yes there is. Stewart could have gotten out of the way. if you've never driven a race car you wouldn't know...he definitely saw him.
he was steering really close to the guy and tried to throw the rear away from him at the last second. but he got a bite and ran him over instead.
i don't think this is over. i bet there is more video and once they get the track video and analyze it, this is going to take a turn.
sgs wrote:
yes there is. Stewart could have gotten out of the way. if you've never driven a race car you wouldn't know...he definitely saw him.
he was steering really close to the guy and tried to throw the rear away from him at the last second. but he got a bite and ran him over instead.
i don't think this is over. i bet there is more video and once they get the track video and analyze it, this is going to take a turn.
I've driven plenty of cars on plenty of terrains, Judge Dredd. No videos have provided evidence to make the case that Stewart without a doubt intentionally slid his back end into Ward. You are seeing what you want to see.
I really don't see that he was trying to throw the rear of the car to the left. He's already going into a curve that causes the rear to drift right, trying to go from that to throwing the rear left on a curve is going to send him fishtailing up into the wall.
I really think he just accelerated to try to get by Ward before he kicked or punched the car.
The previous car must have brushed Ward as well. Tthe camera guy follows that car briefly he's so sure that that car snagged him.
Moral of the story here is to keep your temper in check unless you're prepared to pay the consequences. This is an unfortunate case where a guy's anger management problems (Ward) got himself killed. Nothing more. Whether or not there was any intent on Stewart's part to scare him, you'd never be able to prove it, no matter how much you try.
You never drove a dirt race car on 1/3 mile race track. I know this because you don't even understand what I am trying to assert.
Tony Stewart was trying to scare the guy by driving close and then kicking the back of the car (which is wider than the front) out to the LEFT at the last second. But as we all can see, the kid, by his own stupid actions, also made it closer than it needed to be.
But Stewart was trying to send a message. He had time to move down. Of course, smoke doesn't give an inch to anyone. It is who he is and what he does. But he screwed up and ran the guy over.
He won't go to jail, but the civil case will rest on the question "did you do all you could do to avoid hitting him?" and the answer will be no.
I have driven on a dirt track. It is longer than 1/3 mile but that is irrelevant. I understand exactly what you are saying. You don't seem to understand what I am saying - that video is not incontrovertible proof that Tony Stewart intended to scare Ward by sliding the back of his car out. That is what you are claiming and it is categorically false.
You obviously hate Stewart and that clouds your opinion. It's obvious by this statement:
"Of course, smoke doesn't give an inch to anyone. It is who he is and what he does."
He'll probably settle the civil suit out of court. That also is not incontrovertible proof that he intended to scare Ward.
sgs wrote:
You never drove a dirt race car on 1/3 mile race track. I know this because you don't even understand what I am trying to assert.
Tony Stewart was trying to scare the guy by driving close and then kicking the back of the car (which is wider than the front) out to the LEFT at the last second. But as we all can see, the kid, by his own stupid actions, also made it closer than it needed to be.
But Stewart was trying to send a message. He had time to move down. Of course, smoke doesn't give an inch to anyone. It is who he is and what he does. But he screwed up and ran the guy over.
He won't go to jail, but the civil case will rest on the question "did you do all you could do to avoid hitting him?" and the answer will be no.
I see no sign that he was trying to kick it left at the last second. The funny thing is that many other "experts" are saying he deliberately threw the rear to the right to be as close as possible to Ward.
I doubt both groups are right.
You can also see that Stewarts left rear tire appears flat. Surely that could be felt and would have influenced how much control he had and whether he felt the car would be nimble enough for fancy moves.
On softer surfaces you want a slightly flat tire for improved grip.
sgs wrote:
You never drove a dirt race car on 1/3 mile race track. I know this because you don't even understand what I am trying to assert.
Tony Stewart was trying to scare the guy by driving close and then kicking the back of the car (which is wider than the front) out to the LEFT at the last second. But as we all can see, the kid, by his own stupid actions, also made it closer than it needed to be.
But Stewart was trying to send a message. He had time to move down. Of course, smoke doesn't give an inch to anyone. It is who he is and what he does. But he screwed up and ran the guy over.
He won't go to jail, but the civil case will rest on the question "did you do all you could do to avoid hitting him?" and the answer will be no.
So cut to the chase - how do you apportion blame.
What percentage to each party? Back up your argument with a number.
The person with the more lethal weapon receives the greatest part of the blame. Sort of like the professional heavyweight fighter taking a full force punch at a skinny-arse runner, and accidentally breaking the runner's neck. Oops, your head got in the way of my punch.
