Brandy Crash -- Dead Woman at Fault?

Posted Dec 26th 2007 1:49PM by TMZ Staff

TMZ has learned the hang-up in deciding whether to file vehicular manslaughter charges against Brandy is that Brandy may have been a victim, not a culprit.

A CHP source tells TMZ the woman who died in the car accident involving Brandy actually struck the vehicle in front of her before Brandy made any contact. The law enforcement source says Awatef Aboudihaj, the woman who died, struck the car in front of her -- which was going 65 mph, and then slammed on her brakes. We're told the sudden stop caused Brandy to hit the dead woman's car.

What's more, L.A. County Coroner spokesperson Captain Ed Winter tells TMZ that toxicology reports show Aboudihaj had "slight traces" of marijuana in her system at the time of the crash.

The L.A. City Attorney has until the end of the business day on Friday to decide whether to file criminal charges against Brandy -- that's when the one-year statute of limitations runs out. Sources tell TMZ there is significant division in the City Attorney's office, and a decision still has not been made. The problem for the City Attorney: if they file manslaughter charges, they have to prove Brandy did something negligent -- and we're told that could be difficult if not impossible.

Stay tuned...

Filed under: Celebrity Justice, Music

Comments [175]

Digg it Del.icio.us My Yahoo Sphere RSS MySpace Permalink Email

Reader Comments

(Page 4 of 12)Previous 15 Comments | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

46. #25 kelly? youve seen brit brit drive or park???? shes a better driver than most women.....

Posted at 12:44PM on Dec 26th 2007 by RoughDaddy

47. If the dead woman hit someone from behind, it would be mpossible for those behind her to have judgement to put on brakes, not realizing a rear end accident had occurred. Brandy and any other drive hitting the vehicle at fault, are still victims because of the negligence of the driver who caused the rear end impact. It's called domino effect and you people need to know the law, as I do, and quit looking to help this dead woman and her family. All Celebs are not wrong all the time

Posted at 12:45PM on Dec 26th 2007 by Celia

48. too bad Jess celia you're correct go out with me. I love women who can backup their claim its hott

Posted at 12:47PM on Dec 26th 2007 by JustinMorgan

49. Ok roughdaddy. You picked the one female I wont defend. I bet your always picking your ear wax out of your ear, and digging at your nose. :)

Posted at 12:51PM on Dec 26th 2007 by Kelli

50. Celia, if you know the law like you claim you would realize that the basic tenent of the law is that all drivers MUST BE RESPONSIBLE AND IN CONTROL OF THEIR VEHICAL AT ALL TIMES! That point, all by itself, throws out every argument that anyone has put up her about the other woman hitting another car first. The dead woman was responsible for hitting the car in front of her. Brandy was responsible for hitting the dead woman's car. Period. End of story. Now, was there criminal negligence? Probably not. And there are rules as to what her responsibilities are in this case.

Does it really matter from a civil perspective if Brandy would be found criminally negligent? Yes, it would help the case of the family of the dead woman, but they could and probably will still win in civil court. Remember, OJ was found not guilty in the criminal court but lost in the civil court. If I were the dead woman's family, I would definately want her to continue on with her career. Would just give them more assest to go after.

Posted at 12:54PM on Dec 26th 2007 by Think about it

51. What about Gary Collins drunk killing a woman?! He is barely in trouble at all. Men by far are the worst drivers. Statistics are teenage BOYS have the most accidents. You are in La La land, roughdaddy.

Posted at 1:00PM on Dec 26th 2007 by Go away

52. WE KNEW SHE WOULD SOMEHOW GET OUT OF IT JUST LIKE THE REST OF THE DUMBASS CELEBRITY DRIVERS. WHAT A SHOCK THAT SHE WON'T DO JAIL TIME.

Posted at 1:01PM on Dec 26th 2007 by penny

53. The issue is not whether or not Brandy is at fault - yes, did hit the rear-end the woman's and she is guilty of that. However,the real issue is whether or not that part of the accident caused the woman's death or whether the woman's initial contact with the car SHE rear-ended caused her death. Not all rear end collisions result in death.

Posted at 1:02PM on Dec 26th 2007 by Trish

54. NO ONE, IN FRONT OF HER SLAMMED ON THE BRAKES!!!!. EVERYONE WAS SLOWING DOWN , DO TO THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC, SHE DID NOT SLOW DOWN!!!. HER (RANGE ROVER), SLAMMED INTO THE CAR IN FRONT OF HER DOING
(65 MPH)!!!!. THAT IS ALL HER FAULT!!!!.THE ( CHP), TOLD THE (D.A.), SHE WAS AT FAULT, AND TO CHARGE HER!!!. THIS TELLS ME, IT IS ALL ABOUT HER BEING "FAMOUS"!!!. AND THAT SUCKS!!!. THE REST OF US WOULD BE IN JAIL.

Posted at 1:02PM on Dec 26th 2007 by NO SURPRISE HERE!!!

55. i have class,,,i let someone do it for me!!!!!!!!

Posted at 1:04PM on Dec 26th 2007 by RoughDaddy

56. MY HUSBAND WAS DECLARED NOT AT FAULT when he hit a Lexus from behind.

Three people in the turning lane turned left and immediately crossed over railroad tracks, the first person slammed on his breaks to turn into a driveway, and because all 3 had just crossed a railroad crossing from a turning lane, and thus were very close to each other, the accident was deemed just that, an accident- no fault. Our insurance didn't go up, and my husband didn't get a ticket.

SO THAT BLOWS YOUR "ALWAYS AT FAULT" CLAIM OUT OF THE WATER, SMART ASSES!

Posted at 1:08PM on Dec 26th 2007 by Petite

57. OK people, READ the article. They are not suggesting Brandy is not at fault in the accident. They are saying they can't charge her with the criminal complaint of vehicular manslaughter. People are killed everyday in car ACCIDENTS, where the person at fault is not charged with manslaughter. The reason is, they must be doing something negligent. If Brandy were driving down the freeway and the car in front of her crashed into another car and she couldn't stop in time to avoid an accident, then how is she different than anyone else? If, on the other hand, she was drunk or speeding excessively, then a case for manslaughter could be made against her. It's a tragedy no matter how you look at it.

Posted at 1:10PM on Dec 26th 2007 by Andy

58. In the case of a a multi car chain reaction type of accident the person who caused the initial accident that started the chain is at fault. Put yourself in that position, if someone in front of you causes an accident and you get swept up in it, you are not at fault even if you hit them from behind. I dont think that this has any thing to o w/celebrity if this other woman caused the accident and had drugs in her system I feel bad people have been calling Brandy a murderer for months

Posted at 1:11PM on Dec 26th 2007 by LaLocke

59. some douche with a trailer crushed my mustang while he was backing up,,,now whos fault was that!!!!!!! certainly not mine!!!

Posted at 1:12PM on Dec 26th 2007 by RoughDaddy

60. Petunia, I guess if you were to rearend some stoner after they had hit another car, you would rush to the bank to pay for both cars. Give it a rest. If this was any other person on the street, would you be so gung-ho about them having charges filed against them or whatever? I doubt it. I think you're an idiot!

Posted at 1:12PM on Dec 26th 2007 by Ramma Jamma Alabama

Previous 15 Comments | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments