It sort of is common sense that you don't touch or move someone who's been in an accident.
Unless there's fear of an immediate vehicle fire.
The information given in the story is not enough to make a decision about, and that will thankfully be left to the court system. That's what it's there for, and considering the nature of the incident, I think it's appropriate to use that system.
What if it blows up before they get there? Get this: people help people, especially in moments of distress. People who don't understand that are sociopaths.
What ifs in life will kill you more quickly than what ares.
The fact of that matter is that, legally, you are required to be careful as a good Samaritan. The woman was conscious and yet was not asked if she wanted to be moved, that is not acceptable behavior. If she could respond to verbal questions, it should have 100% been her call as to whether she should be moved. That was gross negligence on the part of the GS, and on that count alone I would lean towards the GS being liable.
The fact that spinal damage was to be assumed trumps the (apparently minimal) risk of fire in such a situation. Again, I don't know the specifics and the risk of fire may have been more severe, but I also doubt the ability of some random person to assess that risk.
If your appendix bursts, you're pretty much dead anyway; the few minutes you're waiting in traffic aren't going to change get you there that fast.
I'm near-positive that's false.
If I was in a major accident and was in a position where spinal injury was expected and could talk and the only way to get me out of the car was a very rough method, I would not want to be moved. I would also probably sue someone if they moved me and I became chair-bound.
Sorry if this does not mesh with your "good intentions" vibe, but trying to "act nice" isn't an appropriate substitute for proper judgment in an emergency.
