0:03

A Warning.

0:06

This episode contains graphic descriptions

0:08

of fatal car crashes. Some

0:10

listeners may find this content disturbing.

0:13

If this does affect you, dial Lifeline on

0:15

13 11 14. Welcome

0:23

to Crime Insider's Forensics. For

0:26

those joining us for the first time, my

0:29

name's Katherine Fox. I'm a

0:31

former GP, crime author and screenwriter.

0:35

I'm enthralled by forensics and have spent

0:37

thousands of hours researching for books and

0:40

screenplays. So, I thought,

0:43

why not turn my research into

0:45

a podcast? Every week,

0:48

you'll be joining me in discovering

0:50

how forensic science is helping solve

0:52

high profile crimes in Australia and

0:54

around the world. This

0:57

week, the forensics

0:59

behind fatal crash investigations.

1:03

I've been to sites where there've

1:05

been crashes a couple of years

1:07

later and I still

1:09

find the evidence there at the site. Professor

1:13

Raphael Gebieta has carried

1:16

out over 200 in-depth

1:18

crash investigations and accident

1:20

reconstruction analyses. His

1:22

work is intricate and highly detailed and

1:25

as you'll hear, involves traumatic,

1:27

highly confronting crime scenes that

1:30

act as a puzzle for forensics. One

1:34

of the cases that stands out for Raph was

1:37

one he worked on only a few years ago.

1:45

The double truck crash that occurred

1:48

prior to 2020. That

1:50

was quite a horrific crash.

1:52

It involved two prime movers

1:55

towing triaxial trailer transports with

1:57

fabricated concrete panels. convoy,

2:00

the one that

2:03

was following the lead, he

2:05

had approached a line of traffic that

2:07

was stopped at a roadworks and

2:10

the speed limit was supposed to

2:12

be 40 kilometres per hour, but he actually stopped

2:14

the traffic and there was a

2:16

line of vehicles, six vehicles,

2:18

including just cars as well

2:20

as a B-double 60 tonne

2:22

grain truck and he

2:25

struck the lead

2:27

vehicle in that convoy, struck the

2:29

line of vehicles, I estimated at

2:32

87 kilometres per hour

2:34

and even the driver admitted he was

2:36

doing around about 80 kilometres per hour

2:39

and collided with those seven vehicles, virtually

2:42

instantly killed two people that were

2:44

in the second car in the

2:46

line and injured all

2:48

the other people in those line of

2:50

vehicles and it was like a you

2:53

know it was like a major disaster, it was

2:55

like as if you had a plane

2:57

crash or an explosion with

3:00

multiple individuals involved and an

3:03

object, I mean when you look at the

3:06

scene, the map scene or the aerial shot

3:08

that was taken that the police

3:10

took from a helicopter, it

3:13

is just amazing that you can

3:15

untangle what actually happened, you know

3:18

I'm most impressed with the police the

3:20

way they untangled that whole situation. The

3:24

prime mover, it acted like

3:26

a massive bulldozer going at

3:28

huge speed, pushing vehicles out

3:30

of the way until it hit the

3:33

grain truck which was the fifth vehicle

3:35

in the line and

3:37

so the first vehicle, it

3:40

was stunning, this person that

3:42

was trapped in the first

3:45

vehicle that was struck, he was

3:47

rolled into a ball underneath

3:49

the truck, the truck was sort of up

3:52

on top of it like as if you put something

3:54

on top of a football or a

3:56

round ball and he was wrapped up

3:59

inside that. still alive

4:02

and the prime mover with that rolled

4:04

up vehicle kept on pushing until

4:06

it hit the 66 tonne truck.

4:10

And so the first thing was to get that

4:12

person out. And so that's

4:14

the first thing the police do is

4:16

assess who's injured, who needs assistance and

4:18

immediately start pulling them all out. The

4:20

emergency services, of course you have your

4:22

state emergency services,

4:24

the volunteers, they

4:27

get there as well. And so

4:29

a whole lot of people, but you've got to

4:32

have someone who's commanding that. And so

4:34

that's what they tend to do is they set up

4:37

someone who's responsible for the whole

4:39

site and start to

4:41

rescue these people. So that's

4:43

the first thing. Then the

4:45

next sequence is, of course, is working

4:47

out what happened. And so

4:50

if it's a major crash like this,

4:52

then you'll get the forensic team from

4:54

the police, from the

4:56

crash investigation squad attending and coming

4:59

in, usually driving. But

5:01

if it's pretty remote, they may come in

5:03

by chopper. If there's more

5:05

than one fatality, and this happens in

5:07

Victoria, if you get about three or

5:09

four fatalities, then quite often they'll fly

5:11

the coroner in by chopper

5:14

to have a look. Because it's really

5:16

important people see what's happened if

5:19

the whole process winds up going

5:21

to court or an inquest

5:23

is carried out. It ramps up

5:26

at different levels as the

5:28

number of victims increase. Obviously,

5:31

we think of the word accident, but

5:33

when investigators go in... No, I don't like

5:35

using that word. No, I don't really like it either.

