• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Paul Walker's daughter sues Porsche

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
z0mb13 said:
From the article: "Lawyers representing Meadow claim that when the Carrera GT crashed, Walker's seat belt 'snapped Walker's torso back with thousands of pounds of force, thereby breaking his ribs and pelvis,'"

Really I thought seatbelts are supposed to protect you
Click to expand...

According to the article he was still alive though. Would you rather some broken bones or instant death? The fact that he was still alive after a crash like that says that they work friggen great. The law of inertia is a bitch when you're on the wrong side of it.
 
When safety belts was introduced the average speed of the cars was way lower but now the engines of the cars evolving and getting better. Any car you buy can hit 120km or more.

At that speed the powers generated at an accident from the belt to your body are high enough to break your ribs. Lawyers have no understanding of physics, the body is moving forward and hits the belt.

But this will happen with any care if crashed at the mentioned speed. Its not a problem of Porsche or problem of the belt, that we went above the limit of force our body can take before getting damaged.

So why not sue the pope for god making us breakable!??!?!?!

We will not judge because the car was a Porsche. We judge from what happened in the accident.

But first they need to sue the police for reporting higher speeds that the speeds they claim the accident happened. They will go in trial and say the car was doing 70 when the police say 90?!?!?!
 
ALIVE said:
Police report has the car driving at 90 mph range and the sue is talking about 70 mph range?!?!?!? They challenge 2 things at once. The official police report and the manufacturer for defects??? They now that if they go to court with 90 mph speed they can not win the case, so they put a lower one. But this should not be 2 stages??? First a sue on the police for the actual speed and then if they win a sue on the manufacturer?

The protection we expect form a car varies from its speed of the accident. While we expect in low/ normal legal speeds the car to be pretty safe. When we start climbing the speed we know that in case of accident the capabilities of the car become less and less and above a speed it a certain death.

So why we are talking still about it? The sue the company over the pretense of a lower speed accident that officially did not happened?? So now not the police but the lawyers will say what was the speed??? so they can account a company viable for sue!?!?!?
Click to expand...

You saw the pics, looks like closer to 90+ than 70 to me.
 
ALIVE said:
the police report is saying 90mph or more while the lawyer in the sue says the accident was at 70mph !?!?!?!?!?
Click to expand...

I'd believe the 90 just by the severity of destruction but I wonder if that car had an "event data recorder" that has been around since '99 (that many still do not know about). If so it would have the vehicles speed at impact, braking, (if any), throttle position, G-forces, ect. It's possible that with a vehicle with that kind of performance and power the maker would intentionally not have an EDR installed. Might make the owner who shelled out $450K to buy it a tad angry if it had the capability of ratting you out.
EDIT:..I just found this, so the cops must know the exact speed upon impact.
 
Last edited:
BUTCH1 said:
I'd believe the 90 just by the severity of destruction
Click to expand...

I wonder how much experience the police have with estimating speed/damage with supercars like that. They are built a hellofa lot different than normal cars which they normally make estimates from.
 
waggy said:
amazing that people actually think Porche has any blame in this. just fucking amazing.

This is 100% the fault of the driver. that's it.

though i suspect they will settle.
Click to expand...



they will settle and then a slew of insurance / auto industry CYA will occur for future insurance premiums / criteria and changes in auto industry.
 
I'd almost think the timing is hopeful for a quick settlement given the company's current preoccupation with the VW disaster going on.
 
cubby1223 said:
I'd almost think the timing is hopeful for a quick settlement given the company's current preoccupation with the VW disaster going on.
Click to expand...

Almost? Of course that's what it's about. Nobody sits on a multi-million dollar lawsuit for 23 months just because they were too busy watching Pawn Stars. The family lawyers evaluated the case right when this happened and if it had any merit at all they would have filed the next day while it was still front page news. They saw that it was stupid and wouldn't go anywhere. But now VW looks gettable, there's a lot of anti-VW sentiment and a jury *could* at least possibly award a verdict against them just to punish them for being lying scumbag fucktards. So a slimebag lawyer whispered in a greedy ear and the deal was done. They're hoping VW will settle to keep it out of the papers and out of a courtroom where a jury might decide on a little German payback even though the case is idiotic.
 
GagHalfrunt said:
Almost? Of course that's what it's about. Nobody sits on a multi-million dollar lawsuit for 23 months just because they were too busy watching Pawn Stars. The family lawyers evaluated the case right when this happened and if it had any merit at all they would have filed the next day while it was still front page news. They saw that it was stupid and wouldn't go anywhere. But now VW looks gettable, there's a lot of anti-VW sentiment and a jury *could* at least possibly award a verdict against them just to punish them for being lying scumbag fucktards. So a slimebag lawyer whispered in a greedy ear and the deal was done. They're hoping VW will settle to keep it out of the papers and out of a courtroom where a jury might decide on a little German payback even though the case is idiotic.
Click to expand...

lol great but a country that justice fails for what ever reason its a country very inhospitable for their own people. Today it is against Porsche tomorrow it can be against anyone and for anything.

You only need a bad start and then everyone go to hell from there. The stupidity is that the people on the jury they do not see that they make their life a living hell.

