The investigative failure conducted by the prosecution witness, the expert examiner Vladi, did not go unnoticed by the courtHowever, this failure does not assist the defendant's defense, since whether the calculation was made from the right side or from the left side of the defendant's car to the damage to the underground, both place the vehicle involved at the time of the collision within her lane.
Anyway, examiner Maayan also made a calculation of the "location" of vehicle B - which was involved - in its lane at the time of the collision, based on the location of the grooves in its lane and the examination of the underside of vehicle B (P/35) on which an asphalt mark was found and determined that the location of the accident was in the lane of the vehicle involved. (See his testimony of January 15,2025, pp. 52-53).
From this the examiner Maayan learned, together with other evidence that I have discussed and will discuss later, that the accident occurred in the lane of vehicle B - the vehicle involved.
It should be noted, that the presence of the groove in the lane of the vehicle involved and marked "C" in the diagram (P/37) and the asphalt mark in the underbelly of the vehicle involved (P/32, photos 23-24) are important for deciphering the manner in which the accident occurred.
During the hearing of the evidence, and in particular the hearing of the testimony of the examiner Maayan, it appears that when the two vehicles in this case meet head-on, and in our case a front front with an angle in the mixed lane, the defendant's vehicle and the vehicle involved lifted up, made a turn during it due to the fact that the vehicle involved is smaller, it collapsed downwards and made a notch mark on the driving lane through its ventral cover. Later on, the examiner testified about the manner in which the vehicles were found at the end.
As mentioned above, the combination of finding the crack on the road in the lane of the vehicle involved and finding an asphalt mark in the underside of the vehicle involved, combined with additional testimonies of eyewitnesses and testimonies of those involved in the accident, enabled the examiner's determination that the defendant deviated from his lane of travel to the lane of the vehicle involved and caused the fatal accident.
Photos 25-26 in a photo board (P/32), illustrate the encounter of the vehicles and their position at the moment of the collision by matching the damage between the two fronts of the vehicles involved.