said by ctggzg:there should be some way a third DRIVER would be held accountable for causing an accident.
If A was able to stop before hitting C but B wasn't able to stop before crashing into A, there is no doubt that B failed to maintain a safe distance and A's insurer won't give much of a damn about C since they have a clear-cut textbook case against B: if A could brake in time, B should have been able to do so as well since the distance between A and B should have given B enough time to start braking before reaching the point where A started braking.
I can imagine one possibility where B might not be to blame: B's car was in perfect condition with proper braking distance and force confirmed using the crash computer's logs; it just turns out that A had far superior braking power than an average car. If A concedes that B could not swerve around him due to cars in other lanes then A's insurer might drop the case against B's and no blame gets assigned.
If someone caught the whole thing on tape as proof that C did trigger the accident, there is a slight chance that A and B's insurers might try to do something but unless C incriminates himself, that would probably be the end of it.