Debunked: Michael Hastings Crash Engine Found North of Crash going South?

I commute through this intersection 5 days a week and saw the aftermath with my own eyes. The motor was where you might expect it to be from such a dramatic accident. The car appeared to have hit the center divider curb on the south side of the intersection. The road narrows here and the center divider is wider on the south side by several feet compared to the north side divider. You actually have to steer to the right in the intersection to avoid the curb. The crown of the road on Melrose is not that dramatic but could bottom out a car traveling at high speed. Factor in the wider center divider and the accident seems reasonable. And another thing; this road ducks into Culver City, Santa Monica and South LA from the Hollywood night spots and restaurants because there is very little traffic at night. Cars parked on Highland south of Melrose are constantly hit. So often that people usually risk a parking ticket and park with two wheels on the curb.
So she got it wrong. What's the big hoo-ha?

The factual foundation remains that Hastings was persona non grata - certainly to one Gen McChrystal - a consummate thug and murderer, recently compromised by Hastings' work as an investigative journalist. The fact remains that Hastings had contacted Wikileaks' lawyer just a few hours before he died, saying that he was under FBI surveillance and that he was going to lay low for a while, until things calmed down. The fact remains that there is a crackdown by the regime on whistleblowers and investigative journalists (the Emperor doesn't like it too well when someone points out he's stark bollock naked). The fact remains, USAmerican establishment public figures openly called for the assassination of a journalist, Julian Assange - let's not forget (isn't that a crime? incitement to murder or some such - but no-one speaks out?). The fact remains that the road is straight. The fact remains that the engine of the car (a Mercedes) ended some 60 metres from the rest of the vehicle (did the mounts just turn to jelly?). I think it's fair to say that it's a fact that the details of the 'accident' are minimal.

So this story is based on a false premise - a basic, stupid mistake that could be dismissed in a sentence - but all the other facts remain, aren't they more important? And yes, she may well have been more inclined towards 'the conspiracy angle', but then again she might work for the FBI spreading information that will be suckled on by certain people, to prove a point, or something (They would never do such a thing!). Who could know? Going with the 'more inclined towards conspiracy' (bad use of language - but I'm quoting) type thing, then ofcourse there's always others about to counterbalance that wrongness by doing their equivalent in reverse, sort of. Then still others who are both skeptical and open-minded in equal measure....and then ofcourse the vast majority - who wouldn't have the faintest what's being said here. Or why it really matters at all.

Why do some people have to ascribe everything that happens to some nefarious plot or something sinister?
People get killed in car crashes every day. Look at what happened to an experienced racecar driver & Paul Walker.