5:38

I call them crashes and incidents. Yes. Crashes

5:41

and incidents, that's what we've got to call them.

5:43

We've got to stop using this word accident. It's

5:46

not a thing that's uncontrollable. Everything's

5:48

controllable. And that's what we've been

5:51

saying as experts, as road safety

5:53

experts over decades.

5:56

Call them crashes, incident. And call them

5:58

an accident. this truck

6:00

crash, there's carnage, you

6:02

obviously have emergency services rushing in,

6:05

you're concerned that some vital evidence

6:07

may be destroyed. How can the

6:09

evidence be destroyed or damaged or

6:11

interfered with by emergency services? It's

6:15

not as hard to destroy the evidence

6:17

as you think, but in some instances

6:19

I was involved in one particular case

6:21

which was a head-on crash. What

6:24

happens is in such crashes is

6:27

vehicles dip into the road and

6:29

cause gouge marks in the road,

6:31

the tyres get blocked.

6:34

In this instance the prime mover truck

6:37

had its hoses severed,

6:40

brake hoses and what happens is the

6:42

brakes automatically

6:45

brakes all wheels and so

6:47

you then get skid marks.

6:50

So you can't get rid of those,

6:52

they're embedded, you know, they're sort of in

6:54

the road system. And then

6:56

you get shattering of glasses, you get

6:58

water dropping etc. In this particular crash

7:00

that I looked at, the head-on crash,

7:03

there was this water patch which

7:06

was alluded to as, oh

7:08

this is the point of impact, this is

7:10

possibly where the point of impact, but it

7:12

wasn't. What happened was, what we

7:14

established was that one of the emergency

7:17

vehicles which had air conditioning had

7:19

dropped some water in that

7:21

area and so that contaminated the

7:23

site. You're absolutely right,

7:26

we have to be careful about contamination

7:28

and the police are pretty tuned into

7:30

that. I'm in the forensic investigative group

7:32

and most of the police that are

7:34

trained to investigate crash sites are

7:37

aware of, you know, if a car's

7:39

been cut open to help a person

7:41

get a person out of the vehicle. So

7:44

you know what's the difference between a

7:47

vehicle that's being crushed because of the kinetic

7:50

energy, the impact forces and one that's been

7:52

cut away with the jaws of light to

7:54

try and release someone from

7:56

the vehicle. Obviously

7:58

the priority is to save lives. lives first,

8:01

but then you have a death scene, so

8:03

you have coroners. How on

8:06

earth do you start going

8:08

about trying to work out what happened?

