So a few weeks back a few were wondering whatever happened with this accident, well here it is:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,339915,00.html

The driver Troy Critchley has been charged with 6 counts of vehicular manslaughter.

Jeff

Sorry, just ridiculous. The threat of any/all bodily harm is real in any motorsports event, especially something like the tragedy that occurred here. Aside from the children who were forced to view this along the sidelines via their legal guardians; anybody who was stupid enough to stand in harms way is just as to blame as the driver. My .02

I guess I don't agree whatsoever with the driver being the only one to accept blame. Everybody involved with this tragedy is responsible for what happened. The driver and team, the police, the event coordinators, even the spectators who put themselves in harms way all should accept the responsibility of what happened.

Jeff

I agree 100% Jeff but unfortunately the driver is the easiest to blame and the simplest case to prosecute. :(
Even though "exhibitions of speed" were being allowed on a public road, the driver exhibited extemely poor judgement.

I guess I don't agree whatsoever with the driver being the only one to accept blame. Everybody involved with this tragedy is responsible for what happened. The driver and team, the police, the event coordinators, even the spectators who put themselves in harms way all should accept the responsibility of what happened.

Jeff

I agree with most of that, but saying that the spectators are to blame is a matter of how you look at it. I'd say that just about everybody here on TC would think that it's a bad idea to stand too close to a charging Pro Mod, but what about those who don't even know what a Pro Mod is? I'm pretty sure that most of the spectators were simply not aware of the danger. If people are allowed to stand that close, they think it's ok to do it.

Very sad but you would think that any experienced race car driver would know what the consequences could be.
The same wouldn't normally be expected of many of the people there without any experience.

I bet a lot of those people have never been to a drag strip and had no idea.

I agree with most of that, but saying that the spectators are to blame is a matter of how you look at it. I'd say that just about everybody here on TC would think that it's a bad idea to stand too close to a charging Pro Mod, but what about those who don't even know what a Pro Mod is? I'm pretty sure that most of the spectators were simply not aware of the danger. If people are allowed to stand that close, they think it's ok to do it.

True, but I can tell you this, my mom has absolutely no idea what a pro mod is and couldn't tell you now what one is, but when she saw the video the first thing she said is "why were they standing somewhere with nothing between them?"

Have you ever had to change a flat on the side of a highway? Those cars are going 55-75 mph. That is some scarey crap being there with nothing protecting you. At least a few of these people should have been bright enough to realize the potential danger in standing where they were.

As I said, I think the blame lies with everyone in this incident, and rather than punishing one person for the enormous mistake of many, it should be a draw and learn something from it instead.

Jeff

...but what about those who don't even know what a Pro Mod is? I'm pretty sure that most of the spectators were simply not aware of the danger.Proof that Darwin was right. :yes:

Somebody's gotta satisfy the lynch mob Jeff. :( :sad:

6 felonies is excessive. It was an accident. If it was intentional, then yeah, I can see. But there is no sense whatsoever in creating yet another tragedy.

Just another symptom of our "justice" system run amok.

6 felonies is excessive. It was an accident. If it was intentional, then yeah, I can see. But there is no sense whatsoever in creating yet another tragedy.

Just another symptom of our "justice" system run amok.

That is exactly how I see it. The driver did not go there that day and say "what the hell, I'm going to slam my car into the crowd today and see how many people I can take out." He wasn't drunk, he wasn't stoned, he did what he was asked to do. It resulted in an accident happening, but it is just that an accident.

Jeff

Olle,

Not to get into a argument, and I agree that most people dont know what a pro-mod is. But do you(or anybody for that matter) think that these people are THAT stupid? That they dont know the dangers of any automobile, whether its a Geo Metro or a Top Fuel dragster? Even if they were so incredibly ignorant and had never seen a car in thier life, you wouldnt think they would be apprehensive about something that's making massive amounts of noise and smoke? That's just flat out impossible.

But either way, this was an accident. Period. I feel bad for this guy...he's just doing his job, trying to put on a good show to please the folks, and the worse thing happened. I think the fact that he has to live with the fact he accidentally killed 6 people is going to haunt him for the rest of his life, you dont have to throw him in jail. If he did it on purpose, then yeah throw his butt in jail.

I dont agree with charging the driver for anything.
Isn't there such a thing as an accident anymore?

Here is a link to video of the crash.

YouTube - Drag Racing Crash Tragedy

Doesn't it seem like he is going a little long on the throttle for a typical burnout? I dunno, I'm not an expert, but it looks like the showmanship got excessive.

True, but I can tell you this, my mom has absolutely no idea what a pro mod is and couldn't tell you now what one is, but when she saw the video the first thing she said is "why were they standing somewhere with nothing between them?"

I'm not surprised, many people say that but that's after seeing the video and knowing about the aftermath. Hindsight is always 20/20, but do you really think she would have even thought of the danger if she had only seen the part of the video that was taken before the run? As a matter of fact, I don't think that even those who knew how powerful the car was anticipated a full-throttle pass like that, especially when the spectators actually were allowed to stand that close. There must have been plenty of gearheads among the spectators on an event like this, but I can't remember seeing anyone running for cover when the car was fired up.

