This is why I have a dash cam | Page 20 | GTAMotorcycle.com

This is why I have a dash cam

Status
Not open for further replies.
turbodish said:
The problem is I'm not seeing anything in the video that cannot be easily explained away by mistake, stupidity, true belief, or a combination of all of the above. The exculptory indicators pile up just as much as the supposedly damning ones. He called the cops himself. He went to his insurance company himself with a claim of being rear-ended. Seeing as he did that, did he also file a claim for soft tissue injury while he was there, yes or no? So, is that just bluster and scamming at play? Or is that simply true but mistaken belief?

In any case, the flip side to your assertion is that if an argument against innocence is that he actions looked like he may have been committing an offence even if only poorly, then no one would ever get acquitted. What was that saying that Rob likes to quote so often - better that ten guilty go free than once innocent....?
Click to expand...

That would be Justice Sir William Blackstone who said, “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.”

Which is why I would like to see this guy charged and in court, rather than have a bunch of internet vigilantes be charged with stalking, while he goes free.
 
turbodish said:
If you look at the first couple of seconds of the video and not the sped-up portions in the various replay parts of it, the speed of the roll-back in the video isn't that fast and is consistent with a simple, unassisted roll-back on a slight grade. The place in question appears to be eastbound 401, just east of Jane Street and adjacent to Lorne Bruce Drive. The 401 at that point is going up a steady grade from a low point at the Black Creek behind the two drivers and continues towards the Keele Street off-ramp and beyond to the high point between Keele and Dufferin before descending again. Having driven that stretch for many years, the grade that I recall can hardly be considered flat or near flat. It's no hill-climb, but it does seem sufficient to cause roll-back if a car is left in neutral or the clutch is depressed.
Click to expand...

Okay, I'm going to go do it myself.

I don't have the same model of car, but it does have a manual transmission and is comparable in weight and size ... and just to give the roll-back theory a fighting chance, I'm going to pump all four tires up to 44 psi, maximum on the sidewall. Brakes have JUST been done - all four corners, last week, nothing's dragging.

I realize that Turbo is still going to pull the VW versus Acura angle, but I'm not buying it - it won't make an appreciable difference.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
turbodish said:
The problem is I'm not seeing anything in the video that cannot be easily explained away by mistake, stupidity, true belief, or a combination of all of the above. The exculptory indicators pile up just as much as the supposedly damning ones. He called the cops himself. He went to his insurance company himself with a claim of being rear-ended. Seeing as he did that, did he also file a claim for soft tissue injury while he was there, yes or no? So, is that just bluster and scamming at play? Or is that simply true but mistaken belief?

In any case, the flip side to your assertion is that if an argument against innocence is that he actions looked like he may have been committing an offence even if only poorly, then no one would ever get acquitted. What was that saying that Rob likes to quote so often - better that ten guilty go free than once innocent....?
Click to expand...

I didn't make an argument "against" innocence. I am just saying that the idea that someone could have done something "better" is not useful.

I am not a court, I don't need to give anyone the benefit of the doubt. I am just saying what I believe based on what I saw. I think the "scamming" explaination is more likely than the "oblivious" explaination. The fact that you don't believe the same thing doesn't really change my mind.

I also think OJ is guilty and I also think Casey Anthony is guilty.
I think the cops who tasered that guy in the BC airport are guilty.

And you know what. Just because there is a judicial decision saying they can't prove that beyond a reasonable doubt doesn't mean they weren't.
 
Last edited:
OpenGambit said:
I didn't make an argument "against" innocence. I am just saying that the idea that someone could have done something "better" is not useful
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but the masses here are basing a verdict of guilt based on a video of what appears to be an ordinary every-day kind of minor collision.

There is no usable sound on it. It's been edited to include text bubbles based on one side's version of what was said. And that's it. There is no clear indication of any deliberate wrong-doing or criminal intent on it.

Yet the hounds are baying for blood. What comes to mind are the Salem Witch Trials.
The episode is one of the most famous cases of mass hysteria, and has been used in political rhetoric and popular literature as a vivid cautionary tale about the dangers of isolationism, religious extremism, false accusations and lapses in due process.[SUP][1][/SUP] It was not unique, being an American example of the much larger phenomenon of witch trials in the Early Modern period.
Click to expand...
And, it appears, of vigilante "trials" to this day.

I find it especially ironic here on this forum, where so many bemoan the "police state" taking away their righst and right to due process. Yet here we see that the masses are quite eager to do the same if given the opportunity.
 
20pg so far and nobody has bothered to ask why the car was stopped in the middle lane of a three lane highway in the first place, without 4-way flashers or anything to warn approaching traffic that he was immobile.

Add my vote to the "Scam" contigent.
 
Gummiente said:
20pg so far and nobody has bothered to ask why the car was stopped in the middle lane of a three lane highway in the first place, without 4-way flashers or anything to warn approaching traffic that he was immobile.

Add my vote to the "Scam" contigent.
Click to expand...

First few seconds of the video shows the cars in the lane to the immediate left slowing as well, just not to a complete stop. This kind of traffic flow where one lane stops while others keep moving is common enough on the 401 at rush hour. All it takes is a lane change by another car into your lane by someone a dozen or more cars ahead of you.
 
Last edited:
Well turbo I did mention previously that I accept that the video isn't conclusive proof. I also specifically mentioned the lack of sound and the fact that the speech bubbles are really just whatever the filming party said.

