The grand jury was composed of idiots, that much is clear.

Yeah, a dick. A guy who would hurl his car at a human form on the track, just because he could. Why people have their noses so far up Stewart's butt is beyond me.

I do have a clue on that though. The US public treats NASCAR champs like royalty. Ward was a hot headed kid. Stewart is a hot-headed NACSAR champ. Big difference.

And hence he deserved what happened and I have no sympathy. Good guy or not.

If by "mature" you mean "I do what I want but you must avoid me at all costs, you are right.

Well, I guess you don't like the tox report either. Lets toss that out then. Lets keep all that we need to convict and anything exonerating should be tossed . Oh hell, lets just hang him because he isn't popular and damned be any evidence. Seriously? Your prejudice is even flowing out onto my keyboard.

So now you think you are an accident expert and you have video that shows more data than what the GJ has? If 2 accident investigators don't see it, I think they have more street cred than you or I will ever have, put together and doubled too.

Well, the GJ didn't find even enough of a case to take it to trial but you are certain he is guilty? Are you hiding evidence that they are not in possession of? I know I don't have more than a couple of videos without the enhancements nor do I have any accident investigator credentials.

Most important, I don't have any desire to convict someone WITHOUT due process or evidence.

So maybe we should test every accident driver who has been in rehab? Back in 96 I broke my ankle and a couple years ago, I was in rehab for surgery. If I have an accident today, should I be suspect since you don't like me and I have to prove my innocence? OTOH, if I am liked by you, I get a pass? Maybe cops should have an additional column in the computer which gets checked if you were in rehab X years ago and if pulled over, immediately sent for a tox report?

Well, I guess your opinion is that if the legal system sides with me, it is good and we must respect the decision. If it sides against me, they are fools?

Probably the same reason you are chomping at the bit to put the noose around his neck.

Ward was an idiot that risked his own life and the lives of anyone else. Go hang yourself if you want. Just don't take others with you. As to Stewart, I don't think he IS a champ. He WAS. "WAS" as in history, "has been", "not lately".

Convict?! I can't convict the guy. We are playing armchair detective, you don't get that? As for me having evidence, it's on the video. Utterly clear.

The kid was no more than 50% at fault. Emergency personnel get out on the track under a yellow flag. We see it on the video about 15 seconds after Ward gets hit.

Bottom line: Stewart gunned the engine and steered upfield in a negligent, reckless, and threatening manner.

When TS threw his helmet at that car at a NASCAR race, the driver could have steered over and taken him out, but he didn't. Stewart was not a big enough man to be civilized.

Actually you are playing armchair judge, jury and executioner. As to the video, it is clearer to the GJ seeing haw the have all the extra data you don't have. It is clear to them. They had accident personnel to agree with it. I don't believe our credentials, impressive as they are can be of my use here.

And if he sat in the crashed vehicle or move to the side like he was supposed to, what percentage?\

Until you are a crash investigator with al the toys at your disposal. it is going to be hard to determine.

Yeah, and if he'd taken up knitting instead of sprint car racing, he would still be playing baseball with his buddies.

The point is chief, getting out and complaining about being done wrong is/was a defacto part of the sport. Word is from reliable sources it happens a lot. And Stewart himself has done it.

Me executioner? Dude, step away from the hyperbole. I have a right to an opinion, same as you. The GJ saw the 1st video and the 2nd which word has it was much like the first. It was obvious. I can scarcely believe that people deny it. My faith in human kind has been shaken. The obnoxious puke is a superstar so he gets a pass.

If car #45 had hit him or some other car who obviously had no inkling that he was on the track had hit him it would be completely different. Stewart gunned the engine and steered upfield. IT WAS OBVIOUS.

The people on the GJ saw that video and were concerned about the legal burden for bringing charges and conviction.
This is the kind of hyperbole you run to for shelter. I've said at various points that no way do I think he intended to kill him, let alone planned it. There would be no noose in my perfect world. If there would be any sentence, I would have thought 6 to 24 months would have been plenty. But my best guess was no jail time - suspended sentence. But c'mon, let's be honest: TS had a hand in this. His behavior was not correct. It was pea-brained, arrogant, uber competitiveness. It's a game. Auto racing is another game. If TS had been half the honest, decent person he expects others to be when he gesticulates at them on the track, we'd have never heard of this story.