Either you have a working legal system. It does not matter if it is the best, if it right as long it works. But when you have a legal system all goes!?!?!? Are you doing something illegal are you legal??? You can enter in jail inocent by the same stupidity of this case.
 
BUTCH1 said:
I'd believe the 90 just by the severity of destruction but I wonder if that car had an "event data recorder" that has been around since '99 (that many still do not know about). If so it would have the vehicles speed at impact, braking, (if any), throttle position, G-forces, ect. It's possible that with a vehicle with that kind of performance and power the maker would intentionally not have an EDR installed. Might make the owner who shelled out $450K to buy it a tad angry if it had the capability of ratting you out.
EDIT:..I just found this, so the cops must know the exact speed upon impact.
Click to expand...

so the police with the black boxes they say 90 mph but the lawyers in the law sue they write 70 mph lol and those lawyers still have a license????

Because it all boils down to what speed was the accident. The layers want to present a much lower speed so to have the company liable. But do they even have the right to challenge the official report of 90 mph??? And if they have the right there should not be first a trial about the accident speed against the police department and then if won they can go against the company????
 
BUTCH1 said:
I'd believe the 90 just by the severity of destruction but I wonder if that car had an "event data recorder" that has been around since '99 (that many still do not know about). If so it would have the vehicles speed at impact, braking, (if any), throttle position, G-forces, ect. It's possible that with a vehicle with that kind of performance and power the maker would intentionally not have an EDR installed. Might make the owner who shelled out $450K to buy it a tad angry if it had the capability of ratting you out.
EDIT:..I just found this, so the cops must know the exact speed upon impact.
Click to expand...

That is interesting, an EDR black box for automobiles. I wonder what the data will be once these devices have been read and the data has been made public.
 
It doesn't really matter whether they went 70mph or 90mph or whatever.

What matters is that the Carrera GT (as some already pointed out) was designed to be a "hard" car without any electronic stabilization fanciness, "as close as you can get to a F1 car on the road".

And NOT designed to hit curves in a residential zone at 70mph or 90mph significantly over the speed limit (or "driver skill limit" for that matter).

Raw power, and not exactly a "safety car". And those who have that car value it because of that.
 
ALIVE said:
so the police with the black boxes they say 90 mph but the lawyers in the law sue they write 70 mph lol and those lawyers still have a license????

Because it all boils down to what speed was the accident. The layers want to present a much lower speed so to have the company liable. But do they even have the right to challenge the official report of 90 mph??? And if they have the right there should not be first a trial about the accident speed against the police department and then if won they can go against the company????
Click to expand...

they have to prove it was 70 mph. the cops CAN prove it was 90 though. if they go in saying 70 and the cops have proof at 90 they are going to hurt the case.

of course they have the right to challenge the police report. Everything is challenge in court. IF you can't prove what you said though you are just hurting your case.
 
I'd take a shotgun approach and sue the producers of fast and the furious, need for speed, gran turismo, forza, for causing a conservative young man like Paul Walker to be perverted by an addiction to speed, an addiction which lead to his tragic death.

Works for school shootings and video games. Might work for speeding deaths.
 
waggy said:
they have to prove it was 70 mph. the cops CAN prove it was 90 though. if they go in saying 70 and the cops have proof at 90 they are going to hurt the case.

of course they have the right to challenge the police report. Everything is challenge in court. IF you can't prove what you said though you are just hurting your case.
Click to expand...

you can challenge everything in the court. but it seems to want to do many things with 1 law suit. All the cars to get permit to be sold they take part in a crash test which is done is a specific speed and they evaluate the damage taken to the passengers. If it is kept in the acceptable damage the car pass the test and can be sold.

So the cats are regulated until a specific speed. All cars need to be the minimum safe with some companies improving even more the safety so the passenger takes practically no damage in the test so they can place them in the market as safe cars.

But when the speed starts going up the cars can protect you less and less and in the end it kills you. So the 20 mph difference is on purpose from the lawyers to blame the company. The car is tested in 40 mph so if you crash 2 cars together that will be the same as a cars going 80 mph.

So if they have a claim is all about the speed of the car. By the way the highest speed crash test was done in 120mph just for the fun of it.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-wall-120mph-speed-family-runarounds-hit.html
as you can see there is no car left.
 
norseamd said:
When safety belts were mandated the average speed of cars was much lower. Since then engines have evolved and improved. Any car you can buy is capable of 75MPH or more.

At today's top speeds the forces generated in an accident are easily high enough for the belt to break your ribs.

Lawyers do not understand the physics of the body interacting with the belt. This will happen with any modern car if crashed at top speed. Its not Porsche's problem. The problem is that the the speed simply exceeded the limit of force our body can take from the belt before getting damaged.

Why not sue the Pope for God making us fragile?! That makes about as much sense. Don't ignore reality just because the car was a Porsche. You still have to consider the other conditions in the accident.

They need to challenge the police report first to establish the speeds they claim. They can't just go to trial and say the car was doing 70 when the police say 90!
Click to expand...
FTFY and ALIVE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top