Jury Convicts Drag Racers
 

Jury rejects murder charges and convicts pair of manslaughter:

http://www.courttv.com/trials/dragrace/051903_ctv.html

I know we all like to step on it from time to time,but racing should be kept on the track to prevent things like that to happen.

Punishment phase of trial?
 

I think the manslaughter conviction is more reasonable than a murder conviction. It'll be interesting what punishment they get. Maybe somene can post that when it's determined.

Rev

Will do, I'm keeping an eye on this.

I dont think murder is justified because it wasnt premeditated

thats kinda sticky cause where i live premeditated is having those10 beers and then driving or when you decided to race.its the act of knowingly doing something illegal, robbing a bank and killing a gaurd shown this type of link if you plan to rob the bank you must of thought it through including the killing , ive back off of lots of street races because i knerw someone may get hurt or even killed because of what i was doing.

but its all kinda mute as we arent on the jury and dont know all the details.

sometimes it amazes me when someone who murders someone premeditively get out in like 10 years and say these guys could get more time depending on the sentencing.

The conviction on gross vehicular manslaughter means Waller, 32, faces about seven years in prison and Calhoun, who was not directly involved in the crash, but fled the scene, faces about 12 years in prison


so they guy who left is facing longer time than the guy who manslaughtered them. ??????

The 7yrs vs. 12yrs is kind of misleading. The 12 yrs is calculated because he was convicted of more crimes (leaving the scene). I presume the crash was worth 7 yrs and leaving the scene was worth 5 years. Most sentences are concurrent which means they're run together and not consecutively (back to back). So, they say 12 years which is the grand total but most likely Calhoun will get out earlier via parole because he didn't directly cause the deaths whereas Waller did. Parole boards take the circumstances of the crimes committed when considering petitions for release on parole.

"Got NOS?, you may as well add neons, wing and carbon fibre hood too"
______________________________________________

This is off topic but that may be the dumbest thing I have ever read on this board.

:rolleyes:

That's EXACTLY why it's there. :D

If bottles are for babies, why did i just spank your azz???

Huh?

....Very sad story. :( Thanks for the updates 20LbsBoost

Those guys are street racers not drag racers.

barracuda -vs- geo
 

'cuda gonna win every time...
buy your kids big old, heavy cars, not recycled-metal foreign crap...

i agree, drag racing is done at the track.

Holy tread resurrection batman!

Sorry but I think they should have paid for what they did at least the one that was driving " waller" He killed two people guys come on. Ya he didnt mean to do it but christ when people street race they have to be carefull about shitt. If there was a car on either side of the race then ya gotta think" oh ok something bad could happen here mabye I should stop" You would all be saying he deserves a conviction if you knew those people. The other dude doesnt deserve anything though

Here's a question no one has addressed yet.

Who had the right of way?

Seems to me she didn't

Thats what I said!!

I think its sad when two people die and two more go to prison all because someone didn't properly yield the right of way.

Had they all lived (and not been racing) SHE would have gotten the ticket.

I agree
 

Deuce, I'm glad someone else agrees on that. I made that same point in a thread called "Court TV Drag Racing Trial". When I said it, nobody seemed to agree with that line of thinking (except maybe Skyler). Most wanted to give them life without parol.

Rev

I guess it's like driving drunk.If you are driving drunk no matter what happened it's gonna be your fault.

two people died
 

If someone learns of the sentences could they post them.

Considerations of who had the right of way is sad. Two people died as a result of street racing. I believe the law provides for yielding the right of way when on coming traffic is traveling at approximatley the post speed limit (when the turning car can judge the appraoching speed), making this a moot point.

The verdicts seem fair.

Re: two people died
 

why is consideration of ALL traffic laws sad? What if she had run a red light? How much of the irresponsibilty of others should people have to bear? If she'd had a better handle on the situation, no one would have died.

The street racers were only racing. They broke no other law, except the guy who left the scene. Had they blown a light or a stop sign it would be different. What if it was just one guy who was speeding (their speeds weren't THAT fast for where they were in San Diego.... what then? Would the simple act of "wreckless speed" be enough for the verdict they got? How about just speeding? At what point does it become manslaughter? Because there were two of them?

