The Overlooked Factor in Crash Cases — VisibilityPart 5: Case Outcomes Shaped by Visibility

Every crash has a story to tell — not just about physics and motion, but about the human element’s interaction with the environment and its influence on a crash. Visibility analysis adds a facet of understanding that is often overlooked. When combined with solid accident reconstruction, visibility evidence will often influence how a case is understood, argued, and resolved.

Here are a few examples — drawn from real-world patterns and anonymized for confidentiality — that show how visibility analysis can shape case outcomes.

1. The Nighttime Pedestrian Collision

An attorney representing a driver in a pedestrian fatality faced strong allegations of inattention. Reconstruction suggested the driver had enough distance to stop, implying fault. However, a visibility study revealed that the pedestrian’s dark clothing and the absence of overhead lighting made detection unlikely compared to research until the vehicle was within 130 feet of the pedestrian. This was less than half the distance needed to react and brake.

When the visibility findings were presented, the narrative shifted: the crash was not a result of carelessness, but of environmental conditions beyond the driver’s control. The case ultimately resolved without trial, supported by science rather than assumption.

2. The Implement

A commercial farming operation routinely used a public roadway to move heavy farming implements from one field to another. While a slow moving tractor pulling industrial farming machinery on the roadway was seldom a problem for the fast-moving vehicular traffic to detect and avoid during the day, a lack of lighting and proper signage at night proved deadly to a passenger in an SUV approaching from behind.

A visibility analysis was conducted, demonstrating the visual cues the driver of the SUV was presented with prior to the crash- in this case, a single slow-moving vehicle triangle in the center of the 12 ft. wide implement. Also present, but inoperable at the time were auxiliary lights at the extents of the implement’s rear. When activated, the auxiliary lighting provided approaching drivers with a dramatically different understanding of what lay ahead.

When the differences between the conditions- a single, center-mounted, passive reflector versus activated lighting- was presented at mediation, the carrier settled immediately.

3. Horse Sense

An open gate or a break in a fence can be a serious issue when large animals are involved. A beautiful paint horse, bay and white, wandered onto a rural roadway in the early morning hours, before being struck by a small passenger car. Both the driver of the car and the horse were killed.

The reconstruction of the crash determined that the driver had sufficient time and distance to detect the horse and stop without incident. A visibility analysis was conducted, and it was confirmed that the driver of the car would have had sufficient time and distance to detect the horse, except for one important consideration- the randomized nature of the horse’s markings created an ambiguous scenario for the driver. In fact, when photographs of the horse were reviewed and the conditions of the roadway were considered, the result was the very definition of camouflage.

Counsel used this new information and reached a settlement shortly thereafter.

4. The Broader Impact

These examples highlight a recurring truth: visibility changes outcomes. Whether it’s adjusting fault, supporting a settlement, or clarifying testimony, accurate visibility analysis brings objective science into emotionally charged cases. Attorneys gain stronger arguments, reconstructionists gain corroboration, and jurors gain understanding.

Conclusion: Seeing the Whole Picture

Visibility specialists don’t replace reconstructionists — they complement them. Together, each discipline presents the full context of a crash: what happened, when it happened, and what was reasonably visible at each moment.

For attorneys, involving both experts early means fewer assumptions, fewer surprises, and a clearer path to the truth. When science shows not just how an event occurred, but how it was seen, justice becomes far more visible.