From: ron_winn@lineone.net   
      
   Grossly negligent driving and the paps were recklessly "racing" the Mercedes   
   and drove so close to it that Mr Paul had no freedom to move.   
      
   Took four days of deliberation in a case that took 93 days.   
      
   How many of those days dealt with the Road Traffic Accident report?   
      
   So it is a fact that the paps were harassing the car - thought they were no   
   where near it at the material time. But then if they were so close to it,   
   which seems to indicate they were trying to influence the drive in some way   
   how come the car has the freedom to crash as it is alleged to have done   
   without taking a few paps, on motorcycles along with it?   
      
   And what was the big deal anyway? What was the big shot they were all   
   after - the couple sitting in a 280 - doing what, looking out the window?   
   The 280 had clear windows - just the job if you want the paps to follow it.   
      
   Was the car pulled away from the pillar and turned around to face the way it   
   came before it was photographed. Straps are seen laying underneath it ready   
   to be lifted up onto a flatbed truck so the well known "damage" picture may   
   have been taken a while after the time of the accident. Was there a spin at   
   all? Computer simulations depict a bounce and a spin off but well, that   
   can't be considered conclusive as to what happened. So was it pulled away   
   from the pillar before the photographs were taken? If so why?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)