The point is that others were reading news stories that proported to be factual when they were not.
One should not blame the reader who has reason to believe he is reading accurate information. The only story I saw was the one quoted in my message above in which the word collision appeared.
In reference to the requirement or lack thereof that the first witness or person to the scene stop and render aid, check this link, very bottom of the main body of text.
http://www.wral.com/news/2611927/detail.html
The person who made this particular 911 call really should feel bad. "ditch" was a lousy choice of words and a few minutes at the scene might have made a difference. Some people die quick in the water and some can be revived after several minutes. It would depend on how much air was trapped in the car and how intact the structure of the car was.
Like the trooper said, it would have helped if he had stayed and showed them exactly where he was talking about.
My guess is "leaving the scene" probably doesn't apply here. I drove by a car that ran off the side of the Saw Mill Parkway near NYC at probably 65 mph. By the time, my brain registered what I saw and I could slow down and pull to the side of the road, I was easily at least a mile sounds like the driver came upon the situation post-crash and probably drove by at 60 mph. (Pulling speed out of a hat.)
Driving at normal highway speed could make it really hard to see whether it was a ditch or creek or gully or what-have-you as well.