My point is that you're talking about the same people who need a manual that says that they shouldn't try to stop a running chainsaw with their hands. People are so used to all the warnings for every possible danger that they simply think that anything is ok, as long as no one tells them otherwise. Common sense is not as common as you may think, and that's what those who arranged the event should have thought about.

Olle,
Not to get into a argument, and I agree that most people dont know what a pro-mod is. But do you(or anybody for that matter) think that these people are THAT stupid? That they dont know the dangers of any automobile, whether its a Geo Metro or a Top Fuel dragster? Even if they were so incredibly ignorant and had never seen a car in thier life, you wouldnt think they would be apprehensive about something that's making massive amounts of noise and smoke? That's just flat out impossible.


I never said that they were stupid, I just said that they didn't know how powerful the car was and that they were unaware of the possible danger. And comparing with regular cars doesn't really make sense... accidents sure happen, but you still wouldn't think twice about walking on a sidewalk were cars are driving by, would you? They just didn't know, and they didn't have time to learn during the few seconds between the launch and the accident either.

Haugen's is a local cruise night spot that has a big event each year that has abut 1100 cars show up. A couple of years ago the cars leaving started doing big burnouts up the highway. The spectators were at the edge of the pavement with no guard rail protection at all. The lady cop was smart enough to shut things down and wouldn't allow anyone to leave at all until more police arrived. At least no one got hurt.
The driver was foolish in this case. The police were foolish for allowing it to happen in the first place. Most spectators don't seem to have a clue about anything. I've seen it at Haugen's, Woodward Avenue, and St. Thomas Ontario. Standing on the side of the road, feet from these cars as if the good Lord himself was looking after them. If nothing else, the insurance companies will put a stop to it, either in the wording of the policies, or the prohibitive costs of the coverage.

Very sad but you would think that any experienced race car driver would know what the consequences could be.
The same wouldn't normally be expected of many of the people there without any experience.

I bet a lot of those people have never been to a drag strip and had no idea.

That is exactly on point Dean!

I've seen it at Haugen's, Woodward Avenue, and St. Thomas Ontario.

Chevell-a-bration.....

Quote:Originally Posted by Dean http://www.chevelles.com/forums/olp/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.chevelles.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1774782#post1774782)
Very sad but you would think that any experienced race car driver would know what the consequences could be.
The same wouldn't normally be expected of many of the people there without any experience.

I bet a lot of those people have never been to a drag strip and had no idea.

That is exactly on point Dean! !

Its okay to dissagree with some people some times, sheesh.

-Was the car in question the first and only car to do a burn out that day?

-If so, why were the spectators lined up so far down the street?

-Does it really matter that the car in question was a full blown race car?

I know of lots of high horsepower street cars that could rip off a long and wild burn out .....

-So does that make a street car any safer to stand close by and watch?

I think not !

To the drivers advantage, he is a professional and was most likely the only person qualified to be pulling a stunt like that on that day with the police and organizers of the show knowing exactly what to expect from a car of that nature, as well as every other car doing stunts like that.
Every now and again these cars end up with the same results on drag strips.... crashing.... Doesn't everyone know the dangers these type of events can bring both on and off the drag strips?

To put any blame on the driver is crazy! ...
It was an accident. Its no different then going to the zoo and having an animal get loose and kill people. Its unlikely, but not unrealistic !

I feel very sorry for everyone invloved and my heart goes out to all of the people and families involved... Especially the driver, who survived and has has nothing but a lifetime to reflect on the events of that day.

They should send anyone who wants to put the driver behind bars, here to Philadelphia PA to help catch the real criminals who go around murdering people on purpose.......


Philadelphia’s Murder Rate Climbing Rapidly: 1 Killing a Day

Philadelphia’s nickname no longer fits, as the City of Brotherly Love has seen more than one killing a day this year.

Last year 406 people were killed in Philadelphia—a nine-year high.

.................................................. ............................
It was an accident !

This is quoted straight from the TN Code:

39-13-213. Vehicular homicide. —

(a) Vehicular homicide is the reckless killing of another by the operation of an automobile, airplane, motorboat or other motor vehicle, as the proximate result of:

(1) Conduct creating a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury to a person;

(2) The driver's intoxication, as set forth in § 55-10-401. For the purposes of this section, “intoxication” includes alcohol intoxication as defined by § 55-10-408, drug intoxication, or both; or

(3) As the proximate result of conduct constituting the offense of drag racing as prohibited by title 55, chapter 10, part 5.

(b) (1) Vehicular homicide under subsection (a)(1) or (a)(3) is a Class C felony.

(2) Vehicular homicide under subsection (a)(2) is a Class B felony.

(c) The court shall prohibit a defendant convicted of vehicular homicide from driving a vehicle in this state for a period of time not less than three (3) years nor more than ten (10) years.

[Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 1; T.C.A., § 39-13-209; Acts 1990, ch. 1038, § 4; 1995, ch. 415, § 1; 2006, ch. 971, §§ 2, 3.]

The areas in bold pretty much cover what this guy did. An accident would have been shutting it down at the 50 foot mark, getting squirlly, hitting the barriers (which were there at 50 feet), knocking the barrier into someone, and breaking their legs. A 100+ mph run down the street well past the barriers and designated burnout area is not an accident.

If your family member had been one of the ones killed, would it be just an accident?