Not a chance. If he had his temper under control, he'd be alive, plain and simple.

The point being? Is it stupid regardless of who does it? I don't care if the King of England does it. It is dumb. Whomever does it endangers themselves and more importantly, anyone else. Go play in traffic if you want but don't drag anyone else into it.

He is a superstar only in your mind. He hasn't really won much since eons ago. But he is a jerk therefore guilty of whatever you can hang onto him. My point is that your opinion is overruled by 2 accident experts so unless you have some credentials or some way to say that everyone was dazzled by a current nobody, I think their opinion has a loud voice whereas yours has little more than a squeak.

OBVIOUS from what perspective? Do you have access to the enhancements they have? Do you have the training they do?

Decency? Seriously? Even if you asked Stalin, he'd tell you that he believes he was doing the decent thing. What you are meaning to say is that you have the right to do stupid things. I have the responsibility to safeguard your safety at any costs. Sorry. You do stupid things, you bite the bullet. I have no sympathy for your stupidity. It is NOT my responsibility to safeguard you from yourself. If I do, it is your good fortune. If I don't, tough.

Stalin? Take a deep breath there pal.

Who are these grand jury geniuses you speak of? Average people according to everything I've read.

The stories I've read have it that the other video is much like the first. They saw them at various slo-mo speeds. The real time and one slo-mo is enough for me. If TS had been taking the shortest route around the track while under the yellow, IF HE'D HAD HIS TEMPER UNDER CONTROL, he'd not have gone through this shyte storm, and he wouldn't have this thing hanging over his head for the rest of his life.

Yes, it was obvious. That you can't see it, refuse to see it, speaks volumes regarding your mental acumen and honesty.

Driving sprint cars is a tad dumb on the personal safety level by itself. Ward was not struck by anyone else and would have not been struck by Stewart had Stewart not intentionally and illogically changed course.

The grand jury let Stewart off because it's very hard to prove intent and because many people have an attitude about weed. IMO. I don't have the requirements for burden of proof as I don't have the power to restrict his freedom in any way. And has-been, whatever, the NASCAR faithful still love their mouthy bad boy. The guy has a well documented history of being a prick and he demonstrated the full range of his arrogance in this episode.

See, that was the problem right there. They heard the testimony of a couple of accident experts and formed an opinion. Maybe you should have given them your expert opinion so they would have something to consider. BTW, what are YOUR credentials? I mean, we need some accident experts to counter the other 2 accident experts.

Can you show me the video of what you are talking about because last time I didn't see the "overlaid with grids and data" part that might shed some light on the situation. What else was presented to the GJ by the experts, I do not know but was it in the video you are so fond of? Who would take me step by step thru each and every frame?

Lets speculate. Had Ward done the right thing instead of following his befuddled mind and not walked onto the track and instead made a hasty retreat to safety, what is it you think you have happened?

Regale me with YOUR honesty. Every other post of yours has "TS is a jerk". Relevance? I think not. Drugs can stay in the system for a month. Not in enough quantity to be judgment impairing but you seem to try to find some excuse for that too. The only thing you cannot say is someone put a gun to Ward's head and made him head out onto the track, YET.

It may be dumb but running out into traffic kinda takes the cake, or do you disagree?

Again, WGAS about TS and his behavior? What is the relevance? You keep trying to bring it up since that is all you got to justify your opinion. If you are a certified accident expert with access to all the data, feel free to say so. Right now, all you have is a whole lot of nothing except a couple of videos on Youtube and a dislike for the man's attitude.

