Schumacher’s helmet camera reveals ski crash details

2014 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

Video filmed by a camera mounted on Michael Schumacher’s helmet at the time of his skiing crash has confirmed further details of his accident.

Schumacher remains in critical condition with serious head injuries in a hospital in Grenoble after the crash which happened nine days ago.

Police investigating the accident in France said their they were make good progress on the case, of which they typically deal with around 50 per year. They confirmed Schumacher was skiing off-piste at the time of the accident and said the area was correctly signposted in accordance with local rules.

The video, which has not been released to the public, gives a very clear view of what happened according to those who have seen it. It shows Schumacher lost his balance after touching a rock with his skis around eight metres inside the off-piste area, then fell over and struck his head on another rock.

According to the police, the video indicated Schumacher is “a very good skier”. Although it was hard to assess his speed at the time of the crash, they noted he did not reduce his speed when he went off-piste. “But speed is not a particularly important aspect for us,” noted the prosecutor.

An examination of the Schumacher’s equipment showed he was using rented skis which were in “almost new” condition. They bore marks consistent with his contact with the rocks.

The police added they had not received any information about a supposed second video showing the accident, which some media claimed had been filmed by a third party. They also did not corroborate a story which claimed Schumacher was trying to help another skier who had fallen at the time of his accident.

Schumacher’s condition remains a focus of high media interest. The police addressed a room filled to capacity with journalists. Yesterday Schumacher’s family asked the media not to disturb them and the medical team in Grenoble as his condition remains serious.

2014 F1 season

Browse all 2014 F1 season articles

Image © Ferrari/Ercole Colombo

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

28 comments on “Schumacher’s helmet camera reveals ski crash details”

  1. I can’t stand journalists… You can’t help to think they don’t care about Schumacher; they just want the scoop.

    1. I think they’re gathered around waiting for something to happen, and have not really realised that Schumacher is facing a lengthy recovery period.

    2. @wpinrui
      I agree but it´s the same thing with lawyers… some hate lawyers but in the end, they are just doing their job even if it is to defend somebody that you know killed someone but can´t prove it! Same deal.
      We might not like because it´s our hero they are reporting about but, it´s their job.

      1. @karter22 The example you give of defending someone you know is guilty is largely limited to films and media etc. In the UK, a lawyer has a duty to not mislead the court. When you combine this duty with the duty to the client to act in their best interests there is often a conflict which leads to a lawyer ceasing to act for a client or simply remaining silent on many points of dispuet – ultimately leading to a correct guilty verdict. Somewhat irrelevant to the article I know, but as a legal person I felt obliged to point this out.

    3. Sounds harsh, but journalists aren’t there to hold a vigil for Schumacher. They’re there to do the job of finding and communicating information about Schumacher’s condition to the public.

      1. My experience is that they forget their responsibility to report the facts and worry more about sensationalism. Their opinions overshadow the reality

    4. I completely disagree with that @wpinrui. Without journalists we wouldn’t even have this blog, nor would we have most of the information on important subjects and nor on our famous sport, possibly apart from governments, companies, sports teams etc feeding us their exclusive view of the world.

      Yes, I agree that camping en masse in the Grenoble hospital is not a great picture of humanity. But remember that tabloid like reporting is also the most read and most asked for form of media currently in existence, meaning that its people looking for such news, pictures and gossip that make certain media go as far as they go to sell add space, hits, etc.
      Serious media and their journalists show far more restraint and have rules they keep themselves to (see here the rules for F1Fanatic, for example) for what they do and don’t do and how they report. Its our choice to support media by following them, watching and buying their content and making sure they can do their job by “voting with our feet”.

    5. To be fair to you it’s pretty clear you mean the Piers Morgan’s of the world (or our governments, same thing) and his legions. I don’t think he means to say he hates the Fourth Estate and freedom of speech guys!

    6. Did you read the above article? It’s from a journalist. How can you come read the article and then say you don’t like that journalists are reporting on the incident?

      1. Is Keith Collantine a journalist? And I thought this was serious site made by an F1 fanatic. I’ll unsubscribe immediately;-)

  2. Police are making progress, today a rock accompanied them to the station and is believed to be assisting them with their investigation.

    1. Too soon man. Too soon.

  3. I didn’t really understand how one could hit a rock while skiing until I saw the picture of the accident site – it really is full of rocks there:

    1. Oh, and I am not sure how the pistes qualify as correctly signposted – I can’t see any markings delineating the piste from the off-piste.

      1. There are poles denoting the edge of the piste. They are on the picture and when you are skiing are actually very obvious. This is the standard way of marking the piste area.

        1. Are those moguls, on the ‘lane’ on the left side, snowed covered rocks?

      2. Well, even if you do not see the poles on the picture, you probably can see the rocks !
        So where is the problem ? If the rocks were hidden under a 2cm carpet of snow, I would understand the need of signalising the danger. But they are just soooooo visible, it is beyond me that someone could pretend that a warning is necessary…

        1. I think if you’re skilled you think you can easily slalom those rocks. But not the ones hidden under the snow.

          1. Yes, but the point is that the danger of this area is plain to see thanks to this number of huge very visible rocks. That should be sufficient as a warning.
            Well, AFAIAC, I would not go there to try and slalom…

  4. I don’t understand why the police are investigating a ski accident. Do they think there’s a possible crime attempt here? Also the media reported his son Mick was with him. Can’t he just tell the investigators how it all happened?

    1. As the police team mentioned, they investigate about 50 incidents much like this one per year. Its the same if you have a fall on the streets and have to be taken to hospital by helicopter, the police investigate to make clear what happened.
      Off course apart from clarity, its about eliminating potential hazards on the pistes, and there is the matter cost for of the rescue crew (Austria sends hefty bills for those 300-500k EUR I understand) as well as medical bills – insurances will want to know if anyone was especially to blame.

    2. I was thinking the same. Surely the only legal point is the relevance of if he was on piste or not, and if it was clearly marked, as there might be some onus on the people who manage the slopes otherwise. Aside from that, what are they looking at? Is the rock going to be charged with assault once they’ve collected enough evidence?

      1. Aside from that, what are they looking at? Is the rock going to be charged with assault once they’ve collected enough evidence?

        Not the rock, but the administrator of the “piste”, if it failed to adequate mark the dangerous areas. Any potential criminal charge, hangs on the piste administration if something happens to skiers.

        1. Yeah, that’s what I was saying in the previous sentence.

        2. Not the rock, but the administrator of the “piste”, if it failed to adequate mark the dangerous areas. Any potential criminal charge, hangs on the piste administration if something happens to skiers.

          But they already confirmed that the area was correctly signposted in accordance with local rules, so what’s left to investigate?

    3. They’re too scared to go after actual criminals obviously. Either that or there’s a surplus of detectives and they need to find something for them to do. It’s been what, about a week since the crash? All they needed to do was watch the video and inspect the area to make sure it was marked.

  5. PS #GetWellSoonMSC !!!

  6. See!? Helmet cameras should be mandatory in F1!

Comments are closed.