This was a horrible tragedy. I live not far from where this happened and have friends who witnessed it live. It actually took place during a parade. The driver was only suposed to do a burn out and he was in an area with guard rails (watch the video close) The driver did do more than what was intended and the road had a bad spot which caused the car to loose controle. I can tell you this, since all of this has happened, my home town almost did not have a home comming or Christmas parade. As far as the spectators we do have to rely on officials to protect us at certain events but we also have to use common since. I do not know who is to blame....the event organizers have raised alot of money for disabled kids over many years and I know they would not wish harm on anyone.....the driver, maybe he should have used better judgement. All I know is it has been an eye opener for everyone.

This is quoted straight from the TN Code:



The areas in bold pretty much cover what this guy did. An accident would have been shutting it down at the 50 foot mark, getting squirlly, hitting the barriers (which were there at 50 feet), knocking the barrier into someone, and breaking their legs. A 100+ mph run down the street well past the barriers and designated burnout area is not an accident.

If your family member had been one of the ones killed, would it be just an accident?

Does it matter to you though or the law that he was asked to do this? Now personally I have seen nothing that proves he was asked to shut it down right away in any of the articles I read. Not saying he wasn't just that I haven't seen proof of that. Now from my understanding, he was told to do an exhibition burn out for the crowd. If any of you have ever been to an NHRA event, the burnouts are spectular and done for show as much as they are for heat in the tires. A burnout can cover several hundred feet in seconds, so if it really was a 50 foot barrier, the coordinators should also be charged with vehicular manslaughter for inviting a car that does several hundred foot burnouts naturally to do a burnout in an area that only has 50 feet of rail.

Expecting this car to do an exhibition burnout and keep it in a 50 foot area is absolutely ridiculous. The coordinators should be put on trial for manslaughter as well then, as their is no way that car was going to do a 50 foot burnout.

This is going to be interesting to see how this plays out, this is going to set a real standard. It already has. I think local car shows and events and parades are going to really suffer when it comes to insurance costs because of this accident.

Jeff

The video that was posted last summer is a different one than is being posted in the newer threads (as in different person/camera/angle). The one last year showed the old guy standing out in the road waving his arm up and down, like that's it shut it down. At which point the driver kept it on the floor and did what we've all seen by now.

I don't know the first thing about trans brakes or line locks, but a car with this power on a un-prepared street, couldn't he have just put one of these on and pretty much stayed in one place until the hides boiled off, or even the foot brake? Again, I know nothing about a car with this kind of power, just asking.

I have no problem putting it all on the driver. He's only been charged so far, the real interesting part will be how a jury sees it. Of course if he gets 12 of you guys sitting in the box, he'll be set.:D

I doubt any of that would work. A transbrake doesn't allow the tires to rotate, and their is no chance the front brakes were going to hold a car like that in position. This is why I say it was more than just the driver at fault here. At the very least, whoever contacted the team about coming to do this should have gotten real in-depth with the question asking. I would bet the driver would have told them if asked that the car was not going to and likely could not just sit in one place and do a burn out. This is a pro mod car for Gods sake, it is not your average street car doing a freakin' burnout. We're talking about several thousand horsepower in an extremely light weight chassis. Somebody should have known what this car could do, or should have asked. The ball was dropped prior to this car even getting to the event in my opinion.

Jeff

Of course if he gets 12 of you guys sitting in the box, he'll be set.:D

They call me "The Nullifier" :D

I have to agree with Jeff. To me, it seems that these organizers of this event didnt totally understand exactly what they were dealing with in regards to a extremely high horsepower race car and how the car(s) could react on the street.

They probably seen them on ESPN and felt, they go nice and straight when doing burnouts on the track, they can do the same thing on a regular street. Its a completely different environment.

This is quoted straight from the TN Code:



The areas in bold pretty much cover what this guy did. An accident would have been shutting it down at the 50 foot mark, getting squirlly, hitting the barriers (which were there at 50 feet), knocking the barrier into someone, and breaking their legs. A 100+ mph run down the street well past the barriers and designated burnout area is not an accident.

If your family member had been one of the ones killed, would it be just an accident?

Hey Brad !
With all do respect, we will just have to agree to dissagree on this one.
I understand your point and it's very clear as to what constitutes vehicular homicide in the section of the laws you posted.
My only point is that them laws do not hold water at an event such like the one taking place that day. because the car in question was allowed to do what he did, just as the people watching were allowed to stand where they were standing.
I hope my post didn't come off as targeting the police or event directers as the bad people here. I honestly don't think anyone was to blame for what happened, I still see it as an accident. But if they are going to start pointing fingers at the driver for what he could have done differently, then they better step back and take a look at the big picture including themselves. I am sure that there could have been a few ways to avoid such a tragity.
And just for the record, God for bid if a family member of mine had been there and been killed , I would still see this mess as an accident. I can say that from experience because I had a cousin pass away while hooked up on life support on December 25th 1980 from a situation similar to this.
I am not a person that says or thinks "That can't happen to me" because it has and it can again. I would like to think that my loved ones can walk on water and bad things cant happen to them, but it's simply not reality.
Please don't think I am coming off as attacking you Brad. I've seen and read many of your posts and think your a good dude. We just simply dissagree...... :beers:

Not only did this event ruin the lives of 6 (Killed) and 22 (hurt) that have to live with injuries, now the driver has to live with what happened and go to jail. I'd be surprised if he doesn't end up killing himself while in prison. Just think having the memories of the event and aftermath, and being in prison knowing you ruined your life, the lives of others, and your families because of all the lawsuits, etc. I do blame someone because everyone knows the crown on public streets with high horsepower cars is what caused him to go into the crowd, but someone should have stopped it before it happened. Could anybody live with this type of guilt?

