E. The majority held that defendant owed no duty to protect because she was an \"unforeseeahle plain ' \" {i.e out of the "zone of risk\"). the dissent argued that there was a "duty owed to plain- tiff", but argued that the jury should he allowed to determine if defendant's conduct was "Proxi cuate cause\" of plaintiff's injury. Justice Andrews said that \"because of convenience, of public policy, of a rough sense of justice, the law arbitrarily declines to trace a series of events beyond a certain point\" Explain the mean ing of Justice Andrews stabnent. 3'. Draw a circle in your mind: and label that as \"none of risk\": and then place the plaintiff outside of the circle, and the injury occurring there. Explain why no liability in this case for plaintiffs in jury