So TS has been doing the same thing. Can you honestly say you would have been so worked up if the position was reversed and it was TS lying in the autopsy room? I think not. All you seem to carp on and on and on about is his bad behavior. I'm sorry but until you have the street creds, I think the accident experts are more credible than you are ever going to be concerning this accident. Or do you have some proof that the GJ totally ignored what the experts said? All you got is grasping at straws because you don't like TS so you go all out to vilify the man. I have NO knowledge of him before this but it is irrelevant. Either you can prove he did it or you can't.

Experts, schmexperts - get those overlaid graphs and grids out my face.

I saw what happened just fine. I'm reminded of one of the web comments I read. The guy said he went to the video fully expecting to see a Darwin award winner playing in traffic. But once he saw it, he said it was clear: 'oh hell yes, he went out of his way to hit that boy.' No question about it. I am sorry that you can't see it. I accept that you will not see it. Best of luck in all your endeavors.

You're right. Why bother with people who studied thus stuff for a living. I mean, how good can they be IF THEY WON'T AGREE WITH YOU. Let's go with the smart ones who see it your way.

Come on Cmac, what do you really think?;)

This doesn't prove Stewart was innocent of any and all wrongdoing. It just proves that the grand jury did not think there was any offence that could be prosecuted successfully.

Perhaps the fact that 2 accident experts testified also swayed their opinion? That is, unless the GJ was so bedazzled by a Has Been that they ignored the experts who said "GUILTY", that is. Sorry but they had all the grid by grid breakdown and people who study these sort of things so unless the experts testify otherwise, I'm going to go along with them.

Who are we going to beleive, cmac or our own lying eyes?

Unless the experts tell me "We said X and the GJ went with Y", I think I am going to go along with them. They had all the data and the training. My eyes and CMAC doesn't have any credibility compared to that. I mean, my eyes tell me the earth is flat.

I don't think you've really examined the evidence. I have and for that I have reaped sarcastic crap from the likes of you. The DA in this matter is an idiot. And I suspect the GJ was peopled with self-important retirees who think 'Reefer Madness' was a documentary. The DA said that TS's car went in a mostly straight line during this, which is about all we need to know to see that the guy is not possessing a clue in this matter. If by straight line, it was meant he was following the angle of the turn, that's clearly not the case and there was nothing straight about how the car behaved when Stewart goosed the throttle and cut the wheels back and forth.

The slo mo vid makes it possible to suss out Stewart's change of direction:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxPiyEWCzls

From the time TS's car enters the frame until he passes Ward, i.e., before he strikes him, you can see the distance between the car and the inside edge of the track increase. Compare that to car #45 who was staying on the track he'd been on from when he first entered the frame. If TS had been at that angle for very long, he'd have been up against the outside wall long before he got to Ward as he was near the end of the turn. Ward's sudden back pedal also indicates that he saw a change of trajectory. He assumed Stewart would do the normal thing and follow the turn.

You can see TS's rear end go slightly to the right before he reaches Ward. This from goosing the throttle, which can be heard in real time of course. When Ward is hanging on the wing, the rear is clearly going to the left, contradicting the notion that Ward's weight deflected the vehicle.

And you can clearly see the left front wheel deflect to the right and back again in the midst of this. In the real time vid you can see the car respond readily to the movements of the wheels, which sort of contradicts the notion that sprint car front wheels are about like T-Rex arms: nearly useless.

But since it is true that Ward was quite close to moving cars of his own choice, going with homicide is a bit much. The DA set a bar too high - manslaughter or neg. homicide - and I suspect he did not want to deal with the case at any rate. Make his cred? No, more like give him the headache from hell.

Something like reckless endangerment at the very least is in order, or was anyway. There is absolutely no way that Stewart tried to avoid Ward, rather it is clear that he went toward him in a threatening manner.

And regarding all this fawning over the wisdom of the GJ, I am not bound to honor any man's opinion about anything. The one way that miscarriages of justice are rectified is by people stubbornly pressing their own case for what actually happened.

If you want to surrender your brains to a roomful of people you know nothing about, y'all just go for it, Imo hang elsewhere.

