Tony Stewart

[mister d]

Would it violate contracts / writer ethics / both to ask you to best guess what happened?

[Brontoburglar]

So if you or I did this wouldn't we get charged with at least vehicular manslaughter? Stewart gets a pass because...he's a professional race car driver? He's rich? What am I missing?

Because it very much could have just been an accident? I don't think every fatal car accident (or even car killing "pedestrian" incident) results a charge of that magnitude.

No, that's true. Not every one. But certainly many (most?) do. I'll grant the actions of the person who gets hit matter even amongst non-racers. I would assume that a professional car driver has a greater responsibility than even an average driver when it comes to not making contact with people on the track though given their (theoretical) higher level of competency driving a vehicle.

ETA: I think the galling thing from my perspective seems to be the general attitude of the investigator's quotes which are somewhere between "nothing to see here" and "LOL, whatevs". If I ran over someone with my car driving home from dinner and killed them, I doubt it would be the same thing, even if that person did in fact run out in front of me and I wasn't at fault. I don't think the police and investigators would be completely pooh-poohing my potential culpability immediately after the accident.

Huh? Have you been watching the press conferences or strictly reading the quotes? The first thing that has stuck out from me over the two press conferences this weekend were that they were a stark contrast from Willie Meggs'.

Multiple times the sheriff has used the "at this time" and brought up that there is an investigation still pending.

[Brontoburglar]

Would it violate contracts / writer ethics / both to ask you to best guess what happened?

Not going to go there.

[Brontoburglar]

It takes someone to die to change rules. For example a new stop sign in the neighborhood.

NASCAR should start heavily fining drivers who get out of their car angry, it's so dangerous.

Incredibly, incredibly important to point out that not all racing is NASCAR. This was a race that had nothing to with NASCAR.

That said, NASCAR could change the rules regarding drivers confronting other drivers who are in their cars. But given that this was a local track on a regional circuit it's almost impossible to legislate it on that level with a universal rule.

True but don't rules and direction come from the top governing body and funnel down?

Using hockey as an example if the NHL banned fighting canadian junior hockey and AHL would too

Racing is incredibly, incredibly diverse. Just because NASCAR or another top level series institutes a rule means the rule would be trickled down to the multitudes of tracks and organizations at the lower levels.

(Struggling to extrapolate out the hockey analogy, but it's like there were 10 different variations of "hockey" and there were four types at a national level and six other types below that. If one of the four does something it doesn't mean the other three, six or nine will immediately follow suit)

[Rex]

For what it's worth, I don't think that "don't run into traffic in the middle of a race" is something that needs to be legislated. If it does, God save us.

[mister d]

Not going to go there.

I can't find a ... for this. Got excited for a second when I had the I-N-T of "intent" but it didn't pan out.



(My amateur logic-ish take is "T-Stew" probably wanted to big time the dude by making him jump away like a dummy and instead ran over him and made him a dead person.)

[The Sybian]

(Struggling to extrapolate out the hockey analogy, but it's like there were 10 different variations of "hockey" and there were four types at a national level and six other types below that. If one of the four does something it doesn't mean the other three, six or nine will immediately follow suit)

How about if the NHL makes a rule, would New Jersey High School field hockey rules change?

Thanks for the educated analysis, Bronto. Facebook rants aren't coming across as very knowledgeable. I was most curious about why a NASCAR star (if I know the name, he must be a star, right?) is racing the overgrown RC Pro Am machines on a tiny dirt track. I get the idea of staying sharp, but it still seems really odd to race in a rinkydink circuit. Especially since this is at night, with a NASCAR event the next day.

[Rex]

I just assumed that's how they keep it real.

Like the Zoolander-Hansel walk off.

[Gunpowder]

I don't see how, if it's truly an accident, that Stewart could be charged with anything. This is a much different situation than being out on the roads after dinner. However, if you were out after dinner, had no drinks, were going speed limit, doing nothing else that could be construed as reckless...I can't see how you'd be charged with anything.

Dont'e Stallworth got such a light punishment for killing a guy drunk because the guy jumped out in front of his car, so to speak. If he weren't drunk he may not have gotten charged, assuming he wasn't speeding.

[Gunpowder]

That's why to me, the only thing I'm questioning is was this on purpose. Was the guy an idiot? Yes. Did he largely or possibly completely cause this? Yes. But nobody is arguing or debating this! This would be like arguing that summer is hot after the Korey Stringer situation. Yes, it is. But there's no point in debating that, IMO.

