Brian2by2 said:
More than the old beetle, which had a spare tire and a 10-gallon fuel tank.
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
manslaughter charge for nsx modifications
- Thread starter riffraff
- Start date
More than the old beetle, which had a spare tire and a 10-gallon fuel tank.
Keeping in mind that the article does not mention curves (blind or otherwise) in stating that he crossed to the other side of the highway...myf16 said:
I think it's pretty basic common sense that you can only count on the other side of the road being clear for the distance you can see. The assumption in driving should be that there can be a car just out of sight, moving in your direction. If you have to cross over to the other side for whatever reason (fun, obstacle avoidance, etc), you should do so only when your line of sight says that you will have enough time to get back over to your side of the road before unseen oncoming traffic can arrive. Again, common sense.
As for our criminal justice system, variations in the severity of treatment happen all the time - celebrities vs common folks, rich vs poor, black vs white, repeat offenders vs first timers, those that the prosecution wants to "make a public example of", whether an accused is someone sympathetic to a jury, etc. Some of those variations are easy to justify, and some aren't. They say that "justice is blind" but there are lots of shades of gray.
tucsonsx said:
a) Any type of sports car group drive.
b) Driver error, exceeding the limits of the car (e.g., car is less capable than the cars ahead) or erratic inputs.
If you have radio communication with cars ahead, this should be the only type of surprise you encounter. It is very, very rare, but if you see the driver in front of you braking more than once per turn or otherwise exhibiting inexperience, back way off and advise him to slow down and smooth it out.
The only really nasty surprise I've faced was on a solo drive when an oncoming motorcyclist decided to use my lane as his high-G apex. He somehow kept from falling and my ABS saved his *ss and my car. Had there been a collision, I supposed the cops could have charged assisted suicide.
True - but only if the cars ahead warn of every oncoming vehicle, and if the channel is otherwise kept clear for that purpose.myf16 said:
NSX-Racer said:
I am not sure what you meant by "my car broke out during breaking" but if you had to brake hard and your car started sliding and hit another car than you are definitly at fault and should of received a ticket. If you car would of crossed the centerline and killed another driver I think you also would of been arrested for vehicular manslaughter.
He without sin...
...is Jesus.
If you've never went over the posted speed (even 1 MPH is illegal), never accelerated quickly from a corner (officer discretion here) never passed on a two lane when there wasn't enough room except for your right foot, never flung the car around a corner at speed because it feels good - then I'll start praying to you.
It's all WRONG in the eyes of the overly subjective law, and a lot of holier than thou types that see a sports car and think its driving recklessly.
For the record, these wild claims of "irresponsible driving" at XPO 03 would be because of my comment about how I chose to cut a couple corners and get on the gas at times. My choice, not demanded of the event, it was fun and I'd do it again in a minute. Back off on the overblown rhetoric.
Anybody here drive near the back of the group coming from Comptech to the Napa Valley Grille? Any of you travel UNDER 90 MPH? (CHP escort not withstanding). What if a tire would have blown? What if one of those cars we passed to our right would have veered into our lane? Exactly.
Safe speed? Doesn't exist. Safe driving? A myth perpetrated by the odds - "It hasn't happened to me yet so it won't." Backing out of your driveway puts you into an area where the slightest screw up on the part of you, your equipment or someone around you can take your life. We take a calculated risk by driving, a little higher risk driving "spirited" and at no time are we safe - ever.
Consequences should be there for making mistakes for sure, but I tend to believe the arbitrary speed limits are made for me (and just about everyone else) to wave at as we go by. If that gets a person in over their head then off they go; hospital, jail, morgue, wherever. I can live with that.
If an out of control car comes my way and I can't avoid it because I'm not paying attention, then I deserve a little of the blame just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
-Ed
www.nsxbuilder.com
...is Jesus.
If you've never went over the posted speed (even 1 MPH is illegal), never accelerated quickly from a corner (officer discretion here) never passed on a two lane when there wasn't enough room except for your right foot, never flung the car around a corner at speed because it feels good - then I'll start praying to you.
It's all WRONG in the eyes of the overly subjective law, and a lot of holier than thou types that see a sports car and think its driving recklessly.
For the record, these wild claims of "irresponsible driving" at XPO 03 would be because of my comment about how I chose to cut a couple corners and get on the gas at times. My choice, not demanded of the event, it was fun and I'd do it again in a minute. Back off on the overblown rhetoric.
Anybody here drive near the back of the group coming from Comptech to the Napa Valley Grille? Any of you travel UNDER 90 MPH? (CHP escort not withstanding). What if a tire would have blown? What if one of those cars we passed to our right would have veered into our lane? Exactly.
