This accident occurred due to the speed of the driver of a Mustang. It led to the abrupt death of David and grievous injury to Anderson. It all started when, shortly after dark, Cantrell in her Mustang sped down the way towards Anderson through an intersection. On her way to Anderson, she sped by a pickup truck driver who estimated her speed to be 75 – 80 mph. Cantrell went on to scare a man whose wife, accompanied by their three boys, was taking him to his night shift textile job. The man estimated Cantrell’s speed to be 75 – 100 mph. Shortly after this, she collided with Anderson. This is the case of Clark v. Cantrell. In this traffic accident case, it was stated that traffic accident animation “is admissible as demonstrative evidence” as long as the relevant rules of evidence have been adequately followed.
According to the World Health Organization, “every year the lives of approximately 1.3 million people are cut short due to road traffic crashes. Between 20 and 50 million more people suffer non-fatal injuries, with many incurring a disability as a result of their injury.” Many of these accidents are caused by speeding, distracted driving, unsafe road infrastructure, unsafe vehicles, inadequate post-crash care, and inadequate law enforcement of traffic laws. Like the case mentioned above of Clark v. Cantrell, overspeeding led to the death of a person and grievous injury to another person. These are the endangering effects of traffic accidents, and traffic accident animation can help victims attain justice in the court of law.
Traffic accident animations are very effective in the courtroom because they help capture the vehicle’s progression and the possible cause of the accident. Dilich (2011), in his article Computer Animation of Traffic Accidents, stated that “computer animation that vividly portrays traffic accidents are increasingly used as analytical and persuasive tools in the American tort system. As this technology continues to develop and its costs further decrease, animations are expected to attract a more diverse audience in areas such as driver education, collision avoidance training, motor carrier preventable accident reviews, reckless homicide investigations, and preventable accident countermeasure research.” From this, it can be noted that not only does traffic accident animation help in upholding a claim involving a traffic accident, it can also help in accident prevention training.
It is important to note that an attorney will have difficulty portraying a traffic accident without the aid of traffic accident animation because of one factor – progression. It is much easier showing a progression of things than telling them. An attorney must, by nature, be able to convince his audience.
However, what is the use of this ability if the audience does not even understand a minuscule of what they are trying to say? This is where traffic accident animation comes to the rescue. It possesses tremendous benefits. With traffic accident animation, the jury would view the accident from different perspectives, such as a bird’s view, the driver’s view, the victim’s, and the eyewitnesses’ view. Beyond this, it is easy to portray incidents that happened in a heartbeat through the function of slow motion. In addition to this, alternative scenarios can be depicted in a context where the probable cause is not certain.
In view of the foregoing, if you have a traffic accident case in the court, whether you are the plaintiff or the defendant, you need to use traffic accident animation to win your case. If it is appropriately done with the help of a good animation company and a sound attorney, all you have to do is sit back and watch as traffic accident animation steals the day in court.