[mister d]

Right. The extension of "if you walk out onto a live racetrack you are taking a tremendous risk ..." isn't "... and you're fair game for whatever happens next."

[The Sybian]

That's why to me, the only thing I'm questioning is was this on purpose. Was the guy an idiot? Yes. Did he largely or possibly completely cause this? Yes. But nobody is arguing or debating this! This would be like arguing that summer is hot after the Korey Stringer situation. Yes, it is. But there's no point in debating that, IMO.

You have it right. In a torts case , if the family sued Stewart, his idiocy could be a factor in mitigating damage, but in a criminal case intent is the key issue. A judge could factor in specifics of the situation in choosing a sentence, but that shouldn't be an issue in determining guilt.

[Gunpowder]

There are a bunch of people on Facebook arguing that the kid was stupid. I assume that we'll be arguing that the sky is blue next.

[brian]

Nowhere did I say "Stewart should be charged with something." My point was that it didn't really sound like the investigators who would potentially bring any kind of charges seemed especially interested in actually performing anything more than a perfunctory investigation whereas if it was a situation like I described (driving home, not drinking, it's dark, someone runs out right in front of you, driver not at fault) I still expect the police would perform a thorough investigation with the onus being on the driver being 100 percent not at fault.

The situation I describe in the parenthetical above happens probably close to once a week in Las Vegas alone, maybe more as that just what I see in the papers. I honestly don't know how often the drivers get charged with anything, but I don't think it's a whole lot, the paper here in town did a huge study a few weeks ago since we have so many pedestrians killed by cars here and I think they estimated that 75 percent of those deaths were ultimately ruled to be the fault of the pedestrian. So you can probably safely assume that it would be hard to bring criminal charges in those cases.

(And obviously it's not apples to apples with this case, but again, my point is that I'll bet the police at least did a complete investigation before clearing the driver(s).)

[Gunpowder]

Well, it's much easier to investigate the latter situation. And there's not likely to be a video. Like, you could investigate the speed that you were travelling in your situation, but for Tony Stewart that is irrelevant. Tony Stewart is in a position where it is normal to be driving a car in a manner that otherwise would be considered wreckless and the only real investigation is "did he do this on purpose or not". I think there are a lot more variables on the street (was he on his cell phone, etc.).

Also if you fight somebody in the street, it's going to get investigated more thoroughly than if you did in a hockey game. I guess sports are just different in those regards.

[rass]

Well, it's much easier to investigate the latter situation. And there's not likely to be a video. Like, you could investigate the speed that you were travelling in your situation, but for Tony Stewart that is irrelevant. Tony Stewart is in a position where it is normal to be driving a car in a manner that otherwise would be considered wreckless and the only real investigation is "did he do this on purpose or not". I think there are a lot more variables on the street (was he on his cell phone, etc.).

Also if you fight somebody in the street, it's going to get investigated more thoroughly than if you did in a hockey game. I guess sports are just different in those regards.

This incident was definitely not wreckless.

[brian]

Well, it's much easier to investigate the latter situation. And there's not likely to be a video. Like, you could investigate the speed that you were travelling in your situation, but for Tony Stewart that is irrelevant. Tony Stewart is in a position where it is normal to be driving a car in a manner that otherwise would be considered wreckless and the only real investigation is "did he do this on purpose or not". I think there are a lot more variables on the street (was he on his cell phone, etc.).

Also if you fight somebody in the street, it's going to get investigated more thoroughly than if you did in a hockey game. I guess sports are just different in those regards.

This incident was definitely not wreckless.

I laughed harder than I probably should have at that.

[Nonlinear FC]

1) There are LOT of pedestrians killed in the DC metro area. Without going into a ton of detail, there is on spot in particular near College Park that has had a ton of fatalities, mainly because the road is very wide (6 lanes) and there aren't enough lights/crosswalks, so people jaywalk. In most of those cases, drivers were not charged with anything. When someone runs in front of your car and you are driving 45 mph, you can not hold the driver responsible.

I'm belaboring the point that just running someone over does not = criminal charges.

2) As others have stated, unless something comes directly from Stewart on intent, I don't see how that video or even eyewitness statements are going to be enough to charge him. Dude ran onto the track. If we had video from a wider angle, maybe you could see Stewart's approach and understand better if he could've avoided contact. (It seems REALLY suspect, from a purely conjecture stand point, that Stewart got that close to the guy under yellow. His speed was throttle down, and it appears it was somewhat of a straightaway.)

