Homicide Charges To Result From Burnout Tragedy

he shouldn’t be charged at all!!! barriers should have been in place and only a small area at each rear tire should have been wet and that doesn’t require a fire truck to do that. The municipality should be held responsible.

Waivers should have been signed by everyone there. The driver and others in charge of the event should have asked everyone to stay a good ways back from his path.

I think of it this way: If it was a firetruck or city bus or police cruiser that lost control and smashed into a bunch of people, would the DA be going after the driver? I don’t think so.

What keeps coming to mind are the total mental deficiency shown by many offroad spectators. They stand on the outside of curves or even along the track in straightaways, exposed. I’ve seen cars passing by them with only feet, sometimes inches to spare. Then there’s the occasional but pretty much inevitable instance when someone loses control or someone dosen’t realize he’s standing in the way.
-
Given more thought yeah, the driver is at fault and deservedly so… in a CIVIL case. Otherwise it’s manslaughter, not homicide. If I were going to race or do an exhibit like burning rubber, I wouldn’t do so unless I’m assured people are safely out of the way for both my intended route, and in the event I go off course. The driver, in a case when safety considerations are apparently a shambles, bears the responsibility of making sure HE (or she) dosen’t endanger the public. Another option is that if the event looks unsafe, just shut down and go home, citing unsafe conditions.
-
Ya gotta think things through. It can save 100 million bucks or bankruptcy, and 6 counts of vehicular homicide, so it’s pretty important to make the right choices.
-
As far as the homicide counts are concerned, it’s a result of a mix of outraged families experiencing unimagineable losses… coupled with lawyers who salivate at the chance to take cases like this to the extreme. Shouldn’t matter though. At least in theory, if they’re right, he’ll be convicted on the counts. If not, he won’t or it will be reduced to manslaughter. Either way, he couldn’t afford another dragster if he wanted one.
-
The municipality? screwed. They failed the public bigtime, as long as the driver performed as they had planned before the accident.

With all due respect, it’s important to remember spectators are not profession and very respectfully have no idea what’s safe and what’s not. When attending something that is specifically on display to the general public they are legally allowed to assume they will not be put in harm’s way. For example, nobody would tell their children that they cannot go to a city parade because there might be something dangerous there.

But in this case there are numerous people that are and will be held accountable and in this order. First and foremost, the promoter (required by law) is held accountable for all and any accidents caused by any issues that arise from any part of the production. (in this case a parade.) Cites always require promoters to have a rather sizeable insurance policy and the standard practice is a Lloyds of London insurance policy. In this case if for some reason the city did not perform it’s legal duty in doing so then they too will be held accountable. Regardless, the city in this case will be held partially accountable since it is their responsibility to have fire, police and ambulance on hand and in this case, race cars performing burnouts, safety walls and fencing This is not something new, these have been standard legal practice in cities for years. As for the owner and driver of the car, they too will be held accountable especially since they are promoted as “professional” business and any court of law will state the obvious… “A professional should have known what the risk are and should have known better.

All in all, all three of these groups neglected to consider the publics safety and well being and all three will share in the law suit responsibility however the standard practice in these types of cases are that the owner/driver of the car will simply seek protection by filing bankruptcy. The promoter and city will not be as lucky. Because of my personal involvement with racing organizations I have carefully followed this case and it is equally important to remember one very important fact… The “city” had been allowing this exact type of event (major burnouts in the street in front of spectators) for several years and had in fact invited the funny car to return each year. For that reason alone the city will be held accountable and should have known better.

The driver should definitely not have to take sole responsibility for this.

The city’s to blame for not providing adequate protection. The spectators have some liability too for putting themselves at risk. They chose to stand where they did just like the idiots who choose to stand on the outside corners in rally racing. Nevertheless, I still think the city should’ve taken more precaution.

The MUNICIPALITY, CLEARLY. I also note that when crash protection isn’t present where a car like THIS is going to open up wide-throttle… The ONLY places that are safe are TO THE SIDE or TO THE SIDE AND REAR (at a safe distance).
-
Adult spectators should bear some responsibility FOR THEMSELVES, too.