Circumstantial evidence convicts headphones of manslaughter
|
Mark Brezinski
Published on May 28, 2008
Comment on this
|
|
 This time the story is fairly straight forward. A guy, who's friends describe him as a frequent texter and headphone-listener, crosses a freeway at night, and gets hit by a car. The headline: "Pedestrian killed on freeway may have been wearing headphones, texting."
Now, since it sucks that the guy actually died, we're only going to point out one thing: crossing a freeway isn't a good idea even in the best conditions. According to Google Maps, the stretch where he got hit looks like a typical highway, where cars drive 85, and pedestrians aren't allowed. Regardless, the reason we're covering this isn't because of the way he died (we doubt the last one we covered can be topped), but rather the way in which headphones were linked to the accident.
According to the news report, "friends of Thomas Jackson said he may have been listening to headphones or texting on his cell phone when he walked into traffic...." First of all, we like how this exposé manages to include both of the latest serial killer gadgets, just in case you forgot that texting is the new DUI. Secondly, we're not sure how this information is even relevant. Sure, he liked listening to headphones and sending text messages, but isn't it a bit condescending to just assume he was doing both while darting across a freeway? If a chef gets hit by a train, should we assume he got hit because he was busy braising pork?
Stay tuned, as we see just how tangential someone's headphone use can be while still getting blamed. Next time: "Teen Puts On Headphones, Chokes On Pizza," or "Headphone Heimlich Horror." |