Safe speed? Doesn't exist. Safe driving? A myth perpetrated by the odds - "It hasn't happened to me yet so it won't." Backing out of your driveway puts you into an area where the slightest screw up on the part of you, your equipment or someone around you can take your life. We take a calculated risk by driving, a little higher risk driving "spirited" and at no time are we safe - ever.
Consequences should be there for making mistakes for sure, but I tend to believe the arbitrary speed limits are made for me (and just about everyone else) to wave at as we go by. If that gets a person in over their head then off they go; hospital, jail, morgue, wherever. I can live with that.
If an out of control car comes my way and I can't avoid it because I'm not paying attention, then I deserve a little of the blame just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
-Ed
www.nsxbuilder.com
Re: He without sin...
Ed,
I'm not sure whether you're referring to the driving at NSXPO 2003 (you do mention that) or the specific incident in the article (probably not, since speeding isn't even mentioned in the article).
I don't think anyone here has posted any lectures that say "never speed" or "never cross over the center line"; even though both of those activities are illegal, most of us do one or the other at least once in a while.
However, the group drives that were part of NSXPO 2003 were controlled and organized to be safe - yes, even the part when our police escort led us on the interstate at illegal speeds (which did not reach 90 at my part of the convoy, BTW). I doubt that anyone was referring to that part. The OTHER group drives - not the ones on the interstate - should not have been held at speeds that required crossing over to the other side of the road, and Keith's post sounds like they were not. If that is not the case, and the speeds were that fast, please say so - because if so, then perhaps we should be discontinue group drives at NSXPO altogether. Any OTHER drives, that were not part of the formal group, were on your own, and the club has no responsibility for your driving.
I'm sure you agree that no one should cross over the center line unless they have enough knowledge of opposite-direction traffic (either within sight or reported by radio) to be certain that there will be none during their time crossing over...
Ed,
I'm not sure whether you're referring to the driving at NSXPO 2003 (you do mention that) or the specific incident in the article (probably not, since speeding isn't even mentioned in the article).
I don't think anyone here has posted any lectures that say "never speed" or "never cross over the center line"; even though both of those activities are illegal, most of us do one or the other at least once in a while.
However, the group drives that were part of NSXPO 2003 were controlled and organized to be safe - yes, even the part when our police escort led us on the interstate at illegal speeds (which did not reach 90 at my part of the convoy, BTW). I doubt that anyone was referring to that part. The OTHER group drives - not the ones on the interstate - should not have been held at speeds that required crossing over to the other side of the road, and Keith's post sounds like they were not. If that is not the case, and the speeds were that fast, please say so - because if so, then perhaps we should be discontinue group drives at NSXPO altogether. Any OTHER drives, that were not part of the formal group, were on your own, and the club has no responsibility for your driving.
I'm sure you agree that no one should cross over the center line unless they have enough knowledge of opposite-direction traffic (either within sight or reported by radio) to be certain that there will be none during their time crossing over...
The "absolutely moronic " driving that I referred to in my original post on this thread did NOT involve the short country drive that I participated in at the NSXPO; it was fairly low risk in my opinion ( carefully chosen route, experienced leader, radios, etc.) . I did not see any cars sliding; if I had I probably would have made an issue of it. It referred to driving on the freeeway by some people in NSXs that thought that the other cars on the road were pylons in a slalom. For all I know they may not have even been participants in the NSXPO - the NSXPO was mentioned merely because it is the only time I've seen so many NSXs on the road ( that is why I referred to the NSX community - which to me is everybody who drives an NSX - not NSXPO participants ).
Maybe I'm just getting old, but sometimes I reflect on some of the " absolutely moronic " driving that I have done in the past and am incredibly grateful that nothing terrible happened. I never meant to imply a holier than thou attitude - I do indeed drive my NSX in a spirited manner from time to time, BUT I do make an effort to choose the time and place carefully.
My only point really was to have everyone really appreciate the wisdom of Mikec's original post.
Maybe I'm just getting old, but sometimes I reflect on some of the " absolutely moronic " driving that I have done in the past and am incredibly grateful that nothing terrible happened. I never meant to imply a holier than thou attitude - I do indeed drive my NSX in a spirited manner from time to time, BUT I do make an effort to choose the time and place carefully.
My only point really was to have everyone really appreciate the wisdom of Mikec's original post.
- Joined
- 3 February 2000
- Messages
- 3,942
For anyone interested, somebody e-mailed me the obituary for the man who was killed in this crash:
Charlie Cutten
Charlie Cutten, 55, a Stanford University graduate and well-known figure on the Northern California acoustic music scene, died April 12.