The ONLY evidence in this case was the vids (second much like the first from various reports) and eye-witness testimony, the most reliable of which came from drivers close to the scene. Since I've read about much of that - both sides - and have watched the real time vid as well as the slo mo, I am persuaded that the GJ got it wrong.

Regarding the education of anyone who can't see that, the word 'refund' comes to mind.

'Nothing that you will learn in the course of your studies will be of the slightest possible use to you in after life – save only this – if you work hard and diligently you should be able to detect when a man is talking rot, and that, in my view, is the main, if not the sole, purpose of education.' - J. A. Smith

Cmac
How much experience have you at driving a race car? How many hours of video have you viewed of similar events?
IOW is your opinion somehow superior to anyone else's?
Please hold your opinions, but there is no need to insult those who see it differently.
Are you always this angry?

IOW, I didn't bother to wreck my race time to do everything to keep your ass safe IN SPITE OF YOUR STUPIDITY.

Not just the wisdom of the GJ but the experts with better equipment and data.

If you have better data and expertise, press on. Just pressing on saying "I said so" is no different from the kid that wants candy and keeps stamping his feet.

Well, I suppose you would want to argue too with the experts. As I asked, what are YOUR credentials? What is it YOU know about accidents? If I had 2 architects that tell me what I want is impossible to build from a structural standpoint, what is it I should do? Tell them that me, a nobody, knows how to build better than them? IIRC Hitler told his generals how to fight a war. Didn't go too well. Mind you, once in a long while, you might even beat the odds and win. Those kind of things are few and far between.

Again, what is YOUR expertise? Have you spent any time studying crashes and actually doing calculations?

My bet is ZERO. As I have asked before about his credentials and he has deftly avoided the question, I am led to believe that he has none. All he rails about is "TS is a jerk". Ward, bit the dust because of his stupidity. Ward gets high enough to impair judgment judgment and he tries to say "well pot can stay in the system for a while.". IMO, he is blinded by the fact that TS is a jerk and got away, as he sees, with running over some other moron on the track who didn't have the good sense to stay sober for the race and got "Darwined Out".

Fact is, TS is said to be a jerk. But so what? Being a jerk is different from guilty. Maybe, I'm not a mind reader, maybe he cut too close to the line because he didn't give a crap about Ward and his antics. I don't know. However, what I do know is that Ward, of his own free will AND ACCORDING TO TOX SCREENS WAS STONNED OUT OF HIS GOURD, took a stroll up the track WHERE HE HAD NO BUSINESS TO BE. They way I look at it, he stuck his neck out where he had no business to be and should have been in the other direction so it is all his blame. Maybe he would have been better of if he had been sober. No different from a drunk driver who plays in traffic and someone doesn't risk themselves to avoid him or didn't make the cut avoiding him. Sorry, it is all you. Had he been sober and walking towards the safety area and anyone ran him down, I can have sympathy. Kid stuck his hand in a fire, WGAS?

What, and you haven't insulted me? This business of 'you don't understand racing is nonsense. It's the way men used to, and still do, insult women by telling they couldn't possibly understand manly stuff.

I have done no racing. I have spent many, many hours in vehicles traveling far faster than Stewart was traveling when he went out of his way to hot dog Ward. I've spent much time at those speeds and more on dirt, gravel, and icy roads. I have an understanding of physics. I've watched serious amounts of dirt track, sprint car video, helmet cam also, since this story began. I've heard all the embarrassingly weak defenses of Stewart: it was dark, Ward was wearing a black suit (with copious white reflective striping), you need engine to steer, the front wheels hardly do anything to control those cars, it's hard to see to your right in those things.

And then there are the utterly absurd lines that people issue, presumably, with a straight face: Stewart did everything he could to avoid Ward.

Where and why people come up with such bull$h!t is beyond me. My best guess is that they are racing/NASCAR boosters much more concerned with avoiding a black eye for racing than they are with the demonstrable fact that their lovable bad boy of racing used his 700 hp car to target a hot-headed kid standing on the track in his skin and not much more.

My opinion is easily seen if you watch the slo-mo vid and look for the features I point out. Have you done so?

