Charles is certainly correct that a traumatic event such as a crash would create very specific intense memories of the incident (assuming no medical trauma or severe emotional/mental trauma). I’ve been in several cars that were totaled and can easily recall specifics of the event, including the sight of the other car coming towards me.

But human memory is a very funny thing. I can believe that Brian embellished a story for dramatic effect or to make a point during a speech and then repeated it enough times over the years that it became “true” to him. His motive might not have been malicious or selfish and it may not reflect an ethical lapse of magnitude.

But as Charles notes such a terrifying event would leave intense memories. If Brian can’t recall specifics of the event and there was no trauma to prevent him remembering, then he should acknowledge the story isn’t true.

And I believe he has done so. So the only question is should the story be considered a deliberate lie or not. Yes, you can argue that it wasn’t true and was therefore a lie, but I think the situation is a little more gray than that. There is a “fog of war” where terrifying events happen so frequently that memory becomes unreliable, and memories can get jumbled.

While I’m generally ambivalent about Brian Williams, I’m not ready to assign sinister motives to his telling of the story.