Like it or not Poles had a point not taking Carter

[Bearly]

Did I say a take on race cars for street sales? I said I'm amazed FCA weren't named in an obvious deep pockets lawsuit.
I have no problem with Chargers/Challengers/Trackhawks other than Chargers/Challengers have too much power for their traction but the Grand Cherokee doesn't have that issue. When you start spinning trying to pass someone on the interstate you have a design problem. Mustangs and Corvettes don't seem to have that problem.
The fact that FCA put a speed limiter on other Jeeps during the runs of Grand Cherokee Trackhawks seems to be a admission of something.
Even if I was against fast cars as far as I know V8s are no more because of EPA rules (and V6 is on its way out too).

And BTW gun manufacturers are named in deep pockets lawsuits and I'm not necessarily against that. I am against protecting companies against product liability suits. What I'm against is anti-gunners using deep pockets lawsuits to bankrupt gun manufacturers because they know they can't legally ban guns. In general I'm against deep pockets lawsuits, judges and juries should be the filter for that but too often they're not. But they are common so I'm amazed when someone with deep pockets isn't named.

When it comes down to it the people who own fast cars are the ones responsible just like people who own guns. Carter is the only one who should be getting sued in this, if anyone (because he wasn't driving the crashed vehicle).

Last I'll say in this forum about it but unless you think assault rifle makers should be able to get sued over a shooting, your on both sides of that fence.
Also, lots of cars faster than those and Carter's vehicle was not directly involved in the crash. He was simply there.

 

[Antobears]

I'm amazed FCA/Stellantis isn't included in the lawsuit. You make race cars for general sales, people are going to use their race cars.

This probably tells you more about the strength of the case against Carter. Difference is there's pressure to tidy up Carter's affairs quickly. Can't see how he's legally liable unless the cars were in close proximity. What you think?

 

[pdxbearsfan]

What are you talking about? This case has merit and will result in a verdict in favor of the Wilcox family, if not settled out of court ahead of time. Chandler LeCroy was an employee of UGA and the vehicle she was driving was owned by UGA. Wilcox died due to the negligence of LeCroy. This case was always going to be brought, and I'm sure a sea of lawyers were standing in line to take the case.

He will lose millions as well as UGA, simple case. Carter will be a bust and gone in a couple of years, does not appear to have the heart, drive and love of the game to be successful.

 

[maxhatter]

He will lose millions as well as UGA, simple case. Carter will be a bust and gone in a couple of years, does not appear to have the heart, drive and love of the game to be successful.

Carter is named in the lawsuit because that's what lawyers do. The real case is against UGA and it's worth millions. Carter's not the big fish in this lawsuit. To be successful against him they would have to show that Carter's reckless driving was a contributing factor in the crash. I don't know if there is enough evidence there, but I'm sure a slew of investigators are piecing the accident back together. This will be hanging over Carter until it gets resolved. If I were representing Carter, I would try and settle as quickly as possible

 

[Calabis]

Ummm isn't the driver racing him the one liable

 

[iueyedoc]

Not much to take on. There are no criminal charges forthcoming as the criminal case has been settled. Only civil suits to come. Don't really see how anyone but the intoxicated driver could be found liable for the death of the player who was in the car with her.

You don't see it because you aren't very smart.

What Does “Implied Malice” Mean For My Case?​

In any scenario where a driver intentionally engages in illegal or dangerous activity, he assumes responsibility for the consequences. This idea is called “implied malice,” and it applies to everyone in the race, not just the ones involved in the collision.

Racers are already breaking several laws: speeding, reckless driving, engaging in a speed challenge and other offenses. If their criminal activities lead to a fatal accident, the charges they face afterward will reflect that.

When the dust settles and the smoke clears, street racers could find themselves charged with anything from vehicular manslaughter and reckless driving causing injury to second-degree murder. Everyone involved in the “impromptu street race” can be charged, with varying degrees of liability.

 

[bears5150]

Have no problem passing on Carter. Hope he changes his life and has a good career. Keep in mind you cant fix stupid

 

[Warrior Spirit]

You don't see it because you aren't very smart.

What Does “Implied Malice” Mean For My Case?​

In any scenario where a driver intentionally engages in illegal or dangerous activity, he assumes responsibility for the consequences. This idea is called “implied malice,” and it applies to everyone in the race, not just the ones involved in the collision.

Racers are already breaking several laws: speeding, reckless driving, engaging in a speed challenge and other offenses. If their criminal activities lead to a fatal accident, the charges they face afterward will reflect that.

When the dust settles and the smoke clears, street racers could find themselves charged with anything from vehicular manslaughter and reckless driving causing injury to second-degree murder. Everyone involved in the “impromptu street race” can be charged, with varying degrees of liability.

You're obviously less smart than me cause, fact is, criminal case against him has already been settled and no more criminal charges can be brought against him for that case as it was indeed settled. Of course, there's going to be lawsuits from those looking to get money from anybody they can but that's just about money.