'Wreck my race time?!" This right here is indication that you don't get this story for one second. You cannot pass during a yellow flag. He was behind #45 who somehow managed to steer his car past Ward without using his engine or even steering, except mabye by a tiny amount. Stewart, OTOH, gunned his engine and steered his wheels to go upfield on the track, towards Ward, a move that made him take a long route around the track, which may have added .09 seconds to his lap time, which didn't matter anyway because they were under a yellow flag.

Ward's behavior was not bright, OTOH it was common and Stewart himself has done similarly.

And HELL YES, especially under a yellow flag you make a point of not hitting people, instead of going out of your way to do so.

I stand with jaw agape and the bizarre "thinking" of people regarding this story. They walk among us . . .

Expert: and 'ex' is something that used to be and a spurt is a small drip under pressure. We know nothing about these experts, I've read enough to conclude to my satisfaction that the DA is clueless on this story and grand juries are peopled with citizens much like those on regular juries but with more time on their hands.

If you have read my analysis and have rebuttal for my argument, I have missed up. Go for it. Prove me wrong.

Without clue. The kid may haved smoked the day before, his family claims they were together for 10 hours before the race and no indication of pot was to be seen.

His movements on the track indidcate to me that adrenaline was the main substance moving him. He looked plenty agile. The other driver Kinney said: 'I saw him just fine. No one else hit him.' Stewart gunned his engine and targeted the kid. Unmistakeable. I don't need no gawddammed racing experience to see that.

This did not happen at full out racing speed. I am a former professional driver. I drove nearly one million miles on the streets of Seattle, Oakland, San Francisco, and Marin county often with passengers in the car. The conditions ran the range: dry, wet, dark, snowy. This was higher speed than the 35 at which Stewart struck Ward. And often in heavy traffick. My only chargeable accident was a 5 mph rear ender in freeway stop and go. Looked aside at the wrong moment. Never even in a serious accident that wasn't my fault. And never with passengers aboard. This macho crap about 'you don't understand racing' is tiresome and seriously so.

I'm not some virgin in the world. I saw what Stewart did.

The trouble is we don't know what was in Tony's mind at the time of the confrontation.

We can see what his car did. He changed course to go upfield towards Ward. Careful examination of the slo-mo reveals that. You can see his car fishtailing as he approaches Ward. Clearly he goosed the throttle. I suspect he was trying to intimidate him. Not smart.

So besides you, who would agree that you are qualified to be an accident investigator? If you went up against those 2 experts, do you imagine you are credible? I have an understanding of physics myself but I don't think I am a physicist.

I don't believe racing will die either way. Not cutting into my paycheck so I don't care. What is you next theory?

I did. Several times. I still didn't see where it showed his thoughts. You have been conjuring up all kinds of excuses for Ward.

OK, explain the physics if the wing of a dirt track car has the weight of a human being hanging on it? Car going as said 30 mph.

I get that part of the story. Yes, according to NASCAR rules, he is to exercise caution and cut speed to whatever it is that it is previously agreed on in the rule book. Why did he take the upfield path? IDK. Was there a reason? IDK. If you can prove there is no logical reason, I suggest you present it to the DA.

Again, what's your point? Who cares if Stewart and others have done it? Lots of people have driven drunk. Doesn't make it a good idea. Stupid is stupid. Stupid deserves what it gets.

And you can prove that he intended to hit Ward? What new theory? Last time it was because some young punk beat him (a has been).

Good thing there is you to keep us on the straight and narrow. What a thankless job, Larry.

I see. You know nothing of these experts and that is all you have? Again, what is YOUR expertise?

Have you forwarded it to the DA? I'll bet he will take you seriously when he sees the calculations and proof you have. Again, I am not an accident investigator.

The family that sticks up for their loved one. Can't say I saw that coming. Bottom line is the tox screen said he had enough to impair judgment. I suppose you want to dispute that too? Maybe the people analyzing the sample don't know what they are talking about either? If I consumed enough alcohol, I could be dry for a few hours and still have enough to blow a DUI charge. Did he toke before the race? Definitely. How long before? Don't know. Enough to be considered impaired? Seems that way.