8:10

To me, it's like having seen the

8:12

aerial photos, it's like a

8:15

whole lot of Lego has been scattered everywhere. How

8:17

do you go from that chaos to

8:21

finding order? Okay,

8:24

so objects behave according

8:26

to the laws of physics. We

8:28

are all governed. It's

8:30

actually one single equation. The

8:33

velocity squared equals 2 times the

8:35

acceleration times the distance over

8:37

which that acceleration acts. V equals 2as. Believe

8:42

it or not, it's equivalent to

8:44

Einstein's equation of E equals

8:46

mc squared. Energy equals

8:48

mass times the speed of light

8:51

squared. But on earth, here, we're

8:54

not affected by relativity. And

8:56

so that single equation governs

8:58

what happens to vehicles and

9:01

people and the systems that

9:03

collide. Now, usually the

9:05

forensic engineers and the police, the

9:08

forensic investigators, those that go to

9:10

the scene have an idea of

9:12

what happens when vehicles collide. From

9:15

experience, from training, we

9:18

know from past crashes

9:20

what happens. In this particular case

9:22

with the double crash, the

9:25

prime mover had

9:27

immense energy. I mean, it's

9:29

87 kilometers per hour. And

9:34

that kinetic energy of that truck

9:36

with a 40-odd ton carrying

9:39

those concrete prefab structures,

9:41

it acts like a massive bulldozer just

9:44

pushing things out of the way. I

9:46

mean, it's almost like you see in

9:48

the movies to some extent, Terminator, for

9:50

example, where they had that big truck

9:52

and it's just pushing things out of

9:54

the way. Well, that's exactly what happened

9:56

in this case. The police,

9:58

when they go there, with the

10:00

forensic investigators, they have some inkling

10:03

of an idea of what

10:05

was the point of impact. The

10:07

point of impact, usually you can find

10:09

the point of impact is where there's

10:12

a gouge mark where what happens is

10:14

vehicles tend to dive. When

10:16

they've got a force imparted onto the front

10:18

of them, they tend to dip. And

10:22

when they dip, the undercarriage

10:24

of the vehicle rubs

10:27

against the road and sort of gouges

10:29

like a plough and creates

10:31

these marks. There's also the

10:34

wheels. If there's braking,

10:36

if there's prior braking, then

10:38

you'll see the skid marks on the

10:40

road. If there's glass

10:43

that's been shattered, you'll see

10:45

the glass will not flick

10:48

forward. It'll always flick ahead of

10:50

the vehicle, if you can

10:52

think of that. So like hitting a billiard

10:54

ball, for example, if you've got the cue

10:56

ball, it hits the billiard ball,

10:58

the ball that gets hit doesn't go backwards, it

11:00

goes forwards. And you know that. And

11:03

the same with glass. And with all of these components,

11:06

you know that goes forward. Spray,

11:09

for example, if it's a fuel

11:11

tank, it goes forward, it

11:13

doesn't go backwards. The vehicles

11:16

that got pushed to one side, you

11:18

can work out more or less where these

11:20

vehicles are as to the sequence

11:23

of the impact and what gets

11:25

struck. And so we

11:27

know that the grain truck, which was

11:29

a 60-turner, that was the

11:31

V-double truck, vehicle six,

11:35

in other words, the fifth vehicle in the cue, it didn't

11:38

move. All it did was just skid.

11:41

And also it's kingpin got

11:43

shed. That's the amount of force that

11:45

was in that. And also the

11:47

driver's cabin got crushed a

11:50

little bit. The driver had some

11:52

minor injuries but walked away.

11:54

And so you can work out that

11:56

sequence. And so that's what the police do. One

12:00

of the important things to do

12:02

is to do walkthroughs, to

12:04

have photographs. You can't take enough

12:07

photographs. Photographs are a key

12:09

because you go back to them and they've

12:11

got to be high resolution photographs because you

12:13

could be analyzing this case like I was

12:15

a couple of years after the incident. And

12:19

so you rely on those photographs,

12:21

those high resolution photographs to help

12:23

you reconstruct the crash.

12:27

Do you reconstruct it in three dimensions as best

12:29

you can using computer programs? Or

12:31

how do you reconstruct it? No.

12:35

Well, you can do that. You can

12:37

use computer simulations to reconstruct it. And

12:40

you see that sometimes in the, we

12:43

see these documentaries about plane crashes and

12:45

car crashes, et cetera, and you see

12:47

the reconstructed. For example,

12:49

the Princess Diana crash. Those

12:53

reconstructions, whilst they're

12:55

useful, they give you information. You can't

12:57

rely on them. And

12:59

for example, George Hampel, he

13:02

was a judge. I

13:04

remember going to a symposium where we

13:07

simulated a court proceedings. And

13:10

I had a simulation of a vehicle

13:12

crash and I was trying to present

13:14

it. And

13:17

Judge Hampel's wife, Felicity, who's

13:19

a judge also, Felicity

13:22

Hampel was cross-examining me. And

13:25

I tried to put

13:27

this into evidence. And he said, well, how do

13:29

we know that's not a cartoon? How do you

13:31

know that's not fiction? Where's

13:33

your evidence? And so the

13:36

issue here is it always comes back to

13:39

what you found at the site

13:41

and also what you found how

13:44

the person was injured. So I

13:46

often look at autopsy reports, at

13:48

paramedic reports. You've got

13:50

to pull everything in. You've also

13:53

got to try and pull in the evidence

13:55

prior, leading to that crash. So

13:57

in that particular crash, I'm There

14:00

was an issue that while the driver claimed

14:02

that he had a coughing fit and that

14:04

he lost consciousness prior to the

14:07

crash and that's why the crash happened. And

14:10

so there was a, you get

14:12

the information about, okay, well, how

14:14

is he travelling all those days,

14:17

all those hours rather, prior to the

14:20

crash? And the dash

14:22

cam came in very useful because of

14:25

the truck that was following that lead

14:27

truck, we were able to use that

14:29

dash cam to figure out, okay, how long had

14:31

they had a sleep, had they been

14:33

to, gone out the

14:35

night before and maybe had some drinks

14:37

or whatever and what he really

14:39

fatigued. So there's a whole

14:42

stream of evidence that comes in and you've got

14:44

to look at the total picture in

14:47

cases that my colleague has been

14:49

involved in in these major truck crashes.

