFA fallout and I can explain it all to Cavenagh in jig time
I have paid for the weddings of two daughters off the back of spontaneous, emotional comment. Forty years worth of payment for listening to, and attempting a reply to, exasperated radio callers who want to get something off their chest in a bronchitic blast. It would therefore be hypocritical in the extreme if I were to approve of someone being punished for indulging in that particular practice. Someone like John Brown, for example. Prior to Rangers' lengthy and indignant response to being fined £3000 by the SFA on Thursday, I had found it hard to work up any level of concern, far less righteous indignation, over the Bomber versus the compliance officer. The truth is I loved the story because it appealed to every cynical, sarcastic bone in my sceptical body. Bomber said the decision to disallow a goal for Rangers against Hibs at Easter Road on May 17 was 'corrupt.' In their initial defence of their in-house television channel's co-commentator, Rangers said in a statement that the words used came under the heading of 'spontaneous emotional' comment. My funny bone was tickled at that point because Scottish football has more conspiracy theorists per capita than any other country in the world. I know. I've spoken to most of them over the last four decades. And if you don't believe there's a conspiracy against their team then it stands to reason you must be part of the conspiracy yourself. Whatever reason is in the context of our game. Every fan in the country thinks the game is bent – particularly those who support Celtic and Rangers. That's why, on radio, there is what's known as a seven-second delay button. This mechanism 'loses' a caller in the event of the spontaneous and the emotional turning into the effing and blinding, which causes offence. Or requires the reading out of a disclaimer to legally distance the radio station from any comment that might ultimately be the cause of litigation. Rangers' post-fine statement on Thursday, that the outburst regarding alleged corruption wasn't an official club comment, is debatable. If I say Scottish football is corrupt on radio then I'm sure any punishment suffered would be delivered to my employers. But this is where the whole business is out of proportion to my way of thinking. People in the Bomber's position – or mine for that matter – are not, according to the SFA, supposed to imply bias or incompetence on the part of match officials. But the SFA's own Key Match Incident panel found that the decision to disallow Rangers' goal in Edinburgh was incorrect. And they have previously stood down VAR Alan Muir for mistakes made during games. Does that mean there is incompetence on the part of match officials, but you're not supposed to say so? It is at this point we are all disappearing up our own jurisprudence. Brown is a former Rangers player and lifelong follower of the club who got carried away in the heat of the moment. Big deal. We could all have got over it without psychological scarring. At the same time, the compliance officer must surely have more to do with his time than get involved in trivia of this description. Now we're into the realms of Rangers saying there is 'selective enforcement' of the rules and 'regulatory oversights', which damage the SFA's credibility. Whataboutery by any other name. Andrew Cavenagh might question, on behalf of 49ers Enterprises, what the cheque for £3000 is all about. But I wouldn't take too long to explain it all regarding 'he said that and they said this'. He's likely to tell whoever is informing him on the background that he's got far more important things to do with his time. Meanwhile, Rangers and the SFA could use their time more profitably if they assisted the Scottish government with their crackdown on crowd violence and the use of pyrotechnics. What Bomber said was never going to endanger anyone's life. Unlike the pyro plonkers.