Good thing because I suspect you don't have any. The other drive is more credible than you will ever be.

My father has been flying in and out of countries for over 40 years. He has been to places I have never heard of and has logged more airline miles than I know of. I wouldn't call him an expert to investigate a crash. You were a Taxi Driver. No offense but that doesn't strike me as an accident investigator. We aren't talking Taxi driving here. I might consider asking for your help if I wanted to learn how to drive a Taxi but calling yourself an accident investigator? Seriously? I suppose you would call a nurse in a hospital a neuro surgeon too?

Could be he is. I am not clairvoyant. IDK. Did the collision occur? Yes. Was he trying to intimidate him? Possible. Why? IDK. Run him over? I don't see any way to know without reading his mind.

Have you actually watched the slo-mo vid? The car fistails to the right before Ward even disappears from view, IOW before he grabs it. During the time he's hanging on it, it fishtails to the left. Then to the right again as he falls off, and perhaps the tire got his head then. Those cars have 700 hp.

He is already going upfield before he strikes Ward. Look at the slo mo. He is moving away from the pole quite a bit just in the two or so lengths while he is in the frame. He was close to the pole just before entering the frame so clearly he veered towards Ward. You can hear the gunning of the engine in the real time and you can very clearly see his front wheels turn to the right and back to the left quickly. The car obeys those wheel commands. It is so obvious. Stewart aimed his car at that boy whether he meant to hit him or not.

Good Lord, stand up and take a bow. Idiocracy is upon us. You can't even think for yourself. Accident investigator?? I have eyes. It is so goddamned obvious.

I weep for our species. You are an embarrassment to thinking people. Your brain works like a jerking knee.

Speaking of the DA:

Here is an account of what the DA presented to the GJ:

Tony Stewart not charged in death of Kevin Ward Jr.

Other remarks by Tantillo:

A number of things are wrong here.

"into a hot track in the middle of other cars that still were racing"

Yellow flag speeds of about 35 to 40 mph are way less than racing speeds. Ward knew the yellow flag would be in effect until his car was taken off the track. One can see the firetruck looking thing show up seconds after he was hit. His behavior was dumb but not suicdically dumb as running into the track during a hot track when racing was going on would be.

The most egregious example of poor thinking was shown here:

"The videos did not demonstrate any aberrational driving by Tony Stewart until the point of impact with Kevin Ward, at which point his vehicle veered to the right up the track as a result of the collision. Prior to that, his course was pretty straight." - Tantillo

The DA has demonstrated that he has approximately no understanding of physics or any ability to examine evidence of this sort. No "aberrational driving," his "course was straight?"

If by straight he means that Stewart was following the curve of the track down in the sweet spot, following behing #45, the video evidence indicates he was doing that until shortly before he came into the frame. At that point he is still quite close to the pole (the inside edge of the track) but is clearly moving away from it. In the car length or two before he reaches Ward and Ward disappears from view, he clearly has traveled a good bit upfield. Contrast to #45 and the difference is what you call obivous. I can tell he must have been near the pole before he enters the frame because the angle he's on in the frame would have had him in the wall if begun sooner or in the middle of the track.

You can see Ward begin to backpedal about the time Stewart would have veered towards him. I've already described how the fishtailing indicates that he gunned the engine and how the movements of the car while Ward is hanging onto it indicate that Ward's weight had a neglible effect.

There is no new evidence of any kind that can over-rule the clear fact that Stewart's driving was, in fact, aberrational. If the DA is clueless enough not to see it, one wonders what sort of guidance he gave the GJ.

It is really, really hard to figure how people can be this wrong. Several possibilities come to mind.

1. He's an idiot.
2. He's a hardcore NASCAR fan or has family who is and they tainted his thinking with repitition of the standard BS lines about can't see to the right, too dark, etc.
3. He thinks pot is evil, dirty, sinful.
4. Or he's a corrupt som-***** who knows that a Tony Stewart trial would be a headache and ultimate black eye for his community.

