Free The Discussion Essay Sample
What is of interest is who is deemed responsible for the accident and thus liable for prosecution. From prior statistics, the main party at fault in such cases is normally the truck driver. This is because these drivers rarely get enough sleep while carrying out their responsibilities. The accident reconstructionist could be used by the prosecutor to show that the truck driver was not following the traffic lights or he was over speeding. The surviving victim from the passenger car should be added to the witness list of the prosecutor to strengthen the case against the truck driver.
Two large trucks collide and a passenger vehicle parked on the side walk is damaged in the collision. One of these large trucks is transporting radioactive wastes and the other transporting petroleum based products. The driver of the radioactive wastes dies immediately. The driver of the petroleum products truck survives but is critically injured. There are no victims in the parked car as the owners were not present in the car when the accident occurred. The two expert witnesses would include the accident reconstructionist and an expert on hazardous wastes. The lay witness in the case is a woman who witnessed the accident occurs. The accident reconstructionist would testify on the conditions in which the accident seems to have occurred by studying the accident scene (Bishop, 2001). The hazardous waste expert would testify on the effects the radioactive materials being transported would have had on the driver (Rhyne, 1994). The lay witness would testify on who she perceives as being at fault based on what she saw (definitions.uslegal.com, 2011).
I would impeach the accident reconstructionist. His testimony can be said to be as good as the money he is paid. Their profession is known to be corrupt with most being used to testify on behalf of the accused for payment. The additional information used would be documents showing that the particular specialist has testified in a number of cases for payment.