Quite possibly, but an electrical burn depends upon current density. Old-fashioned single pole diathermy (surgeons for the use of) uses a pair of forceps or other pointy instrument at the cutting/sealing end and a large pad at the other.
Similarly, whilst defibrillators may leave a red mark, they do not burn the skin.
If you look at the size of the burn in the photo, and the adjacent scorch marks on the fingers/palm, it looks to me like this is the result of a flash effectively happenning 'inside' a closed hand placed over the an arcing contact. The article says it was done on a power block, so potentially flat on the floor with the hand above.
I agree. This does not look like a burn caused by electrical current. It looks more like a flash burn in an enclosed space - a closed hand, It is likely that some force was needed to insert the connector into the live receptacle. We also do not know where the flash came from. It could just as easily come from where the cable joins the plug, either due to the point of failure, or being channelled through the hollow plug.
It is conceivable the child did receive an electric shock that threw her, but I am not convinced that is the cause of the burn.
It is conceivable the child did receive an electric shock that threw her, but I am not convinced that is the cause of the burn.
Nor does it require the experience of a neurosurgeon to know that the normal reaction to pain is to withdraw from the cause.
I got my first belt at the age of about 8. It threw me out of my bed. Or rather, I thought to myself (in an instant) what the **** was that and jumped out away from danger. ?
