From legal advice I once got a good rule on death is "could you/they have done something to prevent it?" and if the answer is yes then "why didn't you"
Two good answers are
- because it would have been disproportionate
- because we couldn't reasonably have seen that happening
This IMHO is going to fall into the latter. It was on the exit of a bend where such a high speed collision was unlikely. At other parts of the track they had 4 layers of tyres (which is why that Toyota driver not only got away with his high speed shunt but they recovered and repaired the car.
The FIA would almost certainly have inspected and licensed the track
Have to learn not blame
It would be interesting to hear the grieving family's view...
Accidents always have a cause they don't just happen therefore it is very rare that there can be no blame . When fault is found blame apportioned then lessons can be learnt ... That doesn't mean that punishment should or will be automatically issued...
This is one of the most famous race tracks in the world and as such you would think one of the safest and the barriers should have been positioned and erected correctly as JOM says therefore they did not take all reasonable precautions and therefore 'could you have done something to prevent it' the answer is 'yes' position and erect the barrier correctly...
But I am no expert but it seems like common sense to me....