Whatever, the DA is utterly wrong and the GJ also, whether he influenced them or not.

Gentlepersons of the Bimmerfest informal investigative unit: if you can't find the stones to tell me why I'm wrong here I'm going to lose respect for you. The hooting mockery chorus doesn't get it done, mucho muy perdonnes.

Tantillo:

http://s20.postimg.org/m24v7gpr1/Tantillo.jpg

http://s20.postimg.org/d5u33iz4t/Tantillo_2.jpg

The key phrase from the grand jury follows: the grand jury has determined there is no basis to charge Tony Stewart with any crimes.

They do not say that Tony did nothing at all wrong. They simply say that there was no crime they could charge him with. They are not mind readers either.

I saw both videos. I saw the first one the day after on a friends smart phone. The video was played 3-4 times. The angle to me blocked any view of Wards actions behind the car. I do think TS drive a bit higher line than the proceeding car, but not way up the race track. I did hear the car rev, but from my view/perspective, Ward was behind the car at that time.

One of ESPN's stories one of the commenters posted the video (Slo-mo) of the second video. His statement was Ward grabbed the wing of TS car. I'm like what!!. I watched the video. I did not see Ward back off. He made a bee line to TS car. Jumped over the front wheel, grabbed the wing, was torqued into a cartwheel.

Yes, I know how much HP these cars have. Know people who own, raced and work on them. I do work in the auto industry. Some of the parts I have made or had a hand in the making of have run around Indy 500. Not an expert though. So, I will make my own judgement.

I see it about this way too. I do believe Tony was higher on the track than he should have been. Was he challenging Ward? Perhaps but perhaps he did not see him either. Unless one is capable of mind reading one cannot know what was in Tony's mind at the time.

In thinking of top race drivers there are many who make a very excellent impression of being polite gentlemen. I think though if you scratch the surface of Al Unser senior, or Rick mears or Johnny Rutherford you will find a very tough individual who will take nothing from anybody when push comes to shove.

Does Tony act like a dick? Sometimes, but that sort of bad boy image is encouraged by Nascar.

I remember the Andrettis were tagged with being arrogant. One of their replies was basically' They had to concentrate for that weekend to race'. Going around at over 200 mph has a different perspective. I've only been 116 mph on the Autobahn. Not the same. Actually felt safer than 80 mph on I-65.
To say all these other drivers saw him why didn't TS. Maybe TS's focus was were it should be 'down the track' as to where his car is going to be. Sort of like people at accidents, turkey necking. Then there is another accident. Not what I would consider myself as a fan of TS. More Mark Martin, Kulwiki, not sure of present drivers. I do know people who grew up with TS, etc.
I judge the videos as I see them. I see Ward stop at one point, then readjust his angle of progression.

It looks like he is getting ready to grab the car, not scrambling to get away. Hard to imagine but it looks like that to me.

I looked at the videos. I didn't see where it was obvious, at least to me, that there was any intent to run him down. I obviously discounted attitudes, facial expressions, irrelevant past behavior, etc, etc. Looking at ONLY the video, I don't see anything that jumps out to say that he was intent on running him over. Had he made a 45 degree turn, fair enough. At this point, unlike you, I'm going to defer to someone who DOES investigations for a living since I have no more tools or training to go any further. Like I have been asking, what are YOUR credentials since you talk so much. All I can see is a loudmouth that knows absolutely nothing about this subject berating those that are better qualified. Again, if you have any qualifications that I am unaware of, feel free to share and add some credibility to your berating.

The limit of my expertise doesn't see anything that says "guilty beyond reasonable doubt". Apparently yours does but when asked, you have no credentials to back it and when cited with those that do, the best you have is to ridicule them simply because they don't agree with you. OTOH, had they agreed with you, those would be the 2 wise men. Such a double standard, don't you see?

The question is whether you can say for sure or not that he had NO reason to be there. Could he have been there for some reason that made sense at the time but doesn't in the light of day? IDK. All of us have done something that made sense at the time but in retrospect, well.....

