NASCAR's Stewart hits, kills driver on NY track

Started by actionblock, August 10, 2014, 06:52:58 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Dr. Meh

Quote from: Solar on August 13, 2014, 09:45:49 AM
No, you're confusing intent with premeditated, the law distinguishes the difference, as does the dictionary.
Note the word "Planned"

Take this same situation and place it on a busy freeway, some idiot gets road rage, jumps out of his car to confront someone, steps out in traffic and gets his ass plowed.
Who's at fault?

What gives you evidence that the camera was picking up the sound of his car from nearly a 1/4 mile away, is it not possible another car was closer and that's what you're hearing?
These cameras have zoom, it's possible the only camera on the scene was the furthest away.

You're ready to hang someone on circumstantial evidence. "Evidence providing only a basis for inference about the fact in dispute".
You see, you're inferring, without proof, and this is why the law never allows circumstantial evidence into court.
It's also why no charges were filed, there simply isn't enough evidence, though, the evidence we do have, is an idiot putting the lives of other in danger.

Now you're making assumptions about what "planned" means in this context. Again, you're confusing it with pre-meditated. So again, if your brother intentionally hit her even for just a split second, that was his plan and his intent. It DOESN'T mean that he had to think about it while eating his Wheaties that morning or anything. It is simply was it an accident or did he intentionally try to hit that person.

As for me "ready to hang him", it seems saying it three times is not enough to get it to sink in. I'll try a fourth and last time: I don't know if it was intentional or not. But because I don't know, I'm not going to assume asyou are that it was not and blame the victim 100% for it. Again, yes, the guy was an idiot. And again, yes, if it were an accident, then life goes on. But again, yes, if it were Stewart's INTENT, that is to say that heTRIED to run him over, he should be charged. But because I'm not sure, I'm not saying he should be charged and I'm certainly not going to act like a callous a-hole and purely blame the victim 100% without knowing Stewart's intent. Again, I'm not sure how much clearer I can be on this and I'm not sure exactly how anyone can argue with what I'm saying.

Solar

Quote from: Dr. Meh on August 13, 2014, 10:34:09 AM
Now you're making assumptions about what "planned" means in this context. Again, you're confusing it with pre-meditated. So again, if your brother intentionally hit her even for just a split second, that was his plan and his intent. It DOESN'T mean that he had to think about it while eating his Wheaties that morning or anything. It is simply was it an accident or did he intentionally try to hit that person.

As for me "ready to hang him", it seems saying it three times is not enough to get it to sink in. I'll try a fourth and last time: I don't know if it was intentional or not. But because I don't know, I'm not going to assume asyou are that it was not and blame the victim 100% for it. Again, yes, the guy was an idiot. And again, yes, if it were an accident, then life goes on. But again, yes, if it were Stewart's INTENT, that is to say that heTRIED to run him over, he should be charged. But because I'm not sure, I'm not saying he should be charged and I'm certainly not going to act like a callous a-hole and purely blame the victim 100% without knowing Stewart's intent. Again, I'm not sure how much clearer I can be on this and I'm not sure exactly how anyone can argue with what I'm saying.
Again, they have to prove intent, and since they can't, the weight is firmly placed on the victim, he is solely responsible for the situation.
I guarantee you, there will be no charges.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

supsalemgr

As a NASCAR fan I have followed this story since it happened. It is truly a tragedy. What we have here is a proven hot head, Tony Stewart, and a 20 year old that felt bullet proof. That gives us a formula of two individuals with questionable maturity coupled with dangerous toys equals bad consequences. Given the assumption of risk involved with auto racing I think it falls into the category of a terrible accident. Tony Stewart should stop playing with "wannabes" in these sprint car races.
"If you can't run with the big dawgs, stay on the porch!"

Dr. Meh

Quote from: Solar on August 13, 2014, 12:02:13 PM
Again, they have to prove intent, and since they can't, the weight is firmly placed on the victim, he is solely responsible for the situation.
I guarantee you, there will be no charges.

In all honesty, I hope you're right. I hope it wasn't intentional and I hope Stewart will be able to race again. I also hope this incident makes all tracks put up better lighting and that the drivers have learned a lesson about not losing their cool and making bad decisions.

walkstall

Quote from: Dr. Meh on August 13, 2014, 04:14:42 PM
In all honesty, I hope you're right. I hope it wasn't intentional and I hope Stewart will be able to race again. I also hope this incident makes all tracks put up better lighting and that the drivers have learned a lesson about not losing their cool and making bad decisions.

One rule would that care of that, stay in your damn car until they get you out!  Break that rule and your out for the year.
A politician thinks of the next election. A statesman, of the next generation.- James Freeman Clarke

Always remember "Feelings Aren't Facts."

TboneAgain

Quote from: walkstall on August 13, 2014, 04:23:58 PM
One rule would that care of that, stay in your damn car until they get you out!  Break that rule and your out for the year.

You beat me to it! I'd throw in a hefty fine too. Anyone stupid enough to run out into the traffic on ANY race course under ANY flag has no business racing anything anywhere.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. -- Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; IT IS FORCE. -- George Washington