Maybe I am missing something... are you guys saying the speeding cars going straight had the right-of-way and the car that pulled in front of them was at fault for not yielding right-of-way? If so, that is really a stretch, yielding right-of-way is based on traffic travelling at the posted speed limits...if I pull out from a side road onto a main road where the speed limit is 35mph and I get blasted by a car going 100mph, are you saying I didn't yield right-of-way:confused:

If that is the case, tomorrow on my commute to work, I am going to get in the left lane of the Beltway and mash my gas to the floor...anybody in my way too bad, I have right-of-way...maybe add one of those cow-catcher things from a train to the front of my car to keep from getting tangled up too bad:p

Right of way?
 

Last I heard, "right of way" has no relation to speed. If I'm backing out of my driveway, the other guy always has the right of way. I HAVE TO WATCH OUT FOR HIM, PERIOD.

This should not be a difficult thing to comprehend, should it? It is not dependent on his speed. He could be going 20 or 40 where the posted speed is 30. Still, the onus is on me to make sure I can back out safely, regardless of his speed.

Rev

Oh well, it is "difficult for me to comprehend"... I can't see how you can say right-of-way has no relation to speed - the guys were estimated at 86mph - how is anyone ever supposed to cross an intersection or enter a street from a side-street if you have to wait until you can't see a car coming for miles away - because you can't assume the speed they are travelling. I was under the impression that was part of what speed limits were for. At least in my area of the country, it is common to see a posted reduction in speed limits as you approach an intersection - I can only guess this is because traffic engineers find it to be safer.

Did you miss my Beltway analogy? Or did you think it is fine for me to set my cruise control on 100mph in the far left lane and if soemone pulls in front of me it is their fault because I had right-of-way?

Maybe your point is that any vehicle in a travel lane has right-of-way over traffic entering that lane...OK that makes sense, but to say that it is ENTIRELY independent of speed is a joke.

If you are pulling out of your driveway and get smashed by some idiot going 86mph I will bet you ONE MILLION DOLLARS the other guy will get charged with a traffic violation and will be determined responsible by insurance companies (and a jury) for causing the accident...wanna bet? Oh, but the other guy had right-of-way...

Here in NY the law states you must have control of your vehicle at all times. Since the speeding street racer didnt regaurdless of the girl who didnt have the right of way, he still hit her. If he was going the posted speed limit, chances are he would avoid hitting her or killing her.

Now what about this. If it was a person crossing the street, would it be the persons fault for crossing? Well pedestrians have the right away, right? So you tell me what difference it would have made? None.

They are guilty as charge and hope they serve their time.

James:mad:

Right of way?
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RED92LX50
"difficult for me to comprehend"...

So if one is cruising down the boulavard at 40 in a 35, someone on a cross street runs a stop sign and gets T-boned.................then it's the speeders fault? Somehow, I don't think so.

Rev

here, u r not suppose to turn or enter another lane of traffic until it is "safe to do so". There is nothing written in there about other vehicle's having to be at the speed limit.

The racers were wrong, but the car should not have turned in front of them. They r both at fault, the first car for mis-judging the speed or just being in-experienced, and the racers for bad judgement.

Ryan

Wow - they sure do things different in Wyoming and Texas - glad some folks choose to live there.

Guess we will have to agree to disagree - I can't see any way that the girl was at fault for trying to cross the road and she gets smashed by some guy going 86mph. Maybe because I have a daughter of my own. She can't drive yet...but when she gets older, and is out driving on her own, if some guy hit her going 86mph while she was trying to cross the road, I don't see how I could think it was her fault (and I would probably not rest until the guy who did it was in jail or under ground).

RED92LX50 - I guess we will have to agree to disagree. The big problem most of us have is trying to figure at what point does it become the racers fault. What if it was you going to jail for going 15, 10 or even 5 over? I have yet to see anywhere a clear understanding of at what point you can relieve someone who was supposed to yield of responsibility.

