It was a fatal accident, thought to be caused by drunk-driving, with a motorcyclist crashing and killing himself in the middle of the night. His mother, however, insists that her son is teetotal. After the story is revealed in the media, the investigation is reopened and forensics must rebuild the site within a year to find the truth. Photographs of the site show tire-tracks from the vehicle involved are not as expected, and the brake marks at the crash point are also extremely abnormal. Although the evidence speaks for itself, it is incontrovertible that the autopsy showed alcohol levels off the chart. Why then does the mother insist her son didn’t drink? What unspeakable secrets are there in this? The driver of the car that the deceased crashed into is a convicted drunk driver and has a criminal record, but has no deep-seated grudge that would cause him to kill the deceased. Is this a simple case of drink-driving, or is there some deep-seated motive for murder?