Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Clint Milby on July 9, 2013 at 11:53pm

I hear what you're saying about the tree, but literally, the only damage to the tree is the superficial charing on the bark.  If a vehicle hit it at even 40mph, there would be more damage than just scratches, and there is literally no damage there at all.  

Also there are no skid marks anywhere that would indicate someone tried to break before impact.  At the time I took these pictures, the ground around was still damp with fuel to the point that it was on my pants when I got up from taking the pictures.  

What actually happened here, I would only be guessing, but it's unusual there are no skid marks or at the very least small pieces of metal, plastic or glass stuck into the tree from the impact.  The burns on the tree are so precise they look like they were drawn with a straight edge.  I'd be curious what someone with fire/rescue experience would say about this, but the only the thing I can say for sure is that it is unusual.  

Regarding the Fire Dept. I'm not surprised   The LAFD works close with the LAPD in sting operations to provide cover, surveillance, investigation and distraction during countywide sweeps organized by the LAPD, LASD the FBI and Homeland Security. Thanks for the info! 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nobody Will Observe on July 9, 2013 at 11:58pm

I think the crash is very questionable!  I question the official story, just as you do.

I just know that that palm is very strong that's all. It looks Gouged to me?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clint Milby on July 10, 2013 at 1:15am

It's superficial - the scaring.  The scars, by their depth and length, look more like impact from a shopping cart rather than a Mercedes traveling at top speed.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nobody Will Observe on July 10, 2013 at 1:16am

OK. We both agree something isn't right with this story

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dave on July 15, 2013 at 2:48pm

Had a question for you VooDoo6Actual, if it’s okay; and to anyone else looking at case. Just trying to establish a baseline fact, one way or the other.

 I know that San Diego 6 journalist Kimberly Dvorak reported that the motor was thrown in “the opposite direction”; meaning backward from the car. But it doesn’t appear so in the photographs.

If you look at the large, diagrammed Google earth photo near the bottom of the extrazoom page (and I don’t know who did that page; I’d like to know, but it doesn’t say), if it’s right, it shows the motor further ahead of the crash scene.

http://extrazoom.com/image-4688.html

Here are the Milby photos, just for reference.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/comeandtakeittv/9142459574/in/set-7215...

Thanks for looking it over; it’s an important case.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clint Milby on July 16, 2013 at 12:39am

I'm revising my post here.  After looking at the video and listening to the witness testimony again.  He says he saw the car turn off of Santa Monica Blvd Right onto Highland Ave.  Then he says the car was bottoming out when it crossed the cross street.  

The vehicle then impacted the tree.  If the engine was indeed found at the storm drain it would appear it was thrown forward and not backwards.  The issue is that the LoudLabs reporter wasn't tailing the car.  He went down at least two different streets before finally approaching the wreck on Highland.  Also, we don't actually know that was Hastings car that passed by while the reporter was at the gas station.  With no license plate info, it could have very well be someone else.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dave on July 16, 2013 at 12:34am

Thanks, Clint. Reportedly, the car was traveling on Highland, away from Melrose and toward Clinton. Therefore, if correct, the car was traveling south. IMO, it still had to be an explosion to send the engine/drivetrain of a 2013 Mercedes a 160 feet away and leave a missing front of the vehicle and massive debris all over the street--but it's best to establish the facts. This link has a good map--and I know they are a conspiracy debunking site, no need to mention that! But the map appears correct. I'm not trying to argue or anything. Like I said, just trying to establish the baseline facts (so that those debunkers have less material). So thanks very much for your time, and for taking a close look. Here's that link: http://metabunk.org/threads/debunked-michael-hastings-crash-engine-...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chip on July 30, 2013 at 11:56am

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/07/28/new-stunning-surveillanc...

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page