A US court has heard that Gwyenth Paltrow’s account of the 2016 ski crash in Utah, in which she claims to have been collided with by another skier, is consistent with the laws of physics, according to a biochemical engineer who testified in court. Dr Irving Scher, the engineer, disputed the evidence presented by previous witnesses, claiming that their analysis had been miscalculated and that he was unable to come up with alternative scenarios that explained the incident. Scher noted that calculations by another expert, Dr Richard Boehne, had been thrown off by an incorrect velocity and that corrected measurements would have resulted in the injuries suffered by the other skier, Terry Sanderson, being much worse.
In his testimony, Scher wrote out several calculations and diagrams on a large board to illustrate his points. He noted that Ms Paltrow’s version of events was consistent with the laws of physics in terms of how people turn and rotate while skiing. He also pointed out that it would have taken very little force for Ms Paltrow’s skis to come off in the collision, but they stayed on, consistent with her account of what happened.
Gwyenth Paltrow (Via Gwyenth Paltrow/Twitter)
Scher also questioned the credibility of another skier who claimed to have witnessed the incident, Craig Ramon, stating that he was unable to make his version of events work. The engineer also noted that if Ms Paltrow’s skis had been knocked off in the collision, it would have taken significant force, but they remained intact, further supporting her account.
The trial, which continues in Park City, Utah, is ongoing, with both Ms Paltrow and Mr Sanderson having already testified. Both have presented conflicting accounts of the incident, with Ms Paltrow claiming that she was collided with by Mr Sanderson, while he accuses her of crashing into him, resulting in his severe head injuries and broken ribs.