14:51

He's looked at the companies, the companies

14:53

themselves. And we know chain

14:55

of responsibility is now a

14:58

legal requirement. So the director of a

15:00

company can be held responsible if they

15:02

know their truck driver is driving two,

15:05

two for long hours and shouldn't be

15:07

and should be taking rests and breaks.

15:10

So yeah, everything comes in. In

15:14

terms of the

15:16

driver in this case, if

15:18

he said he was fatigued, for example, and fell

15:23

is that a defence? There

15:25

was a case and it is a defence. The

15:27

way it works is that, you know, if you're

15:29

asleep at the wheel, you might

15:32

not be held responsible for the incident

15:34

itself. There was a case,

15:36

Yemenis versus the Queen and what it

15:38

was was at about 11pm on the

15:41

13th of June 1988, this

15:43

particular driver, he set out

15:45

to travel south and he's

15:47

BMW with three other people

15:49

in the car. And

15:53

before setting out, he slept for about

15:55

four hours from about five o'clock in

15:57

the afternoon, one of the other

15:59

female passengers. passengers in the car,

16:01

Janelle Stefanoi, drove

16:03

the car for about 400 kilometres and then

16:05

after that time the

16:08

particular driver had slept and at about

16:10

3.30am they switched and

16:14

Yemen started driving the car at

16:16

about 6 o'clock on the

16:18

Pacific High, 30 kilometres north

16:20

of Kamsi, the car failed to make

16:22

a moderate right hand turn

16:24

in the highway and

16:26

it went into the shoulder and hit a

16:29

tree and Stefanoi was killed. And

16:31

so he then got convicted, he was found

16:33

guilty by a jury at

16:36

trial and he was convicted of culpable

16:38

driving and sentenced to six months imprisonment

16:40

to be served by way of periodic

16:42

detention. However, there

16:45

was the question as to whether the driver

16:48

who falls asleep at the wheel is guilty

16:50

of driving in a manner dangerous to the

16:52

public. And so he appealed

16:55

to the High Court of Australia and

16:58

what happened was when the

17:00

driver was asleep because during that time

17:02

his actions were not conscious or voluntary,

17:05

he was acquitted and

17:07

defence barristers have used that

17:10

particular precedent in New South Wales

17:12

and so what you have to

17:14

now do, the onus is on

17:17

the police to establish that

17:19

the fatigue of the driver was a

17:22

hazard to the public and

17:24

a hazard to the passengers or anyone else

17:27

and that's quite hard. So in this

17:29

particular case what happened was

17:32

initially when the paramedics attended

17:34

the scene they

17:36

asked the driver what happened and he said,

17:39

oh my brake failed, I accelerated, jammed. So

17:41

that was when they're pulling him

17:43

out of the truck as he was trapped in the

17:45

truck. Then on

17:48

the way to the hospital

17:50

he said his brakes hadn't

17:53

worked. But then a

17:55

day later he changed his story and

17:58

he changed it to a

18:00

situation where he had a coughing

18:02

fit and he lost consciousness. And

18:05

so the issue, the earnest fell onto the

18:07

police, okay well we've got to establish that

18:09

he was conscious prior to the crash. And

18:12

so when I was reconstructing the

18:14

crash I was provided with the

18:17

dash cam video of

18:19

the truck following in the convoy.

18:22

And I could see in that

18:24

video I could see the accused

18:28

truck veered to the left

18:30

to get out of the way of another

18:32

trip that was coming in the opposite direction,

18:35

a very large truck coming in the opposite

18:37

direction, to veer to the left over the

18:39

fog line and then as soon

18:41

as that truck passed then veered back. And that

18:43

happened about five seconds prior to the crash. So

18:46

he must have been conscious

18:48

and very aware that he

18:52

had to avoid hitting the oncoming

18:54

truck but at the same

18:57

time went back into the lane and didn't slow

18:59

down. And he kept on going at that

19:01

speed, the 87 kilometres per hour, which

19:03

was over the limit because he'd had a number of

19:06

warnings. There was a warning that there was a work

19:09

zone ahead, there was a

19:11

slowing down from from 100

19:13

to 80, then from 80 to

19:15

60 and then the work zone was ahead.

19:17

So he'd missed all those queues and

19:20

so he was found

19:22

guilty by the jury that

19:24

he actually was aware but he didn't slow down.

19:27

Do you also look at what distractions there could have

19:30

been? Was he on a phone? Yes

19:32

they do. Phone records are pulled up, not

19:34

only that there is a

19:36

speed monitoring system on the trucks, a

19:39

tachometer, so all of the data from

19:41

that is downloaded so that you can

19:43

see what speeds there were. The problem

19:45

with the tachometer is that it's not

19:47

refined enough, it's fairly coarse in

19:50

terms of timestamp but

19:52

that information is useful

19:55

and the mobile phones, yes they know that's

19:58

one of the first things that are down. downloaded straight

20:00

away as evidence is to whether they are on

20:03

the phone or not making a call. And

20:06

then automatically drivers are tested

20:09

for alcohol, drugs, any

20:12

other substances that could be influencing their behaviour?