Born August 1948 in San Jose, he was a third generation Californian. He attended Daves Avenue Elementary School in Los Gatos and high school at Punahou in Honolulu, graduating from Western Reserve Academy in Hudson, Ohio.
He was a 1970 graduate of Stanford University. He is survived by his mother, Pauline E. Burch; his father, Merritt E. Cutten; brothers, Merritt B. Cutten and Bill Bancroft; sisters, Merlene Cutten Davis, Mary Bancroft Robins and Toni Bancroft; nieces and nephews, Ted and Max Davis, Sam and Sara Bancroft, Amy and Ben Cutten; and sweetheart, Kara Dworak.
Memorial donations may be made to the Charlie Cutten Music Scholarship at the California Coast Music Camp, P.O. Box 60875, Palo Alto, CA 94306. To celebrate his life, please visit his Web site at http://www.charliecutten.com
Charlie Cutten
Charlie Cutten, 55, a Stanford University graduate and well-known figure on the Northern California acoustic music scene, died April 12.
Born August 1948 in San Jose, he was a third generation Californian. He attended Daves Avenue Elementary School in Los Gatos and high school at Punahou in Honolulu, graduating from Western Reserve Academy in Hudson, Ohio.
He was a 1970 graduate of Stanford University. He is survived by his mother, Pauline E. Burch; his father, Merritt E. Cutten; brothers, Merritt B. Cutten and Bill Bancroft; sisters, Merlene Cutten Davis, Mary Bancroft Robins and Toni Bancroft; nieces and nephews, Ted and Max Davis, Sam and Sara Bancroft, Amy and Ben Cutten; and sweetheart, Kara Dworak.
Memorial donations may be made to the Charlie Cutten Music Scholarship at the California Coast Music Camp, P.O. Box 60875, Palo Alto, CA 94306. To celebrate his life, please visit his Web site at http://www.charliecutten.com
- Joined
- 3 June 2004
- Messages
- 1
Accident Update
It is to be noted that the cause of the accident was due to Mr. Rienecker's (NSX driver) brakes failing. Mr. Rienecker wasn't speeding, nor was he trying to pass anyone. He is currently in a wheelchair, facing many months, maybe years of recovery.
It is to be noted that the cause of the accident was due to Mr. Rienecker's (NSX driver) brakes failing. Mr. Rienecker wasn't speeding, nor was he trying to pass anyone. He is currently in a wheelchair, facing many months, maybe years of recovery.
- Joined
- 14 April 2002
- Messages
- 2,273
Re: Accident Update
OK - this has to be the oddest first post in the history of prime!
First - welcome to NSXPrime. I hope if you have an interest in the NSX you find this a welcome home on the Internet
Second - who are you?
Third - what is your connection to this?
Fourth - how did you come to determine the brakes failed?
Fifth - how do you know the driver was not speeding (or presumably breaking other laws)?
No offence but you made a very short, direct, and difinative post and people naturally want to know what is going on.
rhinothree said:
OK - this has to be the oddest first post in the history of prime!
First - welcome to NSXPrime. I hope if you have an interest in the NSX you find this a welcome home on the Internet
Second - who are you?
Third - what is your connection to this?
Fourth - how did you come to determine the brakes failed?
Fifth - how do you know the driver was not speeding (or presumably breaking other laws)?
No offence but you made a very short, direct, and difinative post and people naturally want to know what is going on.
I guess it is time for me to pipe up
As a guy who has investigated about a dozen or so fatal accidents (and ~1500 lesser ones) , I'd like to share a few of my experiences. And knowing nothing other than the very unfortunate circumstance of "modified NSX crosses over center lane divider, collides with oncoming vehicle and killing that driver"
Failing brakes is very difficult to prove post facto, if the condition of the vehicle is severly destroyed. I have seen too many accidents where the driver bluntly states that his "brakes failed" and there are 250-400 feet of 4-wheel locked skids to the point of impact. They <b>truly believe</b> this has happened, in their defense your mind can play harsh tricks under severe stress and trama. It is doubtful the brakes failed.
It is a misdemeanor to kill somebody by pure accident (with vehicles and public roadway). If the person at fault (P-1) committed an infraction that was germane to the collision, s/he should be expecting to get arrested and booked.
Law enforcement officers do not get much credit for lowly misdemeanor bookings. So they stretch every angle to make it a felony crime. To make this crime a felony you must either have intent or be under the influence. Since you are legally under arrest the specific charge is pretty much pointless to the court, but it makes a big different to the officer and the P-1.