I think those of us you are disagreeing with are looking at it from the side of the fence where speed in it self has become demonized by society, while people get into big old SUV's and don't think to look down where most of us are sitting in sport cars.

If the responsibility of judging time to impact ends with an assumption that people are going the posted limit, wouldn't anyone speeding (even 1 mph over) be at fault in a situation such as this?

Deuce - I do see the other side of the argument...I am just really tired of seeing people knowingly do something wrong and then try to say it wasn't their fault. My point is - the guys speeding KNEW they were doing something wrong, while the girl making the turn thought she had plenty of time. In my opinion, this was not an ACCIDENT, the kids speeding is what caused it to happen.

I don't see much difference in a Street Racing accident over a Drunk Driving accident. In both cases the driver was taking a known risk and should accept responsibility for the outcome. To try and place blame on someone else makes me mad.

Application of the Laws is not black & white, otherwise every offense would have a mandatory sentence without possibility of reducing charges. This is where judges & jury's get to use common sense to decide someones fate for their actions. If someone was found to be going 5mph over the limit and ran into someone, I find it hard to believe that would be judged the same as someone going 40mph over the limit. Yes, it is not clearly defined where the line is - but at some point common sense should kick in... in my opinion 86mph on an undivided through street is way past the norm. But, you never know, maybe the next jury will be filled with mostly street racers and the gys would get off with a speeding ticket.

FWIW, if I recall correctly they were on a part of 52, which has a grass median and cross streets. Not a boulevard.

Please do not think I am saying the girl died and that it was her fault. I was trying to point out that she has some responsibility in this crash. I was also trying to make a point that ..the few people that believe the guys should get huge sentences in prison, should consider all sides of the coin.

I do think these guys should be punished... prison is probably needed for them......but they were wreckless, u will never convince me they intended to kill those people. I use to drag race in my younger days before I do what I do now. I was smarter most of the times and did it in the country. But here in Illinois, u have to have intent for murder, or atleast reasonably know what you did would result in the death of a person. I do not see intent here.

Ryan

I think it makes a difference that they killed the girl while in commission of another crime (86mph). Anything over 80 here and they will throw your butt in the clink. That is purely speculation though.

Personally I say guilty as hell

86 is way toooooooooooo fast to be going in a DODGE anyway.

They are very much guilty in my opinion. The charge of "murder" and "vehicular manslaughter" ---our charge here, can't remmber the one given out there----- are two different crimes.

It definately was too fast....for any older car like that. I love my old stang, truth is it needs better brakes....it was too fast for any car on the public roads. I just wanted to point out and agree with those on here that are trying to look at this from the outside versus the outraged.
Ryan

I disagree.

On a wide 4 lane road with a median, 86 isn't THAT fast. I get passed by soccer mom's in SUV's doing 80-85 on Hwy 19 everyday.

If you can't see two loud *** muscle cars coming down a open road, you don't need to be driving.

I say the sentence was too harsh

-Josh, aka the tireburner

Hey Josh - I looked at your profile and it shows you were born in 1984. I will assume you are still single with no kids... I am willing to bet that you will feel differently in ten or fifteen years when you have a couple kids of your own and have the image of one of them driving a car that gets hit by a person going well over the speed limit.

When I was 20 (16 years ago) I had about 20 points on my license and was really mad at the insurance companies for cancelling my policy and jacking up rates to even carry me...funny, now I drive much differently for many reasons (wife, kids, ticket cost, insurance, job). So I do see the other side, I guess it comes down to perspective. I agree that the racers did not want to kill anyone, but they must have known that they were being reckless. Like Baretta said "don't do the crime if you can't do the time"... where is he now - oh yeah, in jail.