I get what you are saying, but I am just not buying the "easily explained away" part.

I dont' comment on the 4chan stuff because 1. i am not following it really, and 2. its not like my opinion on it matters.

Funny you mention the police state thing because I was suprised at the "why not" response that people on the board gave to the "mandatory camera" thread.
 
Last edited:
Brian P said:
Okay, I'm going to go do it myself.

I don't have the same model of car, but it does have a manual transmission and is comparable in weight and size ... and just to give the roll-back theory a fighting chance, I'm going to pump all four tires up to 44 psi, maximum on the sidewall. Brakes have JUST been done - all four corners, last week, nothing's dragging.

I realize that Turbo is still going to pull the VW versus Acura angle, but I'm not buying it - it won't make an appreciable difference.
Click to expand...


Don't bother Brian, besides the safety issue even if you replicated with the same car turbo would come back with wanting the wind blowing exactly the same and the position of the moon pulling on the car with the same gravitational force and the car wasn't aligned in the ruts the same way.
 
turbodish said:
First few seconds of the video shows the cars in the lane to the immediate left slowing as well, just not to a complete stop. This kind of traffic flow where one lane stops while others keep moving is common enough on the 401 at rush hour. All it takes is a lane change by another car into your lane by someone a dozen or more cars ahead of you.
Click to expand...

I watched the entire video. And I've been through Toronto many a time amd am well aware of how the traffic flows or, in some cases, doesn't.

Scam.
 
Gummiente said:
I watched the entire video. And I've been through Toronto many a time amd am well aware of how the traffic flows or, in some cases, doesn't.

Scam.
Click to expand...

That spot is just past where the core to collector transfer lanes end before Keele. I used to drive that stretch daily for years. Traffic coming off the core lanes and heading for the Keele off-ramp regularly bunged up traffic behind them as they tried to find an open spot to their right, and once in that spot, would bung up traffic in their new lanes until they found another opening the next lane to their right. The net result is traffic stop and go behind them as they wormed their way from left side of collectors to the right side and then finally off at the Keele ramp, all in a fairly short distance.

With respect to that area, it is a steady uphill grade and fairly decent uphill grade at that which would easily facilitate the apparent "reversing" shown in the video. Between that and the typical traffic flow in that stretch, what is seen on the video is no real surprise, easily understandable, and hardly evidence of intentional wrong-doing.
 
Last edited:
CruisnGrrl said:
Don't bother Brian, besides the safety issue even if you replicated with the same car turbo would come back with wanting the wind blowing exactly the same and the position of the moon pulling on the car with the same gravitational force and the car wasn't aligned in the ruts the same way.
Click to expand...

Nothing better to add?
 
turbodish said:
That spot is where the core to collector transfer lanes end before Keele.
Click to expand...

The location and historical traffic flow is irrelevant. I watched the video before wading into this thread and my ******** meter pegged the needle and broke the glass. Nothing I've read here has changed that opinion/feeling, not even your usual opposing viewpoint.
 
turbodish said:
Fair enough, but the masses here are basing a verdict of guilt based on a video of what appears to be an ordinary every-day kind of minor collision.

There is no usable sound on it. It's been edited to include text bubbles based on one side's version of what was said. And that's it. There is no clear indication of any deliberate wrong-doing or criminal intent on it.

Yet the hounds are baying for blood. What comes to mind are the Salem Witch Trials.

And, it appears, of vigilante "trials" to this day.

I find it especially ironic here on this forum, where so many bemoan the "police state" taking away their righst and right to due process. Yet here we see that the masses are quite eager to do the same if given the opportunity.
Click to expand...

No less so than your defence of the right to trial, of someone with reasonable video evidence against him, where you generally seem to support punishment without trial.

*EDIT* And you're completely discounting the elements, that make it look like anything BUT an everyday accident.
 
Last edited:
Test complete, right at the spot being discussed - just past the end of the express-to-collector transfer lane merge and just before the Keele St exit ramp.

Guess what ... the car rolls back. Slowly, but it does roll back. I have a video and I'll post it shortly. The speed was too low to register on the speedometer (which, on my car, operates in reverse).

However, this doesn't change my opinion - only that it's most likely that the scammer took advantage of the slight grade as opposed to intentionally reversing. Slowing down at the rate approximating as shown on the original video required applying the brakes on my car, and there were no brake lamps visible in the original video (but you could see the turn signals, which are the same colour on that car). There are ample visual cues around to tip off the driver that the car is rolling back, and ample time to react, and yet he didn't stop, nor when the horn was used.

Most likely motivation ... scam.

Can it be proven, perhaps not. But at a minimum, in addition to being at-fault in the collision, we have:
- Operating an unsafe vehicle (no brake lamps)
- Reversing on a highway HTA s. 157(1)
 
Rob MacLennan said:
No less so than your defence of the right to trial, of someone with reasonable video evidence against him, where you generally seem to support punishment without trial.

*EDIT* And you're completely discounting the elements, that make it look like anything BUT an everyday accident.
Click to expand...

And just what elements are those again, and as evidenced by what exactly again?
 
... and failure to notice and do anything about roll-back for 4 seconds or thereabouts. In doing this test, it is readily apparent that the car is rolling back, there are plenty of visual cues in the surroundings.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom