With regard to the location of the damage in the front of the Dodge vehicle, the witness referred to the photographs that appear on the photographic board marked P/39 and explained that the round impact on the hood according to his experience is consistent with the fact that the deceased's head hit the hood.
Reference to the opinion of Examiner Partush and his testimony before us:
In practice, the defense does not dispute the vast majority of the measurements taken by examiner Partush insofar as they relate to the condition and integrity of the vehicle, the findings found at the scene, the adjustment of the damages to the Dodge vehicle, and not even with regard to the fact that the injury itself to the deceased was done while the Dodge was in the opposite (left) lane on Eltkoa Street.
In addition to the aforesaid, while the examiner relied on the testimony of Jaudat and therefore in order to reconstruct the accident, he placed the deceased at the beginning of the incident on the left sidewalk shortly after the speed bump, the defense expert relied on the blood marks on the road and determined from them that the impact was near the right turn and before the speed bump. The defense expert also determined that when he was run over the deceased was on the sidewalk on the right side and crossed the road from right to left in the direction of the defendant's travel, while Examiner Partush placed the deceased on the sidewalk on the left in relation to the direction of the deceased's travel.
Before we address the aforementioned dispute and the manner in which Examiner Partush (as well as the testimony of the defense expert), it should be said that from the outset, this case is not decided in the manner of "regular" road accident cases through the work of examiners, when the testimony of the traffic examiner carries considerable weight in relation to the determination of the driver's fault, and we will explain.
The premise of a fatal car accident investigation is that the offender, in the absence of contradictory evidence, is not interested in harming the pedestrian, and therefore, from the moment he notices it, he will try to brake or avoid injury. Based on this basic assumption, a reconstruction is conducted in which it is examined whether a "reasonable" driver would have been able to brake before hitting the deceased, given the first point at which he could have noticed the pedestrian, and his speed.