Actor's Family Sues Porsche for Negligence - His Car Crashed at 94 mph.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 27, 2015 11:54 PM GMT
    Paul Walker, the dead actor, wasn't on a racetrack when the car crashed at 94 mph - they were on city streets in LA. I hope Porsche doesn't offer them a penny in settlement. Perhaps the parents should consider themselves negligent in raising a kid who grows up to be someone who go joyriding in the streets of Los Angeles at racetrack speeds. If I were on a jury in a case like this, I wouldn't given them one cent.

    http://www.ew.com/article/2015/11/25/paul-walkers-father-sues-porsche-wrongful-death-negligence
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 28, 2015 12:37 AM GMT
    You should read the complaint and see on what grounds they are basing their claim on. Only in America. They've also requested a trial by jury. If granted, they only have to convince the jury of their claims.
  • ChicagoSteve

    Posts: 1278

    Nov 28, 2015 2:08 AM GMT
    Paul Walker was not driving the car, he was the passenger. The driver was friend and business associate Roger Rodas. Maybe that specific car had a mechanical failure that prevented them from braking. In the lawsuit that Paul Walker's father filed against Porsche, the following items were noted:


    The lawsuit cites features included in other pending lawsuits against the automaker over the crash that might have saved the actor's life, including a stability control system, side-door reinforcements and a breakaway fuel line to help prevent the car from bursting into flames after a collision.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 28, 2015 10:24 PM GMT
    ChicagoSteve saidPaul Walker was not driving the car, he was the passenger. The driver was friend and business associate Roger Rodas. Maybe that specific car had a mechanical failure that prevented them from braking. In the lawsuit that Paul Walker's father filed against Porsche, the following items were noted:


    The lawsuit cites features included in other pending lawsuits against the automaker over the crash that might have saved the actor's life, including a stability control system, side-door reinforcements and a breakaway fuel line to help prevent the car from bursting into flames after a collision.

    No car is designed to be crash-safe at 90 mph, and no one should expect them to be.

    He was a passenger? So What? He chose to go joy-riding at high speed on city streets. There is no street in LA where it safe to drive over 90 mph. He gambled on thrill and lost. The father is going to get 9 people on a jury to blame Porsche because passengers don't survive a 90 mph crash in their car? Not bloody likely. Check back in 5 years (that's how long it takes to get to trial there.)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 30, 2015 7:16 PM GMT
    i do not see any bad suing a major corporation. especially one that i dont own their stock. I hope the plaintiffs win big. Its not like you buy a mighty Porsche to just get groceries.



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 30, 2015 10:38 PM GMT
    OK, lemme see if I understand this. Another guy drives a car around 100 mph, on a public surface street, not a freeway. He crashes it, and it disintegrates. So the father of the dead passenger sues the car maker. Do I have that correct?

    Now what car is supposed to provide protection when hitting a tree or other stationary hard object at around 100 mph? Is that a US Federal requirement? And I understand the car was modified after sale, was not in the original condition that Porche made & sold it.

    And can a car be reliably controlled on a public street at those speeds? Streets that aren't built and leveled to racetrack standards? That may have dips and irregularities that are satisfactory for a posted 35 mph, but not at a 100 mph rate of speed? Streets that don't have racetrack barriers that contain cars, but rather are lined with trees, and traffic & light poles?

    In my view a frivolous lawsuit. The real target should be the late driver's estate. But I guess Porsche has the deeper pockets.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 30, 2015 11:02 PM GMT
    ChicagoSteve saidPaul Walker was not driving the car, he was the passenger. The driver was friend and business associate Roger Rodas. Maybe that specific car had a mechanical failure that prevented them from braking. In the lawsuit that Paul Walker's father filed against Porsche, the following items were noted:


    The lawsuit cites features included in other pending lawsuits against the automaker over the crash that might have saved the actor's life, including a stability control system, side-door reinforcements and a breakaway fuel line to help prevent the car from bursting into flames after a collision.


    Anybody out really hot dogging it ..... the very first thing they do is turn the stability system off.

    True, the systems have gotten so good 'these days' that it takes a really skillful driver to be able to beat it in track environments, but beat it they can.

    And true, the Carrera GT was pretty tricky at the limit with that kind of rearward weight bias, but this is all driver. Porsche had little to do with it.

    And this is side impact at 100 mph. It's a matter of luck, but you're generally toast as was the case literally and figurative in this instance.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 01, 2015 12:23 AM GMT
    freedomisntfree said
    Anybody out really hot dogging it ..... the very first thing they do is turn the stability system off.

    True, the systems have gotten so good 'these days' that it takes a really skillful driver to be able to beat it in track environments, but beat it they can.

    And true, the Carrera GT was pretty tricky at the limit with that kind of rearward weight bias, but this is all driver. Porsche had little to do with it.

    And this is side impact at 100 mph. It's a matter of luck, but you're generally toast as was the case literally and figurative in this instance.

    Agreed. And as I wrote above, how is any track car near 100 mph supposed to deal with normal irregularities in a road surface designed for about 35? This was a car with a racetrack suspension, that may have been further modified after purchase. Not a rally car, that might have been more forgiving on real-world roads.

    No, I judge this plain driver error. To blame Porsche after an illegal 100-mph crash on a local residential road is pure greed.