It is unlikely that the district attorney can use the "modified vehicle" as an indicator of the general intent of reckless behavior. Unless there is a lot more to the situation, the case will then be FILED as a misdemeanor (extremely likely). By then the damage has been done: P-1 has been booked as a felon, had elevated bail and was in the general population of hard core idiots.
Why arrest somebody in the first place? Pretty much SOP. The best I can figure out is that it gets the subject out of the area and away from the scene. It also allows the detectives a chance to talk to the subject and compare subject to information systems at the station--very little of which is available in the field. For crimes where the subject is going to be OR'd (very likely), I just don't see the point at all.
Expecially in these days of revolving jail doors (about 10 years ago the LASD would charge the local PD $136 for each booking number it issued and more if the LASD were required to transport or house the individual). That is why so many municipal PDs have their own jails: it is cheaper than county jails and they can let inmates out rather than get charged service fees from the County. Personally, I think a "field release booking" (the subject is printed, photographed and released in the field) is a good way to go, it might become a reality if the budget crisis keeps going.
Some vehicle modifications are illegal under the vague sections of 24002 VC and 24004 VC and woe to the driver who gets cited for one of these sections and later kills somebody---IMHO you had better plead out 'cause you are going down. But 24002 VC is used for suspension modifications: like idiots who put their car too high (warped center of gravity) or too low (no suspension travel).
In CA, it is not illegal to drive 1 mph over the posted speed limit, unless that speed limit is 55 MPH (or 65 MPH). The posted speed is for average conditions only, believe me you can get a ticket for going the posted speed limit in poor conditions. If the conditions are exceptional: no traffic or peds, straight road, no obstructions, etc...you can successfully argue going faster and if articulated properly: the court will buy off on it. The commonly cited 22350 VC "Unsafe Speed" does not say anything about posted speed at all, it IS used to calcuate the fine. The Maximum Speed Law, 22349 VC, states that it IS illegal to go over 55 or 65 MPH even a little.
Sounds like everybody is a victim in this incident. My heart goes out to them and their familes. Gawd, stuff like this used to really get to me.
Drew
As a guy who has investigated about a dozen or so fatal accidents (and ~1500 lesser ones) , I'd like to share a few of my experiences. And knowing nothing other than the very unfortunate circumstance of "modified NSX crosses over center lane divider, collides with oncoming vehicle and killing that driver"
Failing brakes is very difficult to prove post facto, if the condition of the vehicle is severly destroyed. I have seen too many accidents where the driver bluntly states that his "brakes failed" and there are 250-400 feet of 4-wheel locked skids to the point of impact. They <b>truly believe</b> this has happened, in their defense your mind can play harsh tricks under severe stress and trama. It is doubtful the brakes failed.
It is a misdemeanor to kill somebody by pure accident (with vehicles and public roadway). If the person at fault (P-1) committed an infraction that was germane to the collision, s/he should be expecting to get arrested and booked.
Law enforcement officers do not get much credit for lowly misdemeanor bookings. So they stretch every angle to make it a felony crime. To make this crime a felony you must either have intent or be under the influence. Since you are legally under arrest the specific charge is pretty much pointless to the court, but it makes a big different to the officer and the P-1.
It is unlikely that the district attorney can use the "modified vehicle" as an indicator of the general intent of reckless behavior. Unless there is a lot more to the situation, the case will then be FILED as a misdemeanor (extremely likely). By then the damage has been done: P-1 has been booked as a felon, had elevated bail and was in the general population of hard core idiots.
Why arrest somebody in the first place? Pretty much SOP. The best I can figure out is that it gets the subject out of the area and away from the scene. It also allows the detectives a chance to talk to the subject and compare subject to information systems at the station--very little of which is available in the field. For crimes where the subject is going to be OR'd (very likely), I just don't see the point at all.
Expecially in these days of revolving jail doors (about 10 years ago the LASD would charge the local PD $136 for each booking number it issued and more if the LASD were required to transport or house the individual). That is why so many municipal PDs have their own jails: it is cheaper than county jails and they can let inmates out rather than get charged service fees from the County. Personally, I think a "field release booking" (the subject is printed, photographed and released in the field) is a good way to go, it might become a reality if the budget crisis keeps going.
Some vehicle modifications are illegal under the vague sections of 24002 VC and 24004 VC and woe to the driver who gets cited for one of these sections and later kills somebody---IMHO you had better plead out 'cause you are going down. But 24002 VC is used for suspension modifications: like idiots who put their car too high (warped center of gravity) or too low (no suspension travel).