20:15

Yes, he was tested. He had no alcohol, no.

20:17

But yes, they're tested for

20:20

drugs and alcohol. Yes, that's one of

20:22

the first things as you go into

20:24

the hospital. I'll test you for

20:26

that. Chain of evidence is

20:29

extremely critical in

20:31

these trials. I got

20:34

involved in a go-kart incident in

20:36

Victoria a long time ago where

20:38

a mum of two

20:40

children would sadly wound up

20:43

dying in a where

20:45

her go-kart crashed into a concrete barrier.

20:48

And so the go-kart was

20:51

kept, hadn't been touched, the

20:54

police secured it, it then

20:56

got brought out to our

20:58

laboratories at Monash. And they

21:01

asked us to have a look at it. And

21:04

so when I had a look at it, I

21:06

had a colleague of mine, we got dressed up

21:08

in all of the forensic suits and everything because

21:10

you've got to be very careful with blood splatter,

21:12

of course, and you've got to wear gloves and

21:14

all that and protect yourself. And

21:16

so she donned all the gear and

21:18

then I got her to sit in

21:20

the vehicle in the go-kart and

21:22

then to try and have the

21:25

seat belt on her. And

21:27

what we found was, quite

21:29

remarkably, the seat belt hadn't been adjusted

21:31

properly. So I was to secure

21:34

the person that died into

21:36

the go-kart seat. And what happened was

21:38

her head as it came into contact

21:40

with the steering wheel and the rest

21:42

of it also kept on going forward

21:44

because that's what it'll do. And

21:46

the seat belt hadn't restrained her, she

21:49

fractured the base of her skull. And

21:51

so that's how she died. And

21:53

so in that particular instance,

21:55

chain of evidence was critical because

21:57

the owners of the go-kart facility that

22:00

he were prosecuted by work cover and

22:02

it went to trial. And so you've

22:04

got to ensure that all

22:07

of that evidence is properly looked

22:09

at. I've got another case

22:12

where I'm looking at a

22:14

helmet now. And

22:16

so that gets delivered to me by the

22:18

police. It comes in a package, it's all

22:20

sealed properly with police tape, et

22:22

cetera. And I get my camera, the first

22:24

thing I do, I get my camera around

22:27

and I start photographing. Okay, here's the parcel

22:29

I received. Here's me opening the parcel, photograph

22:31

that. I take the helmet out,

22:33

photograph all of that. I keep

22:35

that chain of evidence so

22:37

that if I get confronted in a

22:40

cross examination in a court, then I said,

22:42

yes, well, I didn't tamper with it. It's

22:45

there, that's what was delivered to me.

22:48

And likewise in this Dubbo case,

22:50

fascinatingly, we looked at the lights

22:52

because he said his brakes had

22:54

failed. And one of the

22:56

things that puzzled one of

22:58

the police officers

23:00

that were investigating the case was

23:02

they found skid marks from

23:05

the truck. And they wondered

23:07

whether he applied his brakes prior

23:10

to hitting the vehicles. And if he had

23:12

applied his brakes prior to hitting the vehicles,

23:14

that means he was conscious, he was aware.

23:16

He wasn't fatigued, he wasn't unconscious because of

23:19

his coughing fit. So

23:21

we looked at that. And so what

23:23

we did is we pulled out the

23:25

lights, the various globes from the truck.