3) I see this going the law suit route. What I'm really surprised by, both in here and in the overall media coverage, is the lack of focus on the FACT that Stewart is a known hothead. Hell, I barely follow the sport, but when I heard about this, I immediately thought of the many confrontations (physical) that Stewart is none for.

He had a famous physical altercation with Joey Lagano, where punches were thrown (not connected). That was followed by numerous, lengthy interviews where he stated he was going to run Lagano off the track going forward. He has WALKED ONTO the track and thrown his helmet at least once, if not twice, that I'm aware of... Might've been in the pit, but regardless, the vehicle was moving at speed and he walked up close enough to hit the car with his helmet.

If I'm Ward's family, I'm pulling up the multiple highlight clips of TS losing his shit and going after him in court.

I'm not, by the way, saying I think Stewart did this on purpose... As has been stated, it's impossible to know with the "evidence" we have at this point. I'm just saying, with his history, it's extremely difficult to not jump to that conclusion. And I'd wonder if a jury would have that same issue.

[Giff]

I thought I read the driver in front of him speak to the limited views they have in those cars and that he nearly hit the kid too because he didn't see him until the last minute? Is there another video other than the one that shows the crash and then stays on Ward until he's hit?

[sancarlos]

It looks to me like there will be no criminal charges, unless Stewart says something to implicate himself. Not likely. Video will not reveal intent.

However, as NLFC suggested, I certainly expect Ward's family to file a civil suit, and probably get significant damages (more likely a settlement). Sure, the amount will be mitigated by Ward's own actions, but there is enough smoke there (so, to speak) for Stewart to have to cough up a settlement amount on a civil case.

[Shirley]

I thought I read the driver in front of him speak to the limited views they have in those cars and that he nearly hit the kid too because he didn't see him until the last minute? Is there another video other than the one that shows the crash and then stays on Ward until he's hit?

I think in any race car, drivers are almost entirely focused on the cars right in front of and around them. They know the track thoroughly, so they don't need to focus as much on that. Unless someone came on the headset and told drivers that a guy was walking on the track, I doubt they'd notice until they were practically right on him.

Add in that Stewart was right behind another car, it was night and the kid was wearing black, and I seriously doubt Tony knew he was there until a second or two before impact.

Just because the video shows the kid angrily pointing at Stewart from all across the track doesn't meant that Tony knew that was going on.

BTW, I said it before, but I'm amazed at how many people, including supposed experts like the one I heard on Mike and Mike this morning, I have heard talk about hearing Stewart gun his engine. Honestly, from a video shot by a dude on his cell phone from across the track, they can tell Stewart's engine noise from that of all of the other cars out there? It's ridiculous.

All that said, it's completely believable to me that Stewart might have wanted to come close to the kid or gun the engine to give him a scare, but without some sort of voice recording of him saying that or some sort of black box technology that they certainly don't have, I can't see any way for a conviction or even charges.

[degenerasian]

Well, it's much easier to investigate the latter situation. And there's not likely to be a video. Like, you could investigate the speed that you were travelling in your situation, but for Tony Stewart that is irrelevant. Tony Stewart is in a position where it is normal to be driving a car in a manner that otherwise would be considered wreckless and the only real investigation is "did he do this on purpose or not". I think there are a lot more variables on the street (was he on his cell phone, etc.).

Also if you fight somebody in the street, it's going to get investigated more thoroughly than if you did in a hockey game. I guess sports are just different in those regards.

Hockey players have been charged with assault. Ciccerelli and McSorley for stick swinging incidents.

And there was this famous incident in Italy where a player died from a stick slash to the heart. The 'slasher' got 3 months + 2 year suspended sentence.

http://www.hockeyfights.com/forums/f33/ ... -a-130684/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Hockey will make the argument that fighting is part of the game but stick swinging it not.


The day a player dies from a hockey fight NHL (and it will happen), it will be interesting how it's handled.

[govmentchedda]

Do they even have radios at that level?

[Gunpowder]

Well, it's much easier to investigate the latter situation. And there's not likely to be a video. Like, you could investigate the speed that you were travelling in your situation, but for Tony Stewart that is irrelevant. Tony Stewart is in a position where it is normal to be driving a car in a manner that otherwise would be considered wreckless and the only real investigation is "did he do this on purpose or not". I think there are a lot more variables on the street (was he on his cell phone, etc.).

Also if you fight somebody in the street, it's going to get investigated more thoroughly than if you did in a hockey game. I guess sports are just different in those regards.

Hockey players have been charged with assault. Ciccerelli and McSorley for stick swinging incidents.