In CA, it is not illegal to drive 1 mph over the posted speed limit, unless that speed limit is 55 MPH (or 65 MPH). The posted speed is for average conditions only, believe me you can get a ticket for going the posted speed limit in poor conditions. If the conditions are exceptional: no traffic or peds, straight road, no obstructions, etc...you can successfully argue going faster and if articulated properly: the court will buy off on it. The commonly cited 22350 VC "Unsafe Speed" does not say anything about posted speed at all, it IS used to calcuate the fine. The Maximum Speed Law, 22349 VC, states that it IS illegal to go over 55 or 65 MPH even a little.
Sounds like everybody is a victim in this incident. My heart goes out to them and their familes. Gawd, stuff like this used to really get to me.
Drew
Last edited:
drew,
Your post was fascinating - thanks for piping up. You have insider knowledge way beyond 99% of us. This may be beyond your scope, but do you know of any manufacturer or installer being involved in litigation due to vehicle modifications on cars later involved in situations such as this?
Your post was fascinating - thanks for piping up. You have insider knowledge way beyond 99% of us. This may be beyond your scope, but do you know of any manufacturer or installer being involved in litigation due to vehicle modifications on cars later involved in situations such as this?
Well since you are asking for my personal experience, I think it would be within my scope. Since most of my collision investigation was well over a decade ago, it is safe to assume that nothing I was a part of actually made it to the Federal or any appeals court (which is where presumably any ground breaking or high value case would land).
Either via court or transcripts, I have only seen testamony elicited from the defendant on his prior actions, prior statements made and condition of his vehicle (modifications and maintenance).
It is interesting to note that any airbag equipped vehicle has a short term 5 second datalogger for vehicle speed and impact severity. If you think about how an airbag must deploy, it must know about the past history of the car.
I've not been a part of this information being used in court. But it can be quite damning. Example:http://www.crashdatainfo.com/index.html
Almost makes me want to know exactly where my airbag computer is so I can remove it upon a crash that I may potentially be at fault. I've already decided that if I crash my NSX, I'm having it towed home and dumped....and not taken to a yard. But that doesn't help any if the police decide they want the car for evidence.
Maybe Zublin can make a SmartBag option that clears the airbag computer CMOS when power is lost. Just might keep you out of jail!
Last edited:
After digesting that mindblowing piece of information my next question to drew or anyone else out there is - Does anyone know of any aftermarket manufacturer, retailer, or installer of " speed " equipment being involved in litigation similar to what the gun manufacturers are now going through?
drew said:
I have been reading about some data logging that is on modern vehicles and it is getting REALLY big brother ish with airbag computers, onstar, engine managment systems, etc. I took my BMW into the dealer for service, and noticed a used M3 on the lot. It looked great, and I asked the service manager about it. He has developed into a friend over time and said:
'you don't want that one' - most of our used M3s are driven REALLY hard. That one was too. I can tell your car has been babied. I'd keep it, but if you want to sell it call me.'
A comment like that will make you curious how he arrived at that conclusion. The M3 looked in great shape to me. His response was, 'you'd be amazed what you can pull from the computers of those things'.
Chalk up one SmartBag customer!
RSO 34 said:
Side note:
He had a '96 NSX coupe?? Not many of those around.
xsn said:
This casts more doubt on rhinothree's post of Reinecker being in a wheelchair. Unless that was how Stanford treated and released him.
nsx
I know that road very well, was hit head on by a truck going the wrong way 8 years ago on my motorcycle, broke my neck, arm, hips and lost vision in my left eye. You can bet there is more to the story. After the accident, find out the guy had been drinking (stated on the police report) but no cops gave him any test to see how drunk he was. A friend of mine is a P.i and went arount to all the house in the area to see if other people had seen the accident. Nobody, i mean nobody would talk. Every weekend cars and motorcycles go up those roads, some race, some don't, the locals hate it and do there best to keep people out of there. The police do there best to harass anybody with a nice car or motorcycle. There is more to this i am sure.
vince
I know that road very well, was hit head on by a truck going the wrong way 8 years ago on my motorcycle, broke my neck, arm, hips and lost vision in my left eye. You can bet there is more to the story. After the accident, find out the guy had been drinking (stated on the police report) but no cops gave him any test to see how drunk he was. A friend of mine is a P.i and went arount to all the house in the area to see if other people had seen the accident. Nobody, i mean nobody would talk. Every weekend cars and motorcycles go up those roads, some race, some don't, the locals hate it and do there best to keep people out of there. The police do there best to harass anybody with a nice car or motorcycle. There is more to this i am sure.
vince
Similar threads
- Sticky