23:28

And what happens is these globes,

23:30

the filaments in the globes, if

23:33

they are on, then

23:35

the filament is heated. It's like

23:37

a radiator. And what happens is

23:40

during deceleration, they bend. And

23:42

if they bend, that means that they

23:44

were on at the time. Now

23:47

in this particular instance, the brake

23:49

light was still intact, not bent,

23:52

but the parking light was bent. And

23:55

so what we established was the brakes were

23:57

not on. We also found that

23:59

the. hoses were severed that the

24:01

various brake linings were broken

24:03

and that was due to the crash

24:05

and so the skid mark that occurred

24:07

that was there and we measured the

24:09

skid marks from the points of impact

24:11

and so those skid marks

24:14

were being created as the truck was

24:16

impacting other vehicles so it had had

24:18

its hoses severed and the brakes automatically

24:20

came on and locked and that's

24:23

why we established that that braking that

24:25

skid marks occurred when

24:27

the vehicles were being impacted. If

24:30

the filaments were bent why didn't they straighten when

24:32

they cool down? No

24:34

they don't they're permanently bent it's like

24:36

you know heating up

24:39

a piece of metal bending it

24:41

and then cooling it down it'll stay

24:43

bent. Then

24:45

why why aren't they bent the

24:47

very first time they're used and they stay

24:49

bent? No no

24:52

they don't bend under gravity gravity is

24:54

not large enough to be able to

24:56

bend those filaments. It's like your light

24:58

bulb that we've got in the house

25:00

right well the old ones the

25:02

old filament light bulbs when you turn that on

25:04

the filament doesn't bend it stays there

25:06

it's intact and when you turn it off

25:08

and you look at it it hasn't bent. However

25:11

if you turn that on and

25:13

then applied it you put it in a

25:16

sled let's say and you you decelerated it

25:18

it would bend then you'd get

25:20

it bent and you could

25:22

establish oh that's been under

25:24

some severe deceleration. So

25:27

it's the impact that freezes it in

25:29

that bent position? The deceleration

25:31

what we call deceleration. So yes

25:33

the impact event so

25:35

what happens is when a vehicle either

25:38

hits a solid object or hits another

25:40

vehicle or whatever or it's had its

25:42

brakes jammed on in a pedestrian

25:45

accident for example what

25:47

happens is the vehicle is decelerating so

25:49

it's it's decelerating at around about 0.6

25:51

0.7 G and so that's enough

25:57

to bend the filament and

25:59

so you'll then know if you take

26:01

those lights out you'll

26:03

know if someone's claimed well I had my brakes

26:05

on but you can't see any skid marks because

26:08

now what's happened we've got these ABS. Yeah

26:11

I was going to ask you about that.

