Lanzi argued that the prosecution failed to take into account the role of Young and Fisher, the two Williams technicians who, according to O'Rourke, carried out the calculations for the modifications to the steering column. Newey had nothing to do with the steering column and only learnt about it after the accident. He is being accused on the basis of a presumed behaviour within a non specified role. The evidence of Newey's innocence lies with Young and Fisher, whom the prosecution, and not the defense, should have called to testify. Even admitting that the steering column broke, there is no evidence that there is a relationship between this fact and the impact with the wall. Newey must be aquitted for not having committed the fact.
Stortoni said that the prosecution's argument is that Newey is guilty for not checking the modifications, as he never worked on the steering column, but there is no evidence that he ordered that work to be done. In fact when Williams ordered an internal inquiry on the accident, Newey was not called. It is therefore impossible to assume that Newey failed to do his duty, because obviously that is not what Williams perceived his duty to be. The work on Senna's car had been divided and assigned to several departments and, while there is such a role as a coordinator, there also is the principle of assigning a job to a specialised professional. This principle excludes the subsequent checking by a team leader. There also is a strong element of risk connected with motor racing.
Tuesday Newey's lawyers (Dominioni and Gandossi) will conclude the sessions for the defense.
Next Article