[RealityUnfolding]

Originally Posted by Cliffhanger ↗

Just found this on TMZ: (Emphasis is mine)

http://www.tmz.com/2013/12/05/paul-w...mage-not-human

Paul Walker did NOT make a final desperate attempt to escape the burning wreckage -- and the image seen in video shot right after the crash is definitely NOT Paul ... TMZ has learned.

I think this is a bit of a mea culpa to be honest. It's clear that Walker's body is laid out and there would have been no logical reason (and possibly legal reason) to partially move the body then leave it laying again. In fact, when they first moved it, it probably was difficult enough to try and keep intact.

So you either have to believe the photo we KNOW is real was taken after they partially moved Walker's body for no reason, or it shows Walker was not pinned.

Honestly, it does lead a tiny bit of credence to the "flailing" theory if they have said his belt was buckled. The impact would have kept him in the seat and that's not where he ended up.

[RealityUnfolding]

Originally Posted by Cliffhanger ↗

Just read here ( http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/late...over-his-death ) that "police say their car was travelling at 110mph when it hit a tree and then caught fire."

Well, since it hit a pole and the tree itself is still standing when even a moderate impact would have toppled it, I think this story is dubious. I still believe they were speeding but even the oft quoted Maag (Haag?) detective that People first interviewed gave his 90mph figure hours after the accident, he hadn't been on scene and he isn't a traffic investigator so he had no knowledge of the investigation that was actually still ongoing when he made that statement.

Why Walker's traffic tickets are even relevant is beyond me though. They should be looking at Rodas'.

[Cliffhanger]

As to Paul not having moved much, I believe that in the infamous photo, that that's actually the center console to his left so his entire half of the car moved quite considerably.

As for the purported speed, I can believe it was in upwards of 100 mph because that light pole took the brunt of the impact and likely sent it spinning. I believe much of the car's weight was diminished, for lack of better words, after hit that pole, basically disintegrated, possibly spun, then hit the tree...basically just coming to rest on it.

[Cliffhanger]

To my point in the above post:

[truth2]

I'd say by looking at the video of the crash showing the pole fall, and the little amount of time it takes for the tree to shake afterward, they were traveling at a pretty good rate of speed. In the above pic, the outline in red looks like Rodas' upper torso with his left arm across his chest, not a leg as has been suggested.

[Clubhouse]

Once again, as in the case of Ryan Dunn, there is no mention of the damage and suffering of the tree in this carnage...It seems a shame that things like this are always overlooked

[hckr_wolf]

Originally Posted by invertigo ↗

They're trying to sue?
I guess Walkers multimillion $ estate just isn't enough, whatever. At least they seem to be keeping this shit contained to their little elitist bubble. Hollywood is fucking delusional.

Yep, and believe it or not - there's a good chance they'll win a substantial amount of money in the lawsuit.

Back in 2005, two men named Ben Keaton (driver) and Corey Rudl (passenger) were killed - also in an '05 Carrera GT, like Rodas and Walker - on a track day when another driver in a Ferrari pulled out onto the track and failed to yield to them, causing them to lose control and smack into a wall in a very similar accident.

From this article:

Tracy Rudl, the wife of passenger Corey Rudl, filed a lawsuit claiming gross negligence by many parties associated with the track event. She recently received a settlement of approximately $4.5 million. The contributing parties to the settlement fund were:
2% from the merging Ferrari driver,
8% from Porsche,
41% from California Speedway and Ferrari Owner's Club, and finally
49% from the Carrera GT driver's (Ben Keaton's) estate.

Of course, this accident was different in one very important way - mechanical failure was not a factor. So to what extent each party is held responsible in Walker's case, remains to be seen.

[Clubhouse]

When was it confirmed mechanical failure was the sole cause of the accident or even a factor?

[hckr_wolf]

Originally Posted by Cliffhanger ↗

The autopsy revealed that . . . Paul Walker died of both blunt force trauma and what they called "thermal injuries"...burning.

Correct, but keep in mind that "thermal injuries" doesn't necessarily mean over an extended amount of time. The intense amount of heat from the explosion about a minute after impact would've produced plenty of heat, and killed him in an instant. If he was alive before then, chances are he was already unconscious from the "blunt force trauma" from the initial impact.

Originally Posted by Clubhouse ↗

When was it confirmed mechanical failure was the sole cause of the accident or even a factor?

It hasn't been. I did post an article from one news source that cited witnesses on the scene, but since those were just witnesses (albeit, many of them were employees at Rodas' car shop) and not collision investigators or experts, their analysis of the scene is pure speculation on their part.

Last I checked, investigators are still working with Porsche to determine if the so-called "black boxes" were even in place, as they should've been. From there they apparently must be sent directly to Porsche for them to process the data.

I'm no conspiracy theorist, but with all the bad rep Porsche has gotten over their cars lately (specifically the CGT), I wonder if relying on them to retrieve the data from the black boxes would be an acceptable move. That would undoubtedly give them the opportunity to cover their tracks, if any data revealed mechanical failure was a factor.

I'm not saying I would expect them to do such a thing, but considering the fact that it is no longer just an investigation and is now part of a lawsuit, I wonder if the court will allow Porsche to even touch the data due to a legal "conflict of interest".

[Avanti]

Originally Posted by hckr_wolf ↗

Last I checked, investigators are still working with Porsche to determine if the so-called "black boxes" were even in place, as they should've been. From there they apparently must be sent directly to Porsche for them to process the data.

I'm no conspiracy theorist, but with all the bad rep Porsche has gotten over their cars lately (specifically the CGT), I wonder if relying on them to retrieve the data from the black boxes would be an acceptable move. That would undoubtedly give them the opportunity to cover their tracks, if any data revealed mechanical failure was a factor.

I'm not saying I would expect them to do such a thing, but considering the fact that it is no longer just an investigation and is now part of a lawsuit, I wonder if the court will allow Porsche to even touch the data due to a legal "conflict of interest".

"Black boxes" being installed in road going cars is still quite new stuff and the CGT is from 2005. Could be that they that they could do some data aquisition from the ECU if they let that feature stay when they developed it from it's original purpose as a racing ECU. Then only Porsche could analyse it correctly.

I hope this lawsuit turns into nothing. Very rare that components fail on the road when it comes to these kind of cars as they have to be very overdimensioned when it comes to safety. The car was not originally built as a short sprint racer either, it was built for 24 punishing hours around Le Mans. It is a temperamental car but that's what you get when you turn a racecar into a car for the road. No compromises. The owners of the cars knew that and should drive them with the respect they deserve, especially on the street.