26:13

Well you can tell you've got to be

26:15

there straight away on the scene and you

26:17

can see these little small jutters but

26:20

you've got to be there on the scene straight away you

26:22

can't have other vehicles driving over it and all that

26:24

sort of stuff but

26:26

the lights themselves give

26:28

you evidence so if

26:30

you're being decelerating and with ABS you

26:32

decelerate much higher rate you know up

26:35

to about 0.8 g and

26:37

so it will bend the filament

26:40

and so that's

26:42

one of the first things that the

26:44

police do the forensic police do the

26:46

crash investigators they go on scene they

26:48

grab those lights and they document that

26:51

it's one of the standard procedures. The other

26:53

thing also is seat belts looking

26:56

at the seat belt and so you can

26:58

see whether someone was wearing a seat belt and I

27:00

was very easy to tell you'll see

27:02

the front windshield might be shattered or

27:04

for the rear occupants if they're not

27:06

wearing the seat belt you won't see

27:08

any evidence on the seat belt of

27:11

when the seat belt locks in and

27:14

it moves it moves against the retractor

27:16

in a way that it leaves marks

27:20

and also from medical from

27:22

the medical documentation

27:24

if you haven't got a bruise on

27:26

you you haven't been bruised

27:28

then you probably weren't wearing a seat belt

27:31

and people need to realize

27:33

that if you make a claim for

27:35

compensation if you've got a claim

27:37

to third-party insurance for an injury

27:39

you weren't wearing a seat belt

27:42

they'll knock the payout down because

27:44

you contributed to your own irresponsible

27:46

act you

28:01

We know pathologists are often called to

28:03

crime scenes, we know coroners have been

28:06

to crime scenes. With the

28:08

crash investigators, are you

28:10

on call or is there

28:12

a roster? What sort of happens and how do they

28:14

actually get to the site? Because if it's priority to

28:17

get there as early as possible to preserve

28:19

evidence, how are they ferried

28:21

to the site? It

28:23

depends on the severity. If you have

28:25

multiple fatalities, then you start

28:28

getting helicopters involved. If it's at a

28:30

remote distance from a town

28:32

centre, so in the case of

28:34

the Dubbo crash, they all

28:36

drove out. They drove to the site

28:39

from Dubbo and usually it's the local

28:41

police from the nearest police station will

28:43

drive to the site and

28:45

immediately secure the site and

28:48

also reduce risk to other people coming

28:50

into the site, so approaching the site,

28:52

you know, other people travelling. And

28:55

so they maintain the scene. The

28:58

forensic people often it takes a couple

29:00

of hours by the time they get

29:02

there. If it's a remote

29:04

site in this instance in the Dubbo crash, it took them

29:06

a while to get there, it took them a few hours

29:08

to get there. But you want

29:11

to get there as soon as possible because

29:13

the evidence deteriorates over time. I've

29:16

been to sites where

29:18

there have been crashes a couple of years

29:20

later and I still find the evidence there

29:23

at the site. So quite often

29:25

what the police will do, the

29:27

investigators who come in, the

29:29

crash investigators or if someone's been trained

29:31

from one of the local police that

29:33

is there, they'll get a can of

29:35

paint and they'll paint little marks

29:38

on the road that indicate

29:40

a gouge mark or a

29:42

skid mark or you

29:45

know, there might have been some water somewhere

29:47

or there might have been some glass or

29:49

something and they'll leave those marks on the

29:51

road. You'll see them a year or two

29:53

later, still there and likewise

29:55

shattered glass bits of the lights, the

29:57

covers on the lights and that. you'll

30:00

see them in the grass nearby. I've found

30:02

a whole heap of stuff at

30:04

sites which indicates to me,

30:06

oh yes this is the crash site because

30:09

sometimes it's hard to locate the exact place

30:12

of the crash site when you go in a

30:14

couple of years later. But as

30:17

a crash investigator yes you get there as

30:19

quickly as you can often

30:21

it's just by car, it's the team

30:23

they'll have their own vehicles all set

30:25

up with all the gear on board

30:28

and one of the first things they

30:30

do is start surveying. They'll start taking

30:32

photographs and they'll set up the surveying.

30:35

They've got to survey the site and

30:37

indicate exactly where the various bits and

30:39

pieces are, the gouge marks, the skid

30:41

marks. To be able to reconstruct the crash you

30:44

need to know where all the vehicles

30:46

were, where the bodies were lying.

30:48

For example in this particular case

30:50

the driver of

30:52

the second vehicle struck

30:55

was ejected from the vehicle. The back of

30:57

the vehicle was just torn apart and

31:00

the driver was ejected out and lying

31:02

on the ground. So you've got to

31:04

work out where you've got to identify

31:06

those various key points in a survey.