Some want to lay the blame on the organizers since they should have known what a car like this is capable of? Perhaps, but why then don't you also want to lay blame with the driver who above all others present DID know the capabilities of the car? Of all people, he should have known what the car could do and also how ugly it could have gotten (and did) in such a situation. He personally exhibited a HUGE lapse in judgement since he was the only one with a foot on the throttle and hands on the wheel. A crowd of disappointed spectators is vastly better than a bunch of dead and injured spectators.

If you were at a car show and the organizers were encouraging you to do a smokey burnout while leaving and the street in front of you was strewn with spectators and their children what would you do? Hammer the throttle and then blame the mayhem on the guys who told you to do it? Whatever happened to personal responsibility? If someone hands you a loaded gun and then tells you to shoot the guy next to you and you do, who is to blame, you or the guy who told you to do it? Who pulled the trigger?

Yes, accidents happen. But in this case it was bad situation waiting to happen and the driver should have pulled the plug on the situation by recognizing the very likely potential disaster. If the car had broken and that failure cause the car to veer left and hit the crowd, that's an accident. This was caused by poor judgement, poor planning and a lack of consideration for what could very likely go wrong given the circumstances existing at that time and place.

Some want to lay the blame on the organizers since they should have known what a car like this is capable of? Perhaps, but why then don't you also want to lay blame with the driver who above all others present DID know the capabilities of the car? Of all people, he should have known what the car could do and also how ugly it could have gotten (and did) in such a situation. He personally exhibited a HUGE lapse in judgement since he was the only one with a foot on the throttle and hands on the wheel.

If you were at a car show and the organizers where encouraging you to do a smokey burnout while leaving and the street in front of you was strewn with spectators and their children what would you do? Hammer the throttle and then blame the mayhem on the guys who told you to do it? Whatever happened to personal responsibility?

Yes, accidents happen. But in this case it was an accident waiting to happen and the driver should have pulled the plug on the situation by recognizing the very likely potential disaster. If the car had broken and that failure cause the car to veer left and hit the crowd, that's an accident. This was caused by poor judgement, poor planning and a lack of consideration for what could very likely go wrong given the circumstances existing at that time and place.

But you are assuming he knew the spectators were standing unprotected where they were. I don't believe any of us actually know whether the driver knew people would be down there, and did he assume that after the police cars went through and checked it and gave him the go ahead that the spectators were safely positioned. If you have never ridden in a car like this, don't pass judgement until you have. Their is very little chance the driver could have even seen the spectators standing unprotected once that car got moving. Things happen extremely fast in these pro mods, and the guy is trained to watch what is down track and do his job, not look for spectators standing directly next to the track.

The organizors did fail right off the bat if they did not question what kind of car they are dealing with here. To unwittingly invite a car to do a burnout on a city street that they had no idea what it was capable of was negligent on their part as well.

I don't blame only the driver or only the organizors, I blame everybody that was involved in this accident. Everybody wears the weight of theis one on their shoulders. Yet only one is being charges with manslaughter for it. That to me is what is wrong with this.

Jeff

The driver doesn't have eyes in his head? He does have some responsibility for inspecting the area, the ENTIRE area he will need and if the folks in charge and the law enforcement present don't seem to be fully understanding what needs to be done to prepare for this, he should be the one to explain it to them. The crew on the car's team are culpable too, maybe as much as the driver himself.

You are right, lots of people own a portion of the blame, even including many of the spectators, but a fair share HAS to lie with the driver who among them all knew best the potential of the car and the dangers that should be accounted for in the environment he was working within.

The driver was an experienced professional. Common sense should have told him that he should keep within the cofines of the gaurdrailed area!

Jeff! Are you suggesting that the guy could be innocent becauce he, as a professional should not be responsible enough to walk the area and see the conditions and make sure that there are no safety issues he should know about? I don't think so!:noway:

I agree with most of that, but saying that the spectators are to blame is a matter of how you look at it. I'd say that just about everybody here on TC would think that it's a bad idea to stand too close to a charging Pro Mod, but what about those who don't even know what a Pro Mod is? I'm pretty sure that most of the spectators were simply not aware of the danger. If people are allowed to stand that close, they think it's ok to do it.

really ,now..

HOW MANY PEOPLE YOU THINK. DON'T KNOW..
NOT TO STAND /INFRONT OF.. A MOVING CAR....
PRO MOD OR ..GRANNY'S K CAR

AFTER THE POLICE told THEM TO

"STAND BACK< MOVE BACK<< BACK AWAY FROM EDGE OF ROADWAY"

maybe a 2-9 y/o kid, but otherwise>>>>>

The driver was an experienced professional. Common sense should have told him that he should keep within the cofines of the gaurdrailed area!
Jeff! Are you suggesting that the guy could be innocent becauce he, as a professional should not be responsible enough to walk the area and see the conditions and make sure that there are no safety issues he should know about? I don't think so!:noway:

This is how I feel...

