wreck last night on 82W
unknown

Paris, TX

#41 Dec 6, 2009
me and a friend saw the whole wreck happen, my prayers are with ambers family..
SummerMeadow

Glen Rose, TX

#42 Dec 7, 2009
IF you saw the whole wreck happen e-mia lme and let me know what happen. I'm the boyfriends sister - in -law, and we are really wanting some anwsers.
SummerMeadow

Glen Rose, TX

#43 Dec 7, 2009
My email is [email protected]
the whole truth

Austin, TX

#44 Apr 8, 2010
1JaillID 149684 Confined 02/18/2010 Released 02/18/2010
Defendant Johnson, Rodney Lewis - 08/22/1971 Charge INTOXICATED MANSLAUGHTER W/VEHICLE
Department CONSTABLE PCT.5

“Illegitimi non carborundum”

Since: Apr 10

...

#45 Apr 8, 2010
the whole truth wrote:
1JaillID 149684 Confined 02/18/2010 Released 02/18/2010
Defendant Johnson, Rodney Lewis - 08/22/1971 Charge INTOXICATED MANSLAUGHTER W/VEHICLE
Department CONSTABLE PCT.5
I'm just curious as to your reasons for posting this?
Filldaddy

North Richland Hills, TX

#46 Apr 9, 2010
thinkin bee wrote:
according to witness the other driver was traveling at a high rate of speed, he did have his lights on, waiting for tox report for the blood alchol level on the guy driving, she (for what ever reason) turned in front of him. perhaps she misjudged the distance. tragic situation.
Was it another cop driving drunk? From all the instances in the last year, they seem to like doing that. No wonder people think it is acceptable to do so.
Accident

United States

#47 Apr 10, 2010
The woman that was killed turned in front of the man illegally. She caused the wreck.
beenthere

Paris, TX

#48 Apr 10, 2010
Accident wrote:
The woman that was killed turned in front of the man illegally. She caused the wreck.

The other car was coming at or near 100 mph (possibly exceeding). The young lady apparently did not realize how fast the gap between them would close. Had he been going the speed limit she would have had plenty of time to turn.

The only thing illegal that has been established is his approximate speed and that was determined by amount and severity of damage to vehicles.

This is documented in pending lawsuit and will be proven in court.
Accident

Arlington, TX

#49 Apr 10, 2010
beenthere wrote:
<quoted text>
The other car was coming at or near 100 mph (possibly exceeding). The young lady apparently did not realize how fast the gap between them would close. Had he been going the speed limit she would have had plenty of time to turn.
The only thing illegal that has been established is his approximate speed and that was determined by amount and severity of damage to vehicles.
This is documented in pending lawsuit and will be proven in court.
You really dont know if he was speeding or not. You can have as much damage going 50 as you can 70 to a 100. How much was his speeding ticket? It was an accident.
Sid

Paris, TX

#50 Apr 10, 2010
Accident wrote:
<quoted text>
You really dont know if he was speeding or not. You can have as much damage going 50 as you can 70 to a 100. How much was his speeding ticket? It was an accident.
I'm going by what the investigators have written in their reconstruction report, and yes I've seen the report.

The girl's car is sitting at Williams Brothers Auto Salvage on North Main Street in Paris. Go look at it and then tell someone that the car that hit it wasn't speeding, or that is was only going 50 or 70 mph. Better yet, why don't you go tell the team that came here and examined the car. I'm sure they would love for you to 'straighten them out'.

And if you got balls...go tell it to the girl's family.
momma lynn

Healdton, OK

#51 Apr 10, 2010
amen. He shouldnt have had alchol in his system either!!!
NiNi

Paris, TX

#52 Apr 10, 2010
beenthere wrote:
<quoted text>
The other car was coming at or near 100 mph (possibly exceeding). The young lady apparently did not realize how fast the gap between them would close. Had he been going the speed limit she would have had plenty of time to turn.
The only thing illegal that has been established is his approximate speed and that was determined by amount and severity of damage to vehicles.
This is documented in pending lawsuit and will be proven in court.
...true.
hayseed

Blossom, TX

#53 Apr 10, 2010
Accident wrote:
<quoted text>
You really dont know if he was speeding or not. You can have as much damage going 50 as you can 70 to a 100. How much was his speeding ticket? It was an accident.
50 mph is definitely fast enough to cause a lot of damage. Common sense tells me that the same car going 100 mph would do twice as much damage. But my common sense is wrong.
Energy is calculated thus: 1/2 (Mass X Volume squared)= Kinetic Energy.
Hence, a car impacting at 100 mph will transfer four times as much energy as it would at 50 mph.
But I think you may have been saying that dead is equal to dead times two, which I believe is exactly correct.
Accident