31:09

These days it's very interesting that

31:11

they've got modern techniques now. They

31:13

have drones, these drones

31:16

fly over the site and

31:18

they're capable of now getting

31:21

all the data points in the

31:23

millions and then they

31:25

transfer it to a program and then

31:27

in the program you can you have

31:29

the whole site reconstructed with data points

31:31

and it's very sophisticated now

31:35

so that you can get even down to the fractions

31:38

of a millimeter now you can

31:40

get where something was located because

31:42

sometimes in the court proceedings that

31:44

followed many years later the

31:47

barristers are arguing with each other. No it wasn't

31:49

lying there it was over there and that means

31:51

this and this and this and so they have

31:53

these arguments to and fro and

31:56

so it's really important to document

31:58

every last little bit. it collect all of

32:01

the forensic evidence something

32:06

to measure distances so I'll

32:08

just use a wheel

32:11

that surveyors use to measure distances

32:13

I'll have my camera, my camera

32:15

is essential a high

32:17

resolution camera I

32:20

sometimes video as I

32:22

drive through the scene with a GoPro so

32:24

I've got the GoPros and

32:26

I use those at the

32:29

highest resolution I can in

32:31

this case, in the 00 case, truck

32:33

case case we went out to where the

32:35

vehicles were stored at the wrecking yard so

32:38

they're secured by the police they're not allowed

32:40

to be sold on anyone near them

32:43

and so we went out to look at

32:45

all of the vehicles and so I photographed

32:47

the vehicles we use the

32:49

photograph, we use tape measures etc so

32:52

as to the distances, crush sometimes

32:54

we'll take out, so to

32:57

establish crush there are

32:59

various ways of determining the

33:01

speed of an impact and one way

33:03

is to look at the crush of the vehicle so

33:06

we'll set up these sort of coloured

33:08

red and white sort of

33:10

marking sticks which identify what the

33:13

shape of the vehicle was prior to the

33:15

crash and then what we can do

33:17

is we can measure the distance to

33:19

the actual crumpled vehicle from those

33:21

sticks of the original shape of

33:24

the vehicle and so

33:26

that gives us a crush profile and

33:28

we can put that back into a

33:30

program which uses various, well previous

33:33

incidents tens of thousands

33:35

of incidents and it works out what the

33:37

force resistance is to cause that sort of

33:39

crush and from that you can then work

33:41

out what the speed was that the vehicle

33:43

must have been travelling at in

33:46

order to create that crush We

33:49

now have so many different cars on

33:52

the roads so many different vintages is

33:56

there some sort of database that you can look at

33:58

from all the cars went through

34:00

the stage where crumple was actually a safety

34:02

feature and before anti-lock brakes,

34:04

people who've learnt to drive on them

34:07

probably don't realise that in the past

34:09

people were taught to pump the brakes

34:11

because otherwise they would lock and you

34:13

would skid and have no control. So

34:16

you give one of those old drivers an ABS

34:20

car and they're trying to

34:22

pump the brakes. In terms of

34:24

drivers, do you find

34:26

that drivers are negligent possibly

34:29

in accidents because they're not

34:31

knowing how to drive that

34:33

car and the relative

34:35

safety slash risks of that particular

34:38

car? That's

34:41

very hard to prove. The

34:43

reason you're pumping the brakes

34:47

is to release from the brakes rather than

34:49

apply the brakes. So in the old days

34:51

when we didn't have ABS, you would release

34:53

the brakes so that the wheel would spin

34:56

and gain traction again so

34:58

that you could steer it because

35:00

if you kept it on all the time and

35:03

it's skidding, it's like being on an

35:05

ice rink on a

35:07

vehicle and you have no control. So that's the

35:09

reason for the pumping is to release

35:11

it and allow the wheel to

35:14

move because it has a higher friction

35:16

when it's skidding, the friction drops and

35:19

so it drops lower than what is

35:22

the contact between the tyre and the road.

35:24

So with the ABS, that's what it does.

35:26

It controls the skid so it allows the

35:28

vehicle to move. It's dynamic

35:30

friction as opposed to static. Static friction

35:33

is when it's skidding. Dynamic friction is

35:35

when it's moving, the wheel is moving

35:37

but still gripping the road. So

35:39

you can get a much higher braking force

35:42

and what you're supposed to do with the ABS is

35:44

keep your foot jammed on the brakes all the time

35:46

so as to lock in that

35:48

ABS so that it works. But

35:51

for people that don't know what they're

35:53

doing, well, us baby

35:55

boomers, I mean we're experiencing

35:57

now all this modern technology.

36:00

but look the technology is

36:02

important. Drivers make errors. There's no

36:04

two ways about it. We all make errors and

36:07

so how to control those errors and

36:09

don't let those errors be a death

36:11

sentence. That's the real key

36:13

here and so what we

36:15

need to do is have systems that

36:17

are sophisticated enough to understand okay that

36:19

driver's making that error. It's pumping the

36:21

brakes instead of keeping the foot right

36:24

down and so you should have a

36:26

system in there inbuilt

36:28

so it should then apply the brakes

36:31

for you and not rely on you

36:33

applying the brakes. Now

36:35

my new vehicle that

36:37

I've got which is now only a few years old

36:40

it has automatic braking and it's saved me

36:42

a couple of times now. I

36:44

was up at Hall's Gap. I had a lot of

36:46

a bunch of passengers with me. I was in downtown

36:49

and what happened was someone darted out in

36:52

front of me and the vehicle was smart

36:54

enough to apply its brakes and all of

36:56

us were wearing our seat belts of course

36:59

and the vehicle pulled up and we

37:01

didn't hit that pedestrian. Now

37:03

I wouldn't have had enough time to

37:06

have applied my brakes to save that

37:09

pedestrian from getting struck and so our

37:12

perception reaction time is about

37:14

one and a half seconds

37:16

and it doesn't matter if you're shoemaker

37:19

or santa or whoever one

37:21

of the you know formula one drivers or you're

37:23

just normal you each

37:26

of us have roughly about a second

37:28

to two seconds perception reaction time. We

37:30

usually adopt about one and a half

37:32

seconds. Now that car

37:34

is a lot faster. That smart car is

37:36

a lot faster. You can work it out

37:39

in fractions of a second. Hey I'm about

37:41

to hit somebody. Apply your brakes.

37:43

You haven't applied your brakes? Here bang I'm applying

37:45

the brakes and it'll apply the brakes for you.

37:48

There was a crash on the

37:51

Monaro. Blake Corny was killed

37:53

and what happened was a truck hit the rear of

37:56

that car and killed him and

37:58

so there was a coronal inquest. in

38:00

the ACT and so

38:02

we said had that truck had

38:05

this emergency braking system he'd

38:08

be alive today and

38:10

so this is really important that we have

38:12

the system so that even though you might

38:14

have made a mistake and you're pumping your

38:17

you're pumping your brakes the

38:19

system takes over and it corrects your

38:21

error and that's what we want the

38:23

system to do and we want the road to do

38:25

that we want the cars to do that. Well

38:28

Raph thank you so much it's interesting that

38:31

I've not always thought of car

38:33

crashes and incidents involving

38:36

forensic investigators but it's

38:38

actually a crucial crucial component

38:42

in our criminal system so

38:44

thank you very much for joining us today

38:46

and sharing what is

38:48

clearly a passion and

38:50

vocation for you. You're most welcome

38:53

thanks very much for having me. Crime

39:03

and Siders Forensics is a listener

39:06

original production it's hosted by

39:08

me Catherine Fox and is produced

39:10

by Ed Gooden. Sound design

39:12

and imaging is my link to Kelly.