The driver is responsible, not only because he was driving, and he chose to "perform" at that event, but as a professional, he should have known when to shut it down... he should have also walked the track prior to the event, and determined how long his burnout would be... He should look to the event staff as to when it is safe to procede, but HIS experience should tell him when to stop, even if event staff and spectators are encouraging more... And in this case, the event staff (or someone) was trying to motion to him to shut it down...

I think a true "accident" would have been IF the throttle stuck, and axle broke, he had a stroke, the car blew up, etc... In this case, it appears to be driver-error...

The Driver was in control of the car...


I think the event promotors should be liable, financially, but not criminally...

The spectators??? Give me a break... Did any or most of those people think he was going to come screaming by???

This is how I feel...

The driver is responsible, not only because he was driving, and he chose to "perform" at that event, but as a professional, he should have known when to shut it down... he should have also walked the track prior to the event, and determined how long his burnout would be... He should look to the event staff as to when it is safe to procede, but HIS experience should tell him when to stop, even if event staff and spectators are encouraging more... And in this case, the event staff (or someone) was trying to motion to him to shut it down...

I think a true "accident" would have been IF the throttle stuck, and axle broke, he had a stroke, the car blew up, etc... In this case, it appears to be driver-error...

The Driver was in control of the car...


I think the event promotors should be liable, financially, but not criminally...

The spectators??? Give me a break... Did any or most of those people think he was going to come screaming by???

Well if you carry that logic through, if it had been a stuck throttle, a broken axle, etc, you could just as easily say it's his fault for not thoroughly inspecting his equipment beforehand. 20/20 hindsight can point the finger at all kinds of different unforeseen factors. 20/20 foresight simply tells you it was an accident, nothing more.

Well if you carry that logic through, if it had been a stuck throttle, a broken axle, etc, you could just as easily say it's his fault for not thoroughly inspecting his equipment beforehand. 20/20 hindsight can point the finger at all kinds of different unforeseen factors. 20/20 foresight simply tells you it was an accident, nothing more.


YES

No, an "accident" is when something unlikely and/or unforeseen happens. "Negligence" is at play when someone doesn't take reasonable precautions to avoid reasonably likely death and destruction.

The driver was an experienced professional. Common sense should have told him that he should keep within the cofines of the gaurdrailed area!

Jeff! Are you suggesting that the guy could be innocent becauce he, as a professional should not be responsible enough to walk the area and see the conditions and make sure that there are no safety issues he should know about? I don't think so!:noway:

You obviously did not read the thread. No where did I say the driver is innocent, as a matter of fact I said quite the opposite. My feelings are he should not be charged with 6 counts of vehivcular manslaughter and nobody else gets anything from it. This entire incident had stupid written all over it, from the driver to the organizors to the spectators that thought it was fine to sit in an unprotected area.

This was an accident and nothing more. The driver did not jump in and say "well it's time to go kill 6 people". The fault lies with more than one person in this one. The organizors should not have had any burn outs going on in an area that only had 50 feet of guardrail to begin with. Hell I can go burn my tires well beyond 50 feet with my car. Anything could go wrong in that 50 foot area and launch my car out quite quickly. Go look at 50 feet, it is not much at all, considering a car is about 17-18 feet long.

How many of you actually believe a pro mod could do a burn out in a 50 foot area? If you do, I have some ocean front property in Nebraska I would like to offer you for sale. Considering a pro mod will go 60 feet in under 1 second, what do you think the driver saw? He cleared that 50 foot guardrail in under 1 second, their is no way possible he was going to nail the throttle, do even a small burnout and get back off the throttle in 50 feet. It just isn't going to happen, no way no how. This was a complete failure on the part of the driver, the team, and the event organizors for having no idea what they were doing.

Jeff

You all know this has been beat to death and I've said the driver should have NEVER started that car with that crowd that close. But, after seeing the video again and thinking about it AGAIN, I can see why he did it. He's a professional drag racer and he's confident in himself and he was over confident that day. I don't think he should be the only one punished, the whole crowd should be punished...that means, the cops, the parents, the race crew and the Mayor.

Here's my thoughts,

It's everyones fault,

1) The crowd should have been protected by barrier for the length of the intended burnout. Sponsors, fault.

2) The crowd should have known that there was no protection between themselves and the car. Crowd's fault, except kids. But I bet they were lulled into a false sense of security being a sponsored event and having a "professional driver" doing the stunt. Top it off there was no grand stands so you got people trying to see past teh person if front of them so you got the next person standing a little closer to teh road to see around the person in front. This is how we get people standing where they shouldn;t be. I'm sure if it was 2 kids lining up on a street to drag the fear of immenent danger would have been greater.

3) The crowd WAS not protected by barrier. Drivers fault. If he was a pro I'm sure he has burned out before and should know that while it's burning out the car is uncontrollable. The speed he took it too there was no way he resonable expect to gain control within the limited area he had if the back end started to come around.

The act of sliding into the crowd was unintended by the but the actions (driver) and failure to provide (sponsors) and take (crowd) adequate safety precautions led to the accident.

He was charged with homicide but when the smoke settles he will most likely be convicted of involuntary or voluntary manslaughter.

My feelings are he should not be charged with 6 counts of vehivcular manslaughter and nobody else gets anything from it. This entire incident had stupid written all over it, from the driver to the organizors to the spectators that thought it was fine to sit in an unprotected area.