And there was this famous incident in Italy where a player died from a stick slash to the heart. The 'slasher' got 3 months + 2 year suspended sentence.

http://www.hockeyfights.com/forums/f33/ ... -a-130684/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Hockey will make the argument that fighting is part of the game but stick swinging it not.


The day a player dies from a hockey fight NHL (and it will happen), it will be interesting how it's handled.

Swinging a stick would be like if Tony Stewart turned his car right into this dude.

[SportsDoc]

Tyler Graves, a sprint-car racer and friend of Ward's, told Sporting News in a phone interview that he was sitting in the Turn 1 grandstands and saw everything that happened.

"Tony pinched him into the frontstretch wall, a racing thing," Graves said. "The right rear tire went down, he spun on the exit of (Turn) 2. They threw the caution and everything was toned down. Kevin got out of his car. … He was throwing his arms up all over the place at Tony for most of the corner.

"I know Tony could see him. I know how you can see out of these cars. When Tony got close to him, he hit the throttle. When you hit a throttle on a sprint car, the car sets sideways. It set sideways, the right rear tire hit Kevin, Kevin was sucked underneath and was stuck under it for a second or two and then it threw him about 50 yards."

speculative, but man...

This from a 16 year old kid right after it happened looking for his 15 minutes of fame. Not buying much of this. He may soon find himself in a slander lawsuit.

As for what happened, Stewart was behind other cars, so probably had a late look. Dirt tracks are weird, not like asphalt. You actually have better control of the car accelerating than braking, which could explain why it is mentioned he did so at the last second.

And while Stewart is a hothead, he was not the hothead here, Ward was. So there is no reason to suspect there was any malicious intent on Stewart's part in this. At least that's how I see it.

[brian]

If the situation had been reversed. Stewart gets spun out and gets out of his car and gestures at a 20-year-old kid and said kid runs him over and kills him...are there charges then?

[mister d]

Brian brings up a good question, one I wish I'd thought of around 2:42 yesterday.

[SportsDoc]

If the situation had been reversed. Stewart gets spun out and gets out of his car and gestures at a 20-year-old kid and said kid runs him over and kills him...are there charges then?

What if the answer is Stewart isn't that stupid?

[A_B]

If the situation had been reversed. Stewart gets spun out and gets out of his car and gestures at a 20-year-old kid and said kid runs him over and kills him...are there charges then?

What if the answer is Stewart isn't that stupid?

Hypothetically speaking, that ruins the hypothetical.

[rass]

If the situation had been reversed. Stewart gets spun out and gets out of his car and gestures at a 20-year-old kid and said kid runs him over and kills him...are there charges then?

What if the answer is Stewart isn't that stupid?

Or that he's lucky Matt Kenseth is a good driver?

[brian]

Except Stewart has been that stupid before. He's just been lucky enough to not get run over. I don't watch a lot (OK, any) NASCAR but I've seen enough highlights from guys going after other guys outside of their cars to know that this could have happened somewhere under different circumstances. I really don't have an opinion on if Stewart's at fault, I don't know enough about racing to speculate. I admit that. But I can't help thinking if the roles were reversed, it wouldn't be quite the open and shut case that the driver isn't at fault.

[Giff]

It seems to me, given his history, that Stewar's more likely to not be given the benefit of the doubt because of who is he, not the other way around. I mean, if this was some other NASCAR racer with no past anger issues, would we even be talking about anything other than the Darwin award candidate?

[A_B]

So Bronto, give me a rundown of where this case stands. I am having trouble deciding if the investigation thinks he may have done something or if this is just due process.

[Brontoburglar]

So Bronto, give me a rundown of where this case stands. I am having trouble deciding if the investigation thinks he may have done something or if this is just due process.

This is due process. The DA had the option to drop the case and not file charges, but this is the NY law next step. There's no reason to infer guilt from this because there are three options still all very much on the table: felony, misdemeanor and no charges. Plus, you could obviously have the charges and then have no conviction.

So basically, we're still at the "no idea" part of the process, just that the process has taken another step forward. Because of the secret nature of NY grand jury stuff, a timeline on any possible charges seems unclear.

There are a host of career factors that the grand jury's decision hinges on, of course, but I'll go through those if and when they could be relevant.

[Jerloma]

Not charged!

[Johnny Carwash]

Remember when people were unironically saying this was the biggest sports story of the 21st century so far?

[The Sybian]

I just saw a picture of Tony Stewart. Had no idea he looked so much like Artie Lange. We can now erase any doubts that NASCAR is not a sport.