Mafud wrote: >What the Paparzzi did (or not) had nothing to do with her death. She died >only because she hit the back of the front seat at 85mph.
I do a lot of industrial accident investigation, and have extensive training, and I'm pretty good at it. No decent accident investigation team in our corporation would arrive at this too-simple conclusion. The impact is just the injury event, the final point in a chain of circumstances. There were many factors in these deaths - the impact (or rather the cessation of life resulting from the injuries due to excessive g-force causing massive tearing of soft tissue) is just one factor, and not even close to the root cause. In simplest terms, one must back away in time from the point of injury, step by step, to get a handle on the root cause - and often there are multiple contributing factors, each holding almost equal weight. That's what the French law has recognized - while the Papparazzi are not fully culpable, they were certainly a significant contributing factor. A cloud of buzzing bees could cause someone to run into the street and get hit by a car, even if no bee actually stung anyone. Would the local government then address the bee problem? One would hope so. -- John Mustarde - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