Did the spectators KNOW the car was supposed to continue on at high speed? Did they know it was supposed to be under power after the 50-foot guardrails?

While I do feel that "6 counts" may be too much, it really remains to be seen exactly what the sentance will be (if there is a conviction)... I think the 20-something counts of "aggrivated assault" is a little too much...

I do not think the "promotors" should be criminally liable, UNLESS they wanted him to burnout that entire length (was there a contract? was there a length or time requirement to fulfill that obligation?)... But, regardless, unless the event staff knew he was going to go as far as he did, I don't think its a criminal issue for them...

No, an "accident" is when something unlikely and/or unforeseen happens. "Negligence" is at play when someone doesn't take reasonable precautions to avoid reasonably likely death and destruction.

I agree, even if he thoroughly inspected every thing on the car, stuff can still break, etc... There would be no negligence if he did everything to try to ensure the safety of everybody within the limits of the event...

Sure, he didn't mean to hurt anybody, so it was technically an "accident" by that definition of the word...

BUT, I agree with Rich... It was through his negligence, his poor judgement that seems to be at fault here (I didn't hear the driver mention the throttle sticking, etc.)...

So while it was a tragic accident that happened, the burnout still could have been accomplished by the same car and driver, and most likely NOT hurt anyone, if only the driver shut down earlier...

Its specualtion right now, but the point is, the driver was in control of how long his burnout was... He could have shut down earlier... He KNEW that by continuing past the guardrail, that there was a risk of hurting spectators...


Give him the chair!!! just kidding... :D

No, an "accident" is when something unlikely and/or unforeseen happens. "Negligence" is at play when someone doesn't take reasonable precautions to avoid reasonably likely death and destruction.

OK, so did the police and organizers take "reasonable" precautions by simply asking the spectators to move back? Or didn't they? If not, why are they not being charged with negligence? They were the ones in charge of crowd control. Would a barrier between the road and the spectators have been a reasonable precaution? They have barriers between the strip and spectators, and yet, people are still killed from time to time at drag racing events. Is that not an accident when that happens? Should the driver of any dragster and any event be charged with homicide if a crash causes a death? Why don't the drivers scout the drag strip before making a pass to make sure it's safe? I'll answer that - because they have been assured by the organizers that everything is safe.

Let me ask you another question. Suppose you organize a birthday party for a bunch of people and you have a pinata. Everyone gets a whack at the pinata, but one person winds up, misses, and beans someone else with the stick and sends him to the hospital. I would call that an unfortunate accident. But if you must blame someone, who's at fault? You for organizing the event, the guy who swung the stick, or the guy who got hit for standing too close? You can't really pin the blame on any one person - there were a lot of factors involved and a change in any one would have avoided the incident.

You can't do everything. Sometimes you have to rely on other people to do their jobs.

I was not going to comment on this but after watching the video I am.
I don't see how anyone could think that would be safe. (especially the driver) I think he stayed in it WAAAYYY to long although it sounds like he gets out of it right about where the video is shot but at that point he had too much speed and was just a passenger at that point.
I agree he is at fault in this tragedy but I obvously don't think he did it on purpose. VERY bad judgement on his part.
We used to have burnout contest in town here and if any driver moved at all from where he was sitting he was banned from any participation for good, No excuses.

Sad deal.

LK

I'm not saying the driver is solely responsible, but he WAS the one who in the end pulled the trigger now wasn't he? And "manslaughter" does NOT contain an element of INTENT. If there was intent it is homicide, not manslaughter. Manslaughter is about negligence or at least "not taking reasonable precautions".

Situations like this are rarely caused by a single act of stupidity and plenty of stupidity was present that day provided by the organizers, the law enforcement and the "entertainment" providers. Blame them all, only makes sense, but don't try to let the driver off scott free by calling it an accident and simply saying "poop happens" because this "poop" could have been avoided by the the guy holding the gun refusing to pull the trigger because it just wasn't safe to do so.

Similarly, if I'm driving on an icy road at 80MPH and slide off the road, cross the median and kill Daddy, Mommy, little Betsy and little Johnny in the minivan going the other way you can darn well expect I'd be charged with vehicular manslaughter because I didn't take reasonable precautions given the driving conditions to avoid such a tragedy and making the situation worse or at least inevitable by driving too fast. If I drink and drive and kill the same folks, I again am responsible because I didn't find an alternate way to get home while I was impared.

You can't deny that the driver WAS responsible and WAS negligent. Regardless of whomever else may have been part of creating the situation, the driver is still responsible.

Suppose you organize a birthday party for a bunch of people and you have a pinata. Everyone gets a whack at the pinata, but one person winds up, misses, and beans someone else with the stick and sends him to the hospital.

So swinging a bat at a pinata is as dangerous and standing next to street that has a speeding car coming your way that is not totally under control?

So swinging a bat at a pinata is as dangerous and standing next to street that has a speeding car coming your way that is not totally under control?

obviously you missed the point of the analogy

Similarly, if I'm driving on an icy road at 80MPH and slide off the road, cross the median and kill Daddy, Mommy, little Betsy and little Johnny in the minivan going the other way you can darn well expect I'd be charged with vehicular manslaughter because I didn't take reasonable precautions given the driving conditions to avoid such a tragedy and making the situation worse or at least inevitable by driving too fast. If I drink and drive and kill the same folks, I again am responsible because I didn't find an alternate way to get home while I was impared.