 

[maxhatter]

Ummm isn't the driver racing him the one liable

The quick answer is yes, but this is a civil case. In a civil case, the standard of proof is entirely different. In a criminal case, the prosecutors would have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Carter had direct involvement in the crash. In a civil case, all they have to prove is that it was more likely than not that his actions contributed to the crash. That is a very low threshold. Question: if she wasn't racing with Carter would she have been traveling at 100 mph? If she wasn't driving at 100 mph would she have had more control of her vehicle? If she wasn't driving at 100 mph when she crashed would Willock have been thrown from the vehicle? I can't answer any of those questions, but I'm sure the lawyers and their investigators will be making that case.

 

[Myk]

Last I'll say in this forum about it but unless you think assault rifle makers should be able to get sued over a shooting, your on both sides of that fence.
Also, lots of cars faster than those and Carter's vehicle was not directly involved in the crash. He was simply there.

So you think car manufacturers should be sued for people using their product illegally? Someone speeds, sue Ford. Double parks, sue GM. Drives drunk, sue FCA. Any of the 35K people a year who die in accidents, sue the car makers.
We can even go further, everyone responsible for raising a criminal should be sued. Parents, teachers, shrinks.
That's the world you want.
I think the people doing the crimes are the ones responsible not the makers of the object that can be used for good or bad depending person using it. I'm not on both sides of the fence but it seems you likely are since you limited it to "assault rifle" makers.

You shouldn't have brought it up in this forum the first time. It was obvious from the start you were wanting to go political. I was commenting on an NFL player's future deep pockets lawsuits which is not limited to Carter. Didn't Marshall have similar from a college GF once he got money?
People smell money and the sharks come out. Yep, that's an opening for a gun topic that if I ever had here was a long time ago.

I already said Carter probably shouldn't be named (other than what ieuyedoc covered which I think is taken too far).
At least from what I know of the situation and how I imagine it played out I don't imagine him pressuring the Ford to race against her will. Even if he was the instigator a Trackhawk would've left an Expedition in the dust instantly and she could've given up trying a split second after someone said go if she didn't want to race. At no point in the game was that match up a race.

I don't know what "a lot of cars faster than those" has to do with anything other than you want to have issues with anything I say. I bet almost every driver of those other cars built to have a reputation for speed drives them well over the speed limits and probably does reckless driving daily, just like many owners of crotch rockets do when they pop wheelies.
Hell, many people without fast cars think 10-20mph over the speed limit is perfectly OK in town. Sue their driver's ed teacher.

 

[Bearly]

So you think car manufacturers should be sued for people using their product illegally? Someone speeds, sue Ford. Double parks, sue GM. Drives drunk, sue FCA. Any of the 35K people a year who die in accidents, sue the car makers.
We can even go further, everyone responsible for raising a criminal should be sued. Parents, teachers, shrinks.
That's the world you want.
I think the people doing the crimes are the ones responsible not the makers of the object that can be used for good or bad depending person using it. I'm not on both sides of the fence but it seems you likely are since you limited it to "assault rifle" makers.

You shouldn't have brought it up in this forum the first time. It was obvious from the start you were wanting to go political. I was commenting on an NFL player's future deep pockets lawsuits which is not limited to Carter. Didn't Marshall have similar from a college GF once he got money?
People smell money and the sharks come out. Yep, that's an opening for a gun topic that if I ever had here was a long time ago.

I already said Carter probably shouldn't be named (other than what ieuyedoc covered which I think is taken too far).
At least from what I know of the situation and how I imagine it played out I don't imagine him pressuring the Ford to race against her will. Even if he was the instigator a Trackhawk would've left an Expedition in the dust instantly and she could've given up trying a split second after someone said go if she didn't want to race. At no point in the game was that match up a race.

I don't know what "a lot of cars faster than those" has to do with anything other than you want to have issues with anything I say. I bet almost every driver of those other cars built to have a reputation for speed drives them well over the speed limits and probably does reckless driving daily, just like many owners of crotch rockets do when they pop wheelies.
Hell, many people without fast cars think 10-20mph over the speed limit is perfectly OK in town. Sue their driver's ed teacher.

Of course I don't think manufacturers should be held responsible, just like with guns and why I brought them up. It's just not a thing without a mechanical failure/flaw. You're the one that said you were surprised the car company wasn't in the suit and went on a rant about overpowered vehicles. Did you have an actual point about something that doesn't happen or just ricocheting around as usual?

Here you go.

Why Traffic Violence Victims Can't Easily Sue Automakers That Advertise Cars That Kill — Streetsblog USA

Legal experts explain why the victims of traffic violence can't likely sue U.S. automakers on the basis that their advertising campaigns lead drivers to misuse cars.

usa.streetsblog.org

Didn't mean to bring guns back into this and will try to refrain but these posts aren't about guns. They are about legally accepted directed responsibility.

