However if she had been injured he might have to pay thousands more
That could well be true.
When I lived in BKK a friend was killed by a hit and run drunk driver.
The initial impact was probably survivable.
But the driver reversed back over him, then drove over him a third time, to make sure he was dead.
Because it worked out cheaper that way.
I think pleanty of the people who walked on by did so beciase they had something to lose by not doing so.
When a culprit, any culprit, somebody who can pay compensation, is a more important than the actual guilty party being found and brought to justice, bystanders tend to be motivated into ignoring basic human instinct to help in case they are then accused of having caused the orginal injuries, or exacerbated them by interfering when trying to help.
You can't judge the bystanders in that video by our standards, they do not live in tue same reality that we do. And to be honest even as an outsider, brought up with a different yardstick, live long enough with rampant poverty, deprivation and a stong sense of disposability of life and you find yourself hardening and learning to emotionally withdraw from the things you see.
It is a survival mechanism, it's too hard to feel at what most westerns would call "normal", while living knee deep in a context that would leave you emotionally flayed if you don't detatch from what you see.
I'm not saying under the circs I would have walked past the little girl. But I would have had huge misgivings while going over and my ex husband would have been trying to yank me in the opposite direction terrified of us being plonked with the blame as a convienient scapegoat.
For many of the people who walked past her self preservation probably factored helping her out of the equation.