Pelican Parts Forums - This is Just Wrong!!!

Pelican Parts Forums (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/)

- Porsche 911 Technical Forum (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/porsche-911-technical-forum/)

- - This is Just Wrong!!! (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/porsche-911-technical-forum/294560-just-wrong.html)

found this in another forum. BTW why is it assummed he was incapable of driving that car ?

From another board...

quartermile
Junior Member

Registered: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 57
Status: Offline
I have tears in my eyes as I write this. I witnessed the whole thing.

IT WAS NOT BEN'S FAULT!!! THE ORGANIZER HAD PICKED THE 150MPH ZONE AS THE ENTRANCE TO THE TRACK AND THE F-CAR DRIVER PULLED IN FRONT OF HIM NEAR THE END OF THE STRAGHT. THERE WERE NO CORNER WORKS AND NO FLAGS!!! HE TRIED TO AVOID HIM AND SPUN OUT AND HIT THE WALL AT NEARLY THAT SPEED.

The passenger died instantly on impact. Ben was airlifted to the hospital, but still had a pulse when they took him so PLEASE PRAY FOR HIM AND HIS FAMILY.

PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS POST AND DO NOT MAKE THIS INTO A CIRCUS OUT OF RESPECT FOR THE FAMILIES. PLEASE!!!!!

I will not be responding to any questions
I witnessed the whole thing.

hey explain to me this...........richy rich buys ferrari, takes to PIR, has snazzy ferrarri emblazoned fire suit and co-driver(instructor) has ferrari team suit. on 2nd lap turn 1 @ PIR, idiot does 2 360's in front of me.......IT WAS A NASCAR MOMENT ie. where the hell is he NOT GOING to be????? i was very damn close to nailing his sorry A$$, at great pain and suffering to my self,instructor and my car! after that stunt and cleaning out my pants, my instructor stated" you sure as hell dont need me, you know what your doing". i thanked him for the positive comment,despite wanting to ring richy riches neck for being a total jerk.

now if i had hit him and survived,could i have sued him for being a poor driver?

NO ! LITTLE CLAUSE ON BOTTOM OF DRIVERS FORM!!!! RACING IS AN INHERENTLY DANGEROUS SPORT! sh%* happens racing pure and simple and it happens alot more than you hear about. getting my qualifications back after 29 years since i raced my SCCA datsoon 280-Z, has been fun, but not without some real hairy moments. in SCORE/HDRA racing anybody can show up in anything as long as it passes tech inspection. no training, no nothing. starting order is the luck of the draw and you can get some real idiots that do not know the first clue of driving and really screw things up for others on say the goat trail and other infamous places in baja. we call this anomoly "more money than brains"!!! and that can and has been a deadly combination. try getting a dead body out of mexico !

bottom line is no matter how good you may be, there is always someone worse and they somehow manage to screw up your day. the only thing that saved me from center punching that ferrari, was i have spent alot of time behind the stick off road, and KNOW how to handle a car with its A$$ END LOOSE. thats just how you drive off road due to traction, kinda like rally cars powering thru corners and never lifting off the pedal. had i not done alot of this type of driving in my past, i may not be writing this now!!!

Quote:

Originally posted by randywebb
Many if not most of the posts above are people spewing based on this incident and don't really relate to this particular incident much.

1. The author of the article, John Draneas, was President of the Oregon PCA club and is still a big impetus in it. He is also an attorney I think. He did a good job on the article. Read it.

2. The lawyer suing owns Porsches and DEs or races them.

3. No one knows what the widow plans to do with any proceeds or what her motivation is. She may well just want to make the racing/DE events safer.

4. In law suits of this type (torts) the common approach is exactly the same as that of the 82nd Airborne -- "Sue (or kill) them all and let the Judge (or God) sort it out"

5. Remember this is just a filing of a suit, not a decision. There are lots of events, and time before any decision is made. Most of these things settle long before much happens in the litigation.

6. "inquest" - this is something the government does in a criminal case. it won't happen here. The govt. will leave it to the civil justice system.

7. The only way the widow, etc. can find out all the facts is by filing a suit. Private parties or companies can't just order docuemnts or question people - only a criminal prosecutor (or the rare agency like the SEC or EPA can do that an only under certain conditons). So if she wants to get to the bottom of the her husband's death, this is the only way.

8. This does not apply to this specific event since the dead person was rich, but the laws in the US are made for most people so the laws operate for the rich also. That is, that the only way in the US for most people to get medical care paid or in some cases even get money for a funeral is to file a lawsuit for wrongful death or negligence. These are rarely filed unless there is an insurance co. on the other end. The ins. co. will not pay usually unless there is a suit against them - simpel economics. Other countries in the devloped world have universal helath care and other means to take care of people who are injured. The US does not.

Some of you should be ashamed for what you've said about a bereaved widow.

The reason that suits are rarely filed unless there is an insurance company at the other end is that juries, even though it is impermissable for the attornies to infer that the insurance company will be on the hook and not the defendant, know there is insurance and will find against an insurer and for the plaintiff even if the facts do not indicate that they should. The old "somebody got hurt and somebody has to pay, so why not this rich insurance company" theory. In a case like this, a jury would, more likely than not, award substantial damages, not necesarily because anyone was legally negligent, but because they feel sorry for the widow. Any attorney that says otherwise is a recent law school grad with no experience, delusional or a liar.....lol The jury system works quite well in routine criminal matters because the defendant is at an inherent disadvantage anyway. In florida, the win/loss rate for defendants who go to trial is around 50/50. But in complex civil matters, letting 6-12 people who aren't smart enough to get out of jury duty decide a case is a bad idea.:D

Example of jury shennanigans. In one case a few years back, a jury gave a wife damages for loss of consortium (no hanky panky) because her husband had been injured. Unrefuted evidence was presented in court that the husband and wife had been semi-estranged for several years and had not been sleeping together anyway. The jury was so offended that they defense attorney had dragged this bit of embarrassng private info out it awarded damages anyway.

"hate it when I agree with Randy Webb's legal analysis"

- Just got back in town, so a late reply... sure I take it well, tho I dunno why you'd hate it. (?)

I also agree with jdm that juries are very fallible esp. when they feel sorry for someone. I dunno that I'd throw out the whole system. If so, for what? Any expert system risks corruption...

Sine some have posted theri backgnd, FWIW here's mine: I'm a scientist first, lawyer second. And the only law I do is federal administrative law - I enforce the law against the govt. to protect endangered species. I've done a little pollution enforcement and some other related enviro law. But I avoid all the private client stuff, whether criminal, tort or contract. So the above will no doubt have better perspectives than mine on what juries will do. Anyone, of course, is free to debate public policy. Just remember, if you get rid of X what are the substitutes...