I'm not taking one side or the other, but the charges are too harsh for the amount of evidence given.Sure, they should have taken it to the track to race, but everyone has pulled up beside a friend and hit AT LEAST 86mph.What is that half way through third gear?Who knows what the other driver was doing?Talking on a cell phone, looked right, but never looked back left,etc. It is pretty easy for anyone with depth perception to see if they have enough time to pull out.If it is going to be close, they should have waited.I'm sure the racers have enough remorse for what they did that they will not do it again, and will act as an example of what can unintentionally happen from street racing. Seven to twelve years in jail for something that they cannot prove was completely your fault? Isn't it supposed to be guilty without a doubt? Without knowing what was going on in the other driver's mind, who knows what really happened.If I am running 70 in 65, and a drunk driver pulls out in front of me, who's fault is it?

When I had my 96 GT I raced a Camaro up to 140mph on a 4-lane smoked him. But it was really really ssssssssstupid I had my girlfriend now wife in the car with me. If someone had tried to turn in front of me and I would have hit them I would have been guilty as hell if I would have lived. I guess I would have had more pity on these guys if they were fifteen or sixteen and not grown dam men. They knew what they were doing and just because it turned out bad they are trying to hide behind the shield of ignorance.

Did the dodge have a cage in it? They usually do, to hold the rusty parts together.:D

Yes, but would it have been stupid if you had taken it up to 86mph? 140 is nearly twice the speed that they were traveling.

I'm not saying they should get off scott free. Suspended lisense, yea. Fine, yea. But 10 years in jail??? Hell no!!!.

-Josh, aka the tireburner

Just because you were a wreckless driver 16 years ago please don't label me as one. I've got no tickets and no points on my license.

I DO street race and I WILL keep doing it. But only when traffic is very light/non-existant, there are no side streets, etc.

-Josh, aka the tireburner

Wow. People are not taking responsibility for thier actions. Sounds like a typical American thing to do!

He broke a law and killed someone. 10 years harsh? haha! I got a "what if" for you all. "What if" he was doing the speed limit and killed the person? Would it be an accident? Should he go to jail? I don't see why he should since he was obeying the law. Oh but wait he wasn't. Just wait until it happens to someone you know, like family member or a friend. Oh boy will the tables turn!:rolleyes:

86 mph isnt fast? Holy schit, the aszclown award has a new owner:eek:

James:confused:

Look I don't think street racing is the great evil that will be the downfall of modern civilization like the press will have you believe. It's been going on since one caveman discovered that his new "round" wheel was faster than the square rock his fellow cave
dwellers used.
But there is a HUGE difference RACING in town or a heavily populated area just after dark with no headlights on. Than going out to some deserted country road at 2 in the morning. Nor was this a simple 1/16 of a mile red light to red light. How fast would they have gotten if they would not have hit the girl? Would it have been different if they had reached 140 before hitting her? I will reiterate what I said before if these guys were a couple of teenagers who just happen to pull up at a red light........ But these were GROWN DAM MEN who through what I read met there for the sole purpose of racing, If you are going to plan to race why not at the track?

If it were my little girl the words "drug into the street and shot" come to mind.

"Just because you were a wreckless driver 16 years ago please don't label me as one. I've got no tickets and no points on my license.

I DO street race and I WILL keep doing it. But only when traffic is very light/non-existant, there are no side streets, etc.

-Josh, aka the tireburner"

----------------------------------

Hey Josh - I don't think I labelled you as a wreckless driver (at least that was not my intent). The point I was trying to make is that I CAN see why people are on both sides of this argument. If it were 16 years ago - I would probably be on the side saying the girl should not have "cut in front of them"... but, now that I am much older and wiser :) I feel very differently.

Why is it that you see teenagers driving around shooting bikers/pedestrians with paintball guns - videotaping themselves, and saying how much fun it is...yet you never see a bunch of 40 year old guys driving around in their E-class Mercedes shooting people with paint guns? Do they just have better things to do, or maybe they don't think it so much fun, or maybe they don't want to face the consequences if they are caught... who knows.

I still can't believe how nobody wants to accept responsibility for anything these days. I live in Virginia, and was affected daily by the Sniper attacks (either in traffic jams, looking around while getting gas, or seeing it every night on the TV) - they caught these guys with the weapon...what are they pleading - you guessed it - NOT GUILTY. And the Commonwealth of Virginia (well, me as a taxpayer) gets to pay to defend these a$$clowns. Amazing.