Carrera GT crash at California speedway: Verdict, Best to check out the facility Options

[drgchapman]

This is an article regarding the Carrera GT crash that killed the two guys in the car.
Big award......releases are suspect. Track had some fault due to barrier placement, driver had fault, everyone had some fault as in most things in life.

Be carefull out there (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

http://www.sportscarmarket.com/content/carrera

[byndbad914]

interesting deal in the end. I don't agree with all of it of course.

I find it interesting when they say a mechanic said it had a handling issue, but then it turned out he felt the car liked to oversteer. If that was his complaint, I can see why Ferrari Club would still let the car go - it isn't a mechanical issue that might fail, but just how the car drives. A good driver (key wording here) could race the car just fine.

In terms of gross negligence, I agree moving and leaving a barrier closer to the track was gross negligence. So the track was at fault.

But Porsche isn't grossly negligent, sorry. If it is legal to sell that car in the states and legal to license it for the street, then they are playing by the rules. The whole argument of "race car for the streets sold to any idiot with enough money" though true, is not grounds IMO. Courts are subjective no matter who wants to argue about that one - that is why they have an "opinion".

And my point to Josh is this: it isn't up to you how "gross" gets defined, but becomes an opinion of the court. Here is what I mean:

There was a gross negligence not seen in the case of Rudl himself. The case noted the car had spun out 3 or 4 times that day. And then he got in it with the driver. That is just plain Darwin at its best. I would NEVER get in a car with a guy that spins out more than once, let alone 3-4 times in one day. C'mon. People that choose to do stupid sh!t are grossly negligent with their own life... period.

And there is where I find gross negligence in FOC as well. After the second spin, CGT should have been asked to sit out and recommended to take more DEs or only allowed out with an instructor in the driver seat. Everyone gets one spin (for the record I have only spun ONCE in all of my time behind the wheel on the track) but two in one day in a car that is known to oversteer (only a good driver can handle that, clearly not that guy!)... allowing 2 more was insane and death becomes eminent.

So at best I can see getting money from the track for the wall, and FOC for letting the driver continue to race and carry passengers in a car he clearly displayed an inability to drive. At minimum he should not have been allowed any passenger other than a willing instructor.

But just the fact that Rudl got in that car with the driver's clear display of incapability, that should negate the whole thing for his wife. If anything, the wife of the CGT owner should get money from the track and FOC but not Rudl's.

Why I quit law studies - I don't have the lack of conscience to overlook common sense and go for the $$. If you have any integrity at all, you will be broke as an attorney, so I saw more money and better sleep in engineering (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif) I don't need to know "all the facts" as some would argue - all I need to know is he got in a monster car with a clearly incompetent driver and went for a ride. Unfortunately it was the ride of his life, but I (in essence) don't need a sign (or court or FOC) to tell me not to swim in the waters when I can see alligators floating in it. And to be able to sue due to lack of signage and be successful is what kills me.