Tony Stewart Runs over Competitor after altercation... Murder? Manslaughter? - Page 13 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

cmac2012 · #**181** 08-23-2014, 12:33 AM

Not even close.

If Stewart's front tire had struck Ward, it is highly unlikely that his hands would have wound up on top of the wing, which is where they were. For some reason, I can see it more clearly on my iPhone screen. Any strike with the front wheel other than the tinyiest freak brush-by would have knocked him over.

Projection about what was in Tony's mind? Uhhh yeah, it's called guessing, it's wondering what was going on. You have concluded that Ward was so stupid he would try to attack a car with his body. What, that's not projection about what was in Ward's mind? He actually lunged away from Stewart's car. It's obvious. Ward made a fatal assumption. He assumed that since pretty much main purpose of the yellow flag is to allow the safe removal of wrecked vehicles and stranded drivers that the remaining drivers would drive in a slow and cautious manner, taking care of anyone who might be on the track. With that assumption, he stretched the 'person on the track' thing too far, and used that for cover to point, flip off, and otherwise gesture and shout at the object of his ire.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skid Row Joe

The kid willfully and with intent to do harm, darted into Stewart's race car, and paid the ultimate price for it - just as the video shows. End of story.

Good lord, my embarrassment for others in the species continues. A driver in sprint car is remarkably well protected. Check out the Youtube of Stewart breaking his leg in a sprint race about a year ago. He came out of that highspeed mayhem with only a broken leg. Helmet, roll cage, harness and you think Ward thought he was going to him harm Stewart while he was still under power?? It boggles the imagination.

Look again at the slo mo. Just as Ward's body is disappearing from view, you can see Stewart's rear fishtail out to the right. Unmistakable. He did not need throttle to steer at that speed. That people would advance such a theory is beyond incredible. You can also see from the front wheel movement how Stewart operated the steering wheel. At this speed, the front wheels control the car quite well and you can see the car respond to the steering wheel movements as you would expect it to.

Stewart is steadily moving upfield during the entire episode, you can see it further and further away from the rail. No eyewitness testimony? You miss the point of this. We're trying to be independent investigators here. Testimony will come later. The rescue team was only 10 seconds behind the accident and this while they were moving perhaps 25 mph. One wonders what they saw.

Ward's family should sue Stewart. His behavior was 180 degrees different that the driver in #45. He had plenty of time to make a better decision. It sounds crass, but children are an investment. You hope to have some help from that son in later years. The Wards have lost that. As Stewart was about 3/4ths responsible for this fatality, and is reportedly worth $70 million, he can devote several of those to the Ward family to help compensate for their loss. There is no need to prove malicious intent. It was dumbassery, not intent to kill. You might want to study the meaning of criminal negligence.

A report is out that Stewart may retire. This would fit with sponsors pulling the plug. A more graceful way to handle it. And it would give him cover to continue as an owner of cars and tracks:

Quote:

“He has already been talked out of ending his career on a couple of occasions,” a source told HollywoodLife.com EXCLUSIVELY. “He has been going back and forth with just ending everything but currently has been talked into just canceling select races and trying to work out his mental state.”

HollywoodLife.com has also learned that Tony is currently taking things “day by day” and he could eventually decide that he won’t return to racing. Tony has been under the radar since accidentally hitting and killing Kevin at Canandaigua Motorsports Park.

“He is really going through a lot and not sure when he will return to race,” the source revealed. “It is a day by day decision that could still end in never returning.

Tony Stewart Retirement: Driver Thinking Of Retiring After Kevin Ward Jr. Death - Hollywood Life

I'm actually feeling some compassion for the guy. He spent years in a hair trigger sort of sport, where a certain amount of aggressiveness is part of it. He made a bad decision in a fraction of a second, almost certainly meaning to scare or insult the kid and he calculated wrong. I fully suspect he was smacking his forehead after he pulled over maybe 50 yards past the spot of the accident.

BAVBMW · #**182** 09-24-2014, 09:19 PM

Well, can't say I'm surprised. No criminal charges, no fault for Stewart, and toxicology reports indicating Ward was under the influence. Ought to make a civil suit a bit more difficult as well.

MV

t walgamuth · #**183** 09-24-2014, 10:48 PM

Under the influence of what, please?

DieselPaul · #**184** 09-24-2014, 11:38 PM

Ward had Marijuana in his system. No toxicology on Stewart that I saw.

As a few members are chomping at the bit to point out that stays in your system for a while and I too doubt he was racing high, but that did come out in the investigation.

Its sad that someone young lost their life but listening to wards parents, they just want to get paid. Its got nothing to do with grief for them.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nascar/2014/09/24/kevin-ward-jr-marijuana-toxicology-report-tony-stewart-grand-jury-decision/16160043/

BAVBMW · #**185** 09-24-2014, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

Under the influence of what, please?

Here, I really should have included this:

STORY

But to answer your question, marijuana, "in significant quantities to impair judgment".

MV

aklim · #**186** 09-25-2014, 12:01 AM

That is really odd. I knew they did toxicology tests but I would have bet against it coming out positive. I wouldn't have guessed that he took enough to impair judgment or even taken anything prior to a race. I'm not a pro driver and I don't even like to have a drink with anything alcoholic in it less than 2 hours before I drive.