You can't deny that the driver WAS responsible and WAS negligent. Regardless of whomever else may have been part of creating the situation, the driver is still responsible.

Maybe in Nebraska, but surely not in Wisconsin, sadl;y this scenario happens at least a few time severy winter where someone will hit ice cross the median and into oncoming traffic. Unless the driver has been drinking or is otherwise impaired, he will not be charged with vehicular manslaughter. Typically itwinds up as too fast for conditions, which is a minor traffic offense.

I don't think anybody is denying the driver is at fault, the issue at hand is he is not solely at fault. That being the case, being charged with 6 counts of vehicular manslaughter is just plain wrong if nobody else is charged with anything else. If he is the only one charged, that to me says he is the only one at fault, which he is not. The organizors and the police failed just as much as the driver did by putting on a burnout show with only 50 feet of guardrail and open ends. Anything could have gone wrong, and with such little amount of guardrail and nothing to stop an out of control car, they failed. They failed in their planning, and as such should be held just as liable as the driver was in my opinion.

Jeff

obviously you missed the point of the analogy

I thought it was an excellent analogy. Simply changing any of the events in the situation could have dramatically changed the outcome.

Jeff

really ,now..

HOW MANY PEOPLE YOU THINK. DON'T KNOW..
NOT TO STAND /INFRONT OF.. A MOVING CAR....
PRO MOD OR ..GRANNY'S K CAR

And how many people do you see standing in front of the car? :confused: I see one (possibly one of the organizers, making sure that people stay away from the street), the rest of them are all lined up along the side of a wide, 4-lane street. Surely enough, granny's K car can hit you on a sidewalk too, but that doesn't mean that you stay off the sidewalks does it?

Anyway, you're missing my point totally: People didn't anticipate the speed and how easily a car like that can get out of control. Try to explain this and the importance of track conditions to Joe Blow who has never seen anything hotter than a bone stock Mustang, and you'll probably just get a blank stare.

Hey Brad !
With all do respect, we will just have to agree to dissagree on this one.

Please don't think I am coming off as attacking you Brad. I've seen and read many of your posts and think your a good dude. We just simply dissagree...... :beers:

Joe, no offense taken or feeling of being attacked here. There are plenty of guys who disagree with me on this one.:D

I can agree with you all that there were numerous things that could have been done differently as far as safety of the event and by the organizers and officers. They set it up the way it was though, and the driver of this car could see exactly what was in front of him before he did the burnout. There was a windshield on the car, right?:D He knew what he had to work with and how hard to push it, he pushed too far.

I do feel very bad for the driver because I'm sure he had no intentions of this happening and now he has to live with it, however it turns out in court.

And who says they are done filing charges? You can certainly expect civil suits to be filed against the driver, the organizers and law enforcement who was present.

I guess I don't agree whatsoever with the driver being the only one to accept blame. Everybody involved with this tragedy is responsible for what happened. The driver and team, the police, the event coordinators, even the spectators who put themselves in harms way all should accept the responsibility of what happened.

Jeff


How the hell the police and event coordinators have esacped blame is WAY beyond my comprehension. Why were the people so close to the car? Who planned that?

If someone stood infront of a dyno, and the car broke free, does the driver get arrested for vehicular homicide?

I'm not sure how anyone who has viewed the video that Gibbons posted, or the one I've posted before, could think that the driver bears no responsibility for this *accident*

Good gawd, that was a practically a full on competition burnout. He blew right past one of the event people who was at the dead man's point where all burnout cars were to have been completely shutdown - instead he still had the hammer down!

The reason why the police and others haven't been charged (yet) is simple: it seems clear that the driver was showboating and giving an ego driven "thrill of a lifetime" to the crowd. Whatever you might want to say about the local police in Tennesee, it is doubtful that they had cleared the road for unbarricaded 100 mph exhibition passes, cmon guys.

Thomas

Just an observation , but it always seems in cases of questionable responsibility . a criminal case is tried before the wave of civil suits that will certainly follow.

By launching a criminal charge the state (government) will try to distance themselves from any responsibility. I am sure the legal eagles would pray for a conviction, so then the civil damage judgements would be enormous.

My personal opinion......It was a terrible accident but there were professional people involved that should have understood the risk of their folly. The police, civic leadership and the car operators should all face civil not criminal penalties.

So Charlie, when a pro driver is doing an exhibition and given the lay of the land: where to line up, where to shut off, etc. And that pro driver decides on his own that he can/should do a massive competition burnout instead - that somehow the other "professionals" involved in the event should be held somewhat responsible for his rogue decision? So now the event organizers and local police should have anticipated the pro driver would be an idiot who couldn't tell the difference between this venue and a regulation dragstrip?

In the vids you can see the official at the dead man's point helplessly waving at the car to shut down as it blasts right past at W.O.T.

Thomas

Hi Thomas,

I don't disagree with you but the fact of the matter is that this event should not have been allowed to have taken place, period. It is a city street not a dragstrip. To the defense of the guy that did the damage, he probably thought everything was in control because the police and city were sanctioning the event. You are right, he should have loaded his car when he seen the environment.

