Can facts impact your perspective on a crash?

Yesterday I read an interesting piece from Automotive News that looked at people who lost their life in accidents while driving cars covered under the GM recall. The story says that had these fixes been in place sooner lives would have been saved.

Below is an excerpt from the story that talks about one of the only accidents where the driver wasn't under the influence of alcohol and was wearing a seat belt:

"In the 2007 crash in Ohio, a 42-year-old woman died when her car ran off the right side of a road, striking a signpost, several garbage cans, a guardrail and two trees.

The airbags did not deploy," said Lt. David Strasshofer of the Lyndhurst Police Department. While reviewing photos of the crash scene, Strasshofer said: "There's no grille, the hood is pushed back. It's a pretty solid front-end strike."

Using NHTSA's Fatality Reporting System I located that accident described above.


Driver information:

Vehicle information:


Accident information:

According to FARS data the vehicle was traveling at 75MPH in a 35MPH zone before it veered off the road and, as the story above indicates, struck two road signs, a guard rail and then struck a tree.

Driver related factors were listed as "Failure to Keep in Proper Lane" and "Operating the Vehicle in an Erratic, Reckless or Negligent Manner, Operating at Erratic or Suddenly Changing Speeds."

I understand the sensitive nature of fatal accidents. These are human beings, many of which have family members still grieving their loss. In no way am I saying that the lack of airbag deployment is OK, ever. Nor do I want to diminish their loss of life or the potential responsibility of GM.

What I am saying is that the public needs to have all the facts.

Question: Does omitting factors in an accident, like speed in this, case change your perspective on the accident itself