Gripper wrote:
The person with the more lethal weapon receives the greatest part of the blame. Sort of like the professional heavyweight fighter taking a full force punch at a skinny-arse runner, and accidentally breaking the runner's neck. Oops, your head got in the way of my punch.
Could you cite the NY case law for this?
Gripper wrote:
The person with the more lethal weapon receives the greatest part of the blame. Sort of like the professional heavyweight fighter taking a full force punch at a skinny-arse runner, and accidentally breaking the runner's neck. Oops, your head got in the way of my punch.
Okay. But which came first - the chicken or the egg?
Remember, the kid ACTED; Tony Stewart REACTED.
Former motorsport-ian wrote:
Tony Stewart is known for bullying around himself so it's possible also he did do the throttle blip at him as a "Fcuk off you spoiled little rich kid", and instead of scaring him, clipped him.
What you've described warrants, at the very least, an investigation and I'd argue for charges as well.
If you're going to say that Stewart tried to scare Ward, then you're saying he intentionally passed him closely. In doing so he assumes at least some responsibility if it goes to shit.
Of course Ward was being monumentally stupid. He endangered himself, but it looks to me like Stewart intentionally endangered him as well (if he really was trying to buzz him).
malmo wrote:
Barry Badrinath wrote:Remember, the video is being filmed from across the track and up the stands; at least a half-second delay on the sound.
The sound isn't even "delayed".
The only sounds you hear in that video is the roar of engines as cars passed close by the videographer. You aren't hearing the engine sounds of the cars on the other side of the track.
There was a caution flag after Ward's crash. Everyone on the track was off the throttle as they're supposed to be. The "roar" you hear is engines at or just above idle, then one car guns it. Easy to pick out from across the track if you're there which, admittedly, none of us were.
Gripper wrote:
On softer surfaces you want a slightly flat tire for improved grip.
It looks completely flat and wobbly in outline in the video.
Barry Badrinath wrote:
There was a caution flag after Ward's crash. Everyone on the track was off the throttle as they're supposed to be. The "roar" you hear is engines at or just above idle, then one car guns it. Easy to pick out from across the track if you're there which, admittedly, none of us were.
You aren't hearing any sounds from the other side of the track. All of the recorded audio is picking upo the noise from the near side.
malmo wrote:
Barry Badrinath wrote:There was a caution flag after Ward's crash. Everyone on the track was off the throttle as they're supposed to be. The "roar" you hear is engines at or just above idle, then one car guns it. Easy to pick out from across the track if you're there which, admittedly, none of us were.
You aren't hearing any sounds from the other side of the track. All of the recorded audio is picking upo the noise from the near side.
Yes you are. No it isn't.
If everyone is driving under caution and someone across the track guns his engine, you'll hear it plain as day, in person, on a camera phone, or otherwise. The audio recording with the video can't represent the relative volumes accurately between the racing laps and the caution laps. From the stands, an idling sprint car is just loud. At full-open it's deafening.
It isn't clear from the audio alone that it was Stewart who blipped his throttle, but his car was definitely going sideways before impact with Ward.
Barry Badrinath wrote:
Yes you are. No it isn't.
If everyone is driving under caution and someone across the track guns his engine, you'll hear it plain as day, in person, on a camera phone, or otherwise. The audio recording with the video can't represent the relative volumes accurately between the racing laps and the caution laps. From the stands, an idling sprint car is just loud. At full-open it's deafening.
.
Only a complete fool would believe that you can hear the engines on the other side of the track over the din of the engines right in front of the videographer. The camers has no ability to follow the sound of the engines as he follows the car around the track.
1.) The cars closest to the videographer drone out everything far away.
2.) You don't even hear the faintest sound of the crash. Why? I stated it before. I can guarantee you that if there were NO cars on the near side of the track you would have heard a resounding BOOM as the car crashed on the other side. You hear NOTHING.
3.) the voices of the people around the videographer are heard over the din of the engines as they pass by closest to the videogrpaher.
None of what you are hearing on the video is of the cars on the other side of the track. Everything is on the closest side, right in front of the viewers.
Everything else is your fetid imagination.
There are lessons to learned from this incident but I have a feeling that to some, it is lost. There is a group that thinks the higher responsibility for Ward's life lies with Stewart and not Ward himself. In my opinion, whether Stewart could have stopped/avoided Ward or not is secondary to an angry man walking around a track with speeding cars. Also, arguing 'should/could have' 'saw him/didn't see him' 'intentional'deliberate' belongs to the theoretical world and that is where a good lawyer comes in.