Arlington, TX

#54 Apr 11, 2010
Sid wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm going by what the investigators have written in their reconstruction report, and yes I've seen the report.
The girl's car is sitting at Williams Brothers Auto Salvage on North Main Street in Paris. Go look at it and then tell someone that the car that hit it wasn't speeding, or that is was only going 50 or 70 mph. Better yet, why don't you go tell the team that came here and examined the car. I'm sure they would love for you to 'straighten them out'.
And if you got balls...go tell it to the girl's family.
I dont know who the investigators were but I guarantee you that the defense can find a team who will say the opposite. Investigators have a tendancy to say what whoever hires them wants them to say. Theres rarely impartial investigators. In this case the investigator is either being paid by the family who wants money and a conviction or the County Attorney who wants a conviction. I dont know the womans family but whoever they are I have the balls to say it to their face but I dont have any reason to do it. Theyre only doing what most people in the same situation would do.
Accident

Arlington, TX

#55 Apr 11, 2010
hayseed wrote:
<quoted text>
50 mph is definitely fast enough to cause a lot of damage. Common sense tells me that the same car going 100 mph would do twice as much damage. But my common sense is wrong.
Energy is calculated thus: 1/2 (Mass X Volume squared)= Kinetic Energy.
Hence, a car impacting at 100 mph will transfer four times as much energy as it would at 50 mph.
But I think you may have been saying that dead is equal to dead times two, which I believe is exactly correct.
If that were the case, all wrecks with cars going the same speed would sustain the same amount of damage and thats not true. Ive seen high speed wrecks with little damage and Ive seen wrecks at low speeds where the vehicle was totaled.
hayseed

Blossom, TX

#56 Apr 11, 2010
Accident wrote:
<quoted text>
If that were the case, all wrecks with cars going the same speed would sustain the same amount of damage and thats not true. Ive seen high speed wrecks with little damage and Ive seen wrecks at low speeds where the vehicle was totaled.
Cars are of different weights, design, material, and workmanship. Then you have to consider angles of impact, where 1/2 of a degree can make a huge difference. But what I posted is taught by the experts, not made up by me. You are the first expert I've heard of to dispute it.
http://id.mind.net/~zona/mstm/physics/mechani...
Google if you want. You will get a jillion sites giving the same formula.
Chirpes sake

Paris, TX

#57 Apr 11, 2010
Accident wrote:
<quoted text>
If that were the case, all wrecks with cars going the same speed would sustain the same amount of damage and thats not true. Ive seen high speed wrecks with little damage and Ive seen wrecks at low speeds where the vehicle was totaled.
'Totaled' is the cost of repair vs value of vehicle. Has NOTHING to do with speeds at time of impact....dummy
byebye

Paris, TX

#58 Apr 11, 2010
Accident wrote:
<quoted text>
I dont know who the investigators were but I guarantee you that the defense can find a team who will say the opposite. Investigators have a tendancy to say what whoever hires them wants them to say. Theres rarely impartial investigators. In this case the investigator is either being paid by the family who wants money and a conviction or the County Attorney who wants a conviction. I dont know the womans family but whoever they are I have the balls to say it to their face but I dont have any reason to do it. Theyre only doing what most people in the same situation would do.
Ok Mr. hotshit Expert,

...want the address and phone number so you can 'show off' your balls to the family?

It will damn likely be the last showing.
momma lynn

Healdton, OK

#59 Apr 11, 2010
Every one needs to let this girl rest in peace and quit the back and forth bull. Keeping all this going is only hurting this family more let the judical system handle this case from here on out. Please
david7290

Paris, TX

#60 Apr 11, 2010
Most agreed.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Paris Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Lamar Co Humane Society & Dr Bryan, Veterinarian 1 hr Just my thoughts 1
What the real Booker T story??? 3 hr KingKunta 8
Tony M 3 hr Get a life 333
Boys head split open by Paris Police. 3 hr KingKunta 36
Tidwell tax lien thread now deleted twice in 7 ... 3 hr true american 3
Nikki Norton 5 hr Tactics 54
Petition to raise minimum wage to $12 an hour!; 5 hr Laughing 12
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Paris Mortgages