Did anyone else catch the news story last night about the young guy who was killed in a race when the stock rear shock linkage on his bike (I believe it was a 2002 model CBR600RR) broke? The guy lost control of course, came off, and another motorcycle hit him and killed him. Happened about a year ago. What was interesting was that the story was about determining the scale of the inquest into the accident. Honda was apparantly gunning that other evidence of linkage failure on the same model of bike be barred from any formal inquest (unsure of the reason why), and that Honda couldn't be to blame because the lad was killed by another motorcycle, and not the linkage breaking. After watching the report, I was thinking, "What the f**k"? I know that it's news reporting and it's not always accurate, but surely arguing that the boy was killed by a bike, and not the linkage breaking, is a bit like the manufacturer of window cleaner safety harnesses arguing that when the harness broke and the window cleaner fell to his death, that it was the sudden stop at the end that was to blame and not any fault in the safety harness manufacture. I mean, surely one would have to logically think that when a critical component that fails results in loss of control and therefore a chance of death, whether that chance of death be by tree, vehicle, or other, that it was the original point of failure that was to blame, and not the tree/vehicle/other that then caused the resultant death. This is one case that I want to hear the outcome of. It surely sounds as though Honda is trying to shirk responsibility for the failure of components critical to the control of the motorcycle, and blame any resultant injury on what you end up hitting, rather than the failure itself.