We tend to like the gentleman competitor. Sure, he appeals to our sense. Most of us like the nice guys and/or underdog and root for them. As to what is really inside that "gentleman suit" they wear, it can and usually is quite ugly.

Acting like a dick is one thing. Just because I am a dick to you doesn't mean I am going to take it a few steps further and try to kill you. I might leave you lie in the street with a broken leg but that is far from me shooting at you.

While we are on the subject of acting like a dick, how is Ward any different from Tony? Besides being legally impaired, that is. All we know so far is that Ward is starting to show a little of Tony. My money says that had he "grown up" in the racing world, we'd have another TS except his name on the racing suit is different. Same antics.

So the Andrettis were arrogant. I really don't care why they were. I'd be more leery of someone who comes across as "sweet as pie" than an arrogant jerk. The nice ones tend to be more dangerous in my observation.

Actually, I now know more about TS and Ward than I ever did before the accident. Don't even follow who does what in their world.

Man was legally impaired. No way he should even have been on the track even if he was driving a broom. Race sober or don't.

That begs the question. Why? Had he succeeded, could he have thrown the weight off enough to crash TS? If so, would he not also be dragged into the crash? Kinda makes me wonder.

I'm sorry, I respectfully disagree with parts of this. He made a bee line to be next to where TS was going to be driving, IF he followed the course he was on which was directly behind #45 in the sweet spot by the pole. How do I know he was there? In the slo mo, you can see that he headed upfield from that spot. At that point where he headed upfield, Ward started to backpedal as, my take, he saw that Stewart was changing course. That he changed course is obvious in the slo mo as you can see the distance between his tires and the pole steadily increase as he heads towards Ward.

In the real time, you can see that any notion that he grabbed the wing for some sort of nefarious reason is absurd. He was trying to save his ass. In the slo mo you can see TS's rear fishtailing to the right just as Ward begins to disappear from view, i.e. before he grabs the wing. What, he was going to wrestle the car to the ground and pound the innocent Mr. Stewart? There in nothing else on the car but the wing that is outside of the tires. I susect he put his hands up in an "OH $H!T!" move to try to save his ass. I think if he'd let go a fraction sooner he might have survived.

But I'm sorry, TS went way upfield. #45 was taking the shortest route around the track. TS departed from that while gunning his engine. Why would he do that?

Why would TS go upfield? Didn't see him? How is that possible? Ward was not on his right until he was upon him. Before that he was to his LEFT as it took place in a turn.

The movements of TS's car are consistent with his seeing Ward and trying to B-slap him with a spray of dirt or a brush off.

Ward made an incorrect assumption that Stewart would be civilized enough not to change course in that turn.

I agree that many racers are hard-bitten people. Seems the most successful are the most dirty. Saintly Schumacher was supposedly a seriously dirty driver.

I have said many times that I thought homicide was too strong a charge. It is racing, it's dangerous, and Ward was a dumbass. But I can't get past a strong suspicion that TS is guilty of some sort of reckless endangerment. I don't think he meant to hit him. How many times do I have to say that? No, it was not murder in the first, second, or third degree.

But I do not buy Tony the wonderful man who couldn't see Ward because there weren't enough white reflective stripes on his firesuit. A friggin potato cell cam maybe 100 yards away saw Ward just fine in that suit. There is something really chicken$h!t about gunning your engine in the direction of a guy standing in his skin. Add to that the FACT that Stewart did intentionally knock him out of the race one lap earlier and it's worse.

For a man trying to save his ass, he is making a huge play TOWARDS danger instead of away. So what was Ward trying to do? Doesn't sound rational that he moved towards TS's car to save his ass.

I don't know why TS would go that way. I don't race NASCAR or Sprint cars so I have no idea what he was trying to do. Ward is definitely out of the race so why would TS go hurt his time by trying anything? A collision will DEFINITELY put the race off. Even running over debris can cause car trouble so unlike Ward, at this point, TS seems more disciplined by keeping himself sober.