UniChris

You are exhibiting a fundamental failure of logic.

The role of a witness is to state what they observed. It is not to give interpretive opinions.

Based on the observations reported by witnesses, it is then possible to have a meaningful debate about how those should be interpreted.

The comments of a streetsblog poster who gives their interpretive opinion but neglects to state what they saw are meaningless.

"A did everything right" is meaningless

"A did X" would be something we can work with, by considering action X in the context of applicable laws, physics, and yes, political priorities. We can link to actual sections of vehicle codes, explain what is and is not visible from a particular position, etc - those aspects are testable.

But an opinion offered without mention of the facts on which it is based is utterly worthless.