 

[ZOMBIE@CTESPN]

You're obviously less smart than me cause, fact is, criminal case against him has already been settled and no more criminal charges can be brought against him for that case as it was indeed settled. Of course, there's going to be lawsuits from those looking to get money from anybody they can but that's just about money.

Thanks idiot

 

[Myk]

Of course I don't think manufacturers should be held responsible, just like with guns and why I brought them up. It's just not a thing without a mechanical failure/flaw. You're the one that said you were surprised the car company wasn't in the suit and went on a rant about overpowered vehicles. Did you have an actual point about something that doesn't happen or just ricocheting around as usual?

Here you go.

Why Traffic Violence Victims Can't Easily Sue Automakers That Advertise Cars That Kill — Streetsblog USA

Legal experts explain why the victims of traffic violence can't likely sue U.S. automakers on the basis that their advertising campaigns lead drivers to misuse cars.

usa.streetsblog.org

Didn't mean to bring guns back into this and will try to refrain but these posts aren't about guns. They are about legally accepted directed responsibility.

OK. It was cynicism about the way people are when it comes to searching for deep pockets. Like the article pointed out it's really a settlement without a court case that they're after.

I'm pretty sure the dealer wouldn't have even $10M to settle with. Carter probably won't for 4 years. The college maybe but they tend to waste a lot and run like a non-profit where a lot of people make profit. The only risk I can see by including FCA is they can afford better lawyers.

Especially Dodge/FCA that your article mentions because they wanted powerful cars to be their reputation and advertised it. The computer they put in the vehicles has track settings just like mine has for offroad.
If they want to hold the car dealer who gave Carter the vehicle (had I known that I would've been slightly more OK with drafting him), Carter and the person who died's employer responsible I am amazed they didn't include FCA. If they're wanting $40m that's the deepest pockets of them all. And outside of possibly Carter if he pressured her for the race, they are the "guiltiest" of all of them.

I don't call "You make race cars for general sales, people are going to use their race cars." a rant.

 

[Runruffshod75]

To much risk to the locker room. I agree

Jalen Carter faces lawsuit in death of former teammate Devin Willock

Eagles rookie Jalen Carter faces a lawsuit stemming from a car crash that killed his former Georgia teammate, Devin Willock, Shehan Jeyarajah of CBS Sports reports.

profootballtalk.nbcsports.com

I'm glad the Bears passed on Carter. I didn't get the hype before the supposed character flaws.

I really believe that players like Carter are the byproduct of nickel and dime social media experts all circle jerking around one player.

Go look at players like SUH, SAPP, ATKINS, DONALD, CASEY, MCCOY, HARRIS when they were leaving college ball to enter the draft. Do people really see a player like the above mentioned when they watch Carter?

I dont. No way.

 

[modo]

Its not just the car racing incident.

There is a belief that his work ethic isn't at an NFL level. Whether that is true or not, or if he can turn it around, remains to be seen.

I'd prefer the Bears take a solid olineman anyway. Fields' success is more important to the success of the team.

 

[Antobears]

Its not just the car racing incident.

There is a belief that his work ethic isn't at an NFL level. Whether that is true or not, or if he can turn it around, remains to be seen.

I'd prefer the Bears take a solid olineman anyway. Fields' success is more important to the success of the team.

Exactly. Maybe carter proves the Bears wrong. But the Bears' focus on defence without putting enough resources into offence hasn't worked. Time to try a different approach.

 

[Mdbearz]

I imagine it was not a single issue that deterred the Bears, but all of the things added up....

I think he will have a great season or two, but eventually the work ethic or getting in trouble will show up again, and it never comes at a good time.

 

[iueyedoc]

I imagine it was not a single issue that deterred the Bears, but all of the things added up....

I think he will have a great season or two, but eventually the work ethic or getting in trouble will show up again, and it never comes at a good time.

This accompanied on CCS with the kneejerk #calledit #Polesisanidiot crew chest thumping way before seeing how the entire first contract with the players plays out.

 

[Bearly]

Its not just the car racing incident.

There is a belief that his work ethic isn't at an NFL level. Whether that is true or not, or if he can turn it around, remains to be seen.

I'd prefer the Bears take a solid olineman anyway. Fields' success is more important to the success of the team.

If he nailed his pro day and and Rah Rah the interviews he'd have made a lot more money in this draft. Seems like a guy that nothing motivates and poor fit here. I was really hoping that evaluation would have gone differently and that this staff felt they could extract his potential but I completely understand that the less than good risk/reward for the Bear was not favorable. Better for a team that either needs that final piece or can afford a fail.

 

[modo]

If he nailed his pro day and and Rah Rah the interviews he'd have made a lot more money in this draft. Seems like a guy that nothing motivates and poor fit here. I was really hoping that evaluation would have gone differently and that this staff felt they could extract his potential but I completely understand that the less than good risk/reward for the Bear was not favorable. Better for a team that either needs that final piece or can afford a fail.

A team, like the Eagles, that are close to the Superbowl, can afford this type of risk.

Even if the Bears were close, I don't think they like to gamble on people like this.