More importantly, the witness explained that the location of the pedestrian according to Jawdat's testimony is a "beneficial" scenario for the defendant, since assuming that the deceased was in the place where the first blood stain was (marked 11), the Dodge driver's field of vision would necessarily have increased, the defendant should have noticed it earlier: "The distance of the field of vision has increased, that is... that is, the distance he sees it, it's not 22 meters, it's not 29 meters, he sees it before... We didn't measure it but he sees it before [...] So if you place it 11 meters really close to the intersection, really close to the intersection then you see it much, much more, much more before... I can estimate at 30 - 40 meters... Yes - at least 30 meters... I haven't checked it, but I can estimate yes" (p. 287).
The defense insisted that this argument of Examiner Partush was made in vain without conducting an experiment in the field or substantiating his claim with any calculations. Since we have watched the video documenting the field of vision experiment, and especially taking into account the simple logic underlying the matter, we accept Examiner Partush's statement that moving the place of impact to the left closer to the right turn will necessarily increase the field of vision.
To illustrate this, attached is the photograph from a video that will reconstruct the field of vision in which a police officer is located in the presumed location of the deceased (rectangle). The bumper on the road is marked (arrow), as is the location where the deceased is supposed to be located, assuming that the deceased is located 11 meters closer to the intersection (ellipse) (this is an approximate location, the purpose of which is to illustrate the trend of increasing the distance from which the deceased can be first noticed, the closer he is located to the intersection):
And for the sake of comparison, see the driver's field of vision upon arrival at the intersection (a consolidation from a video that will restore the field of vision):