Isn't the question here as to whether the driver has any responsibility for the death of the child effectively the question as to whether the driver had any choice in being drunk, driving, the chosen route home or anything else in his life that set him on the path to that tragic moment? To only consider a random component not directly related to the driver and only at the point of the accident itself is to miss the fundamental point of the question of free will.
Were the drivers and the childs actions both predetermined from the point that the physical universe was set in motion? Are their inherently random components to every physical possibility? If either of these extreme positions are true can we hold peopleaccountable for either predermined actions or totally random fluctuations over which they have no control?
Even determinists would accept that there is at least the illusion of free will and it seems to me that detrminism is too dependant on the idea of clockwork cause and single effect universe which modern physics would seem to fundamentally preclude.
There has to be a random component. The real question I think is how we reconcile our intuitive notion of free will with a random component over which we seem to have no control.......
™ Version 4.2