Interesting story about Stewart though:

Quote:

Stewart, who is single, also has been heavily involved in philanthropy. He formed the Tony Stewart Foundation in 2003 to help chronically ill children, at-risk animals and drivers injured while racing. He has supported several NASCAR-affiliated charities (donating $1 million to the Victory Junction Gang Camp in 2008). He visited hospitalized fans after a February 2013 Nationwide crash at Daytona International Speedway sent debris into the frontstretch stands, hurting more than two dozen.

Before it came out, they never mentioned it. All we know is that Stewart is the bad tempered lout. Suddenly, he is a charitable person. Wet finger, stick it up in the air to see which way the wind blows.

t walgamuth · #**187** 09-25-2014, 06:04 AM

A fellow here in town who I know well, is very into racing and goes to events and such. I believe he might have even drove as a chauffer to Tony on occasion says that Tony has a fairly modest home in the neighborhood he grew up in in Columbus Indiana.

Wonder why they did not publish Tony's tox report?

aklim · #**188** 09-25-2014, 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

Wonder why they did not publish Tony's tox report?

Because one was never done. They used a certified drug recognition expert to determine that he was clean. Wish they did his tox screen the same way.

t walgamuth · #**189** 09-25-2014, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

Because one was never done. They used a certified drug recognition expert to determine that he was clean. Wish they did his tox screen the same way.

I imagine the tox check is a routine part of an autopsy. Apparently the other method is standard for race tracks...?

aklim · #**190** 09-25-2014, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

I imagine the tox check is a routine part of an autopsy. Apparently the other method is standard for race tracks...?

Don't know about track rules. I wish they would do the pee in a cup, blood sample, hair sample and even deeper checks when we have something this serious happening.

t walgamuth · #**191** 09-25-2014, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

Don't know about track rules. I wish they would do the pee in a cup, blood sample, hair sample and even deeper checks when we have something this serious happening.

Seems like the police should have done that.

cmac2012 · #**192** 09-25-2014, 02:25 PM

I can't believe they wouldn't do one on Tony. And yes, pot does stay in the system for about a month. Ward could have gotten high a week before the race. The grand jury had a tough assignment. Ward was acting aggressive and agitated and what do they know about sprint cars? Not to mention, TS is a star, large fan base and burden of proof is what it is.

But to me, it is obvious. Stewart could have driven by him just like #45 before him, but then he would have had to endure getting flipped off and yelled at. He gunned the engine and went way upfield. The doubt on that is approx zero. He's legally off the hook and he's a dick. Not mutually exclusive.

aklim · #**193** 09-25-2014, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

Seems like the police should have done that.

They were summoned so I can't imagine why not test both parties. OTOH, cops cannot do random tests on Stewart without probable cause. I don't know if that rule is suspended for death on a race course. Do you know for certain? Just curious.

aklim · #**194** 09-25-2014, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

I can't believe they wouldn't do one on Tony. And yes, pot does stay in the system for about a month. Ward could have gotten high a week before the race. The grand jury had a tough assignment. Ward was acting aggressive and agitated and what do they know about sprint cars? Not to mention, TS is a star, large fan base and burden of proof is what it is.

But to me, it is obvious. Stewart could have driven by him just like #45 before him, but then he would have had to endure getting flipped off and yelled at. He gunned the engine and went way upfield.

The doubt on that is approx zero. He's legally off the hook and he's a dick. Not mutually exclusive.

Seriously? They just said

Quote:

Tantillo said toxicology reports revealed that Ward was under the influence of marijuana at a high enough level to impair judgment."

and you are trying to say it was him being high a month ago? I suppose your complaint is now that the burden of proof should be on the less appealing party?

Yes. Lets throw aside the testimonials from witnesses, among whom are a couple of accident experts. Lets even forget that the video you saw and supposedly based your unbiased opinion on were shown to the grand jury

Quote:

The videos were run at 75%, 50% and 25% speed and overlaid with grids and data and "were an important piece of the evidence," Tantillo said. "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."

OK. So you think he is a dick. What's your point? That you are sore because the dick didn't get convicted as you feel he should? So you think the grand jury should toss evidence aside and simply focus on the public appeal of the accused? This is no different from people who claim the moon landing was faked simply because it didn't fit the religion. I don't care how many charities or good deeds TS did. Either he is guilty or he is not. I don't care if he is a dick. That has little to do with guilt. The burden of proof has always been with the accuser not the accused. Either we say that all have the right to make the accuser prove their guilt or we don't.

hill · #**195** 09-25-2014, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

Seriously? They just said and you are trying to say it was him being high a month ago? I suppose your complaint is now that the burden of proof should be on the less appealing party?

Yes. Lets throw aside the testimonials from witnesses, among whom are a couple of accident experts. Lets even forget that the video you saw and supposedly based your unbiased opinion on were shown to the grand jury

OK. So you think he is a dick. What's your point? That you are sore because the dick didn't get convicted as you feel he should? So you think the grand jury should toss evidence aside and simply focus on the public appeal of the accused? This is no different from people who claim the moon landing was faked simply because it didn't fit the religion. I don't care how many charities or good deeds TS did. Either he is guilty or he is not. I don't care if he is a dick. That has little to do with guilt. The burden of proof has always been with the accuser not the accused. Either we say that all have the right to make the accuser prove their guilt or we don't.

If being a dick was relevent. I and a few others here would be in for life.