Obviously the courts will have the best chance of convicting the driver. That said, once the trial details are on record , the civil trial(s) will go after anyone that may have had some responsibility. Civil law can name more than one defendant and go after proportional responsibility.

The criminal case, if successful will lessen the exposure of the other parties that may be named in a civil case. That was my point.

The guy waving is a mute point. The judge will just consider "who should have known better". The people I named will definitely be named in the suits that follow. IMHO.

Bottom line is that this affected a lot of people in a tragic way and was completely unnecessary.

Charlie

Check these out, I guess this was his way of doing burnouts but it doesn't mean he should have done it on a city street. The first one looks like a full out pass that the tires broke loose on, sound familiar. The second one is a pretty normal burnout, which would have been more appropriate. Both cool vids with some good camera angles, the rear facing camera, man those guys disappear in a hurry.

YouTube - Troy Critchley Outlaw Pro Mod Cuda Rear Wing Cam

YouTube - Troy Critchley Rooftop Cam @ Dragstock III

Bottom line is that this affected a lot of people in a tragic way and was completely unnecessary.

Very well put, that's really what it boils down to.

I doubt that any juror would think that the guy waving is a mute point.

If I were a juror, I think I would feel that that guy was one of the people helping the promotion/display and was trying to tell the driver where he was supposed to have shut it down and the driver simply didn't do as he was told.
It appears that he took it upon himself to do more.

But who knows :confused:

Oh good grief, I give up. Apparently no one is responsible for their individual actions if there are *officials* present.

So let's play this out:
1) Why station an *official* at a dead man's point if indeed the plan from everybody involved was to do a full on competition burnout?
2) Why would an *official* place himself out on the street if he knew the car was going to blast right on by?
3) Why would the *official* be madly waving his arms at the approaching car to have it shut down?
4) Now let's say that the driver somehow "didn't know" about the dead man's point - which would mean the "professional" driver wasn't being very professional.
5) Which means the professional race driver was being careless - and stupid.
6) Or that he believes guard rails and spectator barricades to be unneccesary for 100 mph speeds.

He was clearly showing off - and the actions of the *officials* show that it was not planned that way. I wouldn't want to be in court if he makes any statement about unexpected road conditions either - like that he was somehow not aware in all his years of racing that previous spills and other road defects could cause driver control problems. He thought he could do it, he was wrong. The *officials* had in fact cleared the road way beyond where the car was expected to be under power - what they hadn't counted on was the driver's decision to really put on a show.

Thomas

He blew right past one of the event people who was at the dead man's point where all burnout cars were to have been completely shutdown - instead he still had the hammer down!

The reason why the police and others haven't been charged (yet) is simple: it seems clear that the driver was showboating and giving an ego driven "thrill of a lifetime" to the crowd. Whatever you might want to say about the local police in Tennesee, it is doubtful that they had cleared the road for unbarricaded 100 mph exhibition passes, cmon guys.

Thomas
The only person I see in the vid (other than the ones behind the guard rail) is a man in coveralls and a tee shirt. If you listen to the vid. You can hear the driver let off shortly after passing him (not "blow by him, Hammer down"). The car went out of control after he let off.
As for the police NOT clearing the road for a "un-barricaded 100mph exhibition pass". Unlike the spectators, They were fully aware of the power, speed and potential danger of this type of thing.

when a pro driver is doing an exhibition and given the lay of the land: where to line up, where to shut off, etc. And that pro driver decides on his own that he can/should do a massive competition burnout instead - that somehow the other "professionals" involved in the event should be held somewhat responsible for his rogue decision? So now the event organizers and local police should have anticipated the pro driver would be an idiot who couldn't tell the difference between this venue and a regulation dragstrip?

In the vids you can see the official at the dead man's point helplessly waving at the car to shut down as it blasts right past at W.O.T.

Thomas

I can't comprehend your first statement. You say that the "organizers" (who were fully aware of the dangers involved) couldn't have anticipated this. Yet, from a 15sec. video, You can tell that the driver "intentionally" disobeyed everything he was told and "blast past at W.O.T." this point that you have decided was the shut down point.

In the vid, I can clearly see a guy in coveralls, put his right arm out as the car passes, Then shield his eyes with his left hand to look down the road.
No frantic waving,

I do feel that he (along with others) used poor judgment. But I do not feel that his actions (that I can see in that 15sec. video) constitutes "criminal negligence".

Apparently no one is responsible for their individual actions if there are *officials* present.

I do not write the laws. As I said, I do not disagree with you but the legal system will look at the case as you suggest. The driver was indeed showing off .....iis that an exception? What do racers do?

I am not the judge but let that person judge the outcome. None of us have all the facts and a couple of low res videos will not decide. They may influence but not decide. Who know's maybe the driver wanted to opt out but his contract but the city would not let him. We do not know the facts so it would be improprer to condemd the guy.

Charlie

...................None of us have all the facts ...........................

That is true Charlie.
Good thing we're not the jurors.

Thomas,

With all due respect , you are missing my point. I am not stating that the driver was not negligent.....I think he was.

I am staing simple legal facts which go beyond observations you or I make. While the waving guy is a factor , good litigation will go back to the point of why this even happened.

I think we generally agree but my point is that the criminal case is the set up for the civils that will come.

Charlie