
Fatal Accident On Iron Point
#211
Posted 23 January 2007 - 03:18 PM
#212
Posted 23 January 2007 - 03:30 PM
With all due respect, one of the first responses to this thread included this statement:
"I want to know why these 17-year-olds were driving a BMW 5-series and a Dodge Stealth. I can't even afford to drive those cars. Just another illustration of the spoiled rich kids in Folsom."
#213
Posted 23 January 2007 - 03:35 PM
I would say they've been more accurate. Simply by not inserting commentary on potentially unrelated topics like the kids house. They've generally stuck to the facts "Witnesses say racing, cops say racing, skid marks say racing". I don't even think I've seen the authors say they were racing, just quote these facts.
All in all, a tragic story, but I don't think it's been misreported outside of the conjecture of some MyFolsom Super sleuths.
I agree. The comments on this board seem to be incredible focused on investigating, trying and convicting or exonerating outside of the Police and the Court system. This is a very tragic event and everyone should stay out of it until the people who know what they are doing on it have had the time to investigate and determine what happened.
I can't believe that people here were actually going out and measuring the skid marks and analyzing the sign locations. I would expect that if this goes to trial, some of you might be asked to testify for the defense.
#214
Posted 23 January 2007 - 03:52 PM
"I want to know why these 17-year-olds were driving a BMW 5-series and a Dodge Stealth. I can't even afford to drive those cars. Just another illustration of the spoiled rich kids in Folsom."
... and much is due, so you better mind your P's and Q's, bucko!

I was slightly trying to lighten up the conversation and didn't really mean for the statement to be taken seriously... but still... I did say "many." One person not realizing that a 15 yr old Dodge is a cheap POS does not negate my statement. Plus, they could have been referring to the BMW driver.
#215
Posted 23 January 2007 - 04:06 PM
All I read in these posts is sympathy, concern, discussion, and opinion.
Unless anyone here can be qualified as an expert in court or was an eyewitness, it's ridiculous to say they would be called to testify for either prosecution or defense.
#216
Posted 23 January 2007 - 04:18 PM
For the life of me, I can't find any reference stating that the Stealth was 15 years old. Not in this entire post, nor in any of the articles. Where is that info coming from? Just curious.
#217
Posted 23 January 2007 - 04:19 PM
All I read in these posts is sympathy, concern, discussion, and opinion.
Unless anyone here can be qualified as an expert in court or was an eyewitness, it's ridiculous to say they would be called to testify for either prosecution or defense.
I agree! This is called a DISCUSSION board. Without differences of opinions, we would have no discussion!
#218
Posted 23 January 2007 - 04:33 PM
I don't think anyone was wandering onto Iron Point to measure the skid marks... risking their own life in front of traffic that is going at least 45 mph.
The length of the skid marks is public knowledge that was quoted in the Sac Bee.
#219
Posted 23 January 2007 - 05:28 PM
My point is that most of the people that I talk to about the case, that have seen the news reports, had assumed that the kids are spoiled, rich, white kids.
In this regards, the media hasn't painted a picture for people that is accurate.
This is one of the things that leads me to question if other statements made by the media are accurate.
They are minors. Has much of anything about them been written?
Btw, the media rarely paints a picture that is accurate. They paint a picture that sells. Don't take it personally.
#220
Posted 23 January 2007 - 05:32 PM
I know all of the boys and the families invloved in the accident. Also, about 12 years ago, I lived in Shingle Springs for two years. At that time, I knew the McNew family. My sister's 3 kids attended Blue Oak school. I was on campus everyday.
I find it quite hard to believe that you would know personally ALL of the families involved in the accident. Since you lived in Shingle Springs and were at Blue Oak daily, then I can see how you would know the McNew family. But to say you know the two boys that were involved in the accident as well as their familes, I find hard to believe. I'm not saying it's not true, just quite a coincedence.
You also seem to have shared information that has been quite different than the media has reported. My question is: How do we know what you're saying/implying is true? Somrthing seems kind of fishy to me.
#221
Posted 23 January 2007 - 06:36 PM
#222
Posted 23 January 2007 - 06:59 PM
Everyone can see that the boys were speeding. Nobody will argue that fact. [.../quote]
Unfortunately, those basic facts (corroborated of course), can lead to a 192©1PC conviction.
Regardless of the judicial outcome(s), these kids will live with this disaster for many years to come. A very sad event, indeed.
#223
Posted 23 January 2007 - 07:22 PM
I know all of the boys and the families invloved in the accident. Also, about 12 years ago, I lived in Shingle Springs for two years. At that time, I knew the McNew family. My sister's 3 kids attended Blue Oak school. I was on campus everyday.
I find it quite hard to believe that you would know personally ALL of the families involved in the accident. Since you lived in Shingle Springs and were at Blue Oak daily, then I can see how you would know the McNew family. But to say you know the two boys that were involved in the accident as well as their familes, I find hard to believe. I'm not saying it's not true, just quite a coincedence.
I had exactly the same reaction, LGE. Guess it's the skeptical attorney in me, but it strikes me as a one-in-a-million coincidence that someone would know both a teacher from Shingle Springs and two unrelated boys from Orangevale and Citrus Heights.
#224
Posted 23 January 2007 - 07:53 PM
"I want to know why these 17-year-olds were driving a BMW 5-series and a Dodge Stealth. I can't even afford to drive those cars. Just another illustration of the spoiled rich kids in Folsom."
That'd be me.

I still hold my initial assertion about rich kids in Folsom. I know waaaay too many kids with really nice cars. It's crazy. BUT, that's a completely different thread!
#225
Posted 23 January 2007 - 08:28 PM
how about requiring all drivers under a certain age and potential risk groups (cars more than xxx HP) to have a device that records telemetry data. that is, data like speed, g-force, etc. we already have this technology it's just not linked and sent anywhere. it could be made to disable the car in case the device is tampered with. we have similar things for DUI people (breathalizer in car, etc).
insurance companies could be informed of this data - or send it to parents, etc. consequences could be imposed and what not. i bet the fear of losing their car or not being able to pay for their car (higher insurance) would stop a large percentage of reckless people. Of course you'd always have that other percentage that it wouldn't affect either way.
what do you think?
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users