GTR Forum banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
Driver = Mr. Kazuhiko "Smoky" Nagata of Top Secret.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,804 Posts
jeebus. at first I thought he was driving against traffic....but those were the cars he was passing. I've driven 200kph in traffic that required weaving through and the occassional duck into the breakdown lane, I probably ought not to do that if I am to value my own life as well as the lives of others :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,612 Posts
there was a time i would look at clip and think how cool,140mph into the back of a sunday driver swapping lanes on empty motorway.changed my mind, im not preaching but just think twice before you put your foot down....

matt
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,494 Posts
there was a time i would look at clip and think how cool,140mph into the back of a sunday driver swapping lanes on empty motorway.changed my mind, im not preaching but just think twice before you put your foot down....

matt
You did 140 into the back of a Sunday driver?:eek: What was the outcome?

I agree with you 100%. If there's a car in the middle lane, don't do it. You need at least one unoccupied lane between you and the other road users to think about that kind of speed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,451 Posts
WE´ve had a court trial recently because one Merc S600 V12 Biturbo approached on the left lane (yes left one, in germany :D )
onto a slower car, the slow driver (young woman) got shocked by the fast appearance of the Merc, panically turned the wheel and lost control of the car, crashed and died.
The Merc driver although not even having touched that car was jailed for 18 months IIRC.
Quite explosive stuff to discuss about
 

·
Registered user
Joined
·
6,821 Posts
The howl issue is delicate, because the speed limitations and street conditions are no more appropriated for the hudge traffic and powerfull cars. Like 50kph speed limit . .OK but shall I do if my car accelerates from 0-50 in 1.8 sec?

Was it not that the Merc. driver pushed the womens car and even touched the bumper? sad story.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,494 Posts
WE´ve had a court trial recently because one Merc S600 V12 Biturbo approached on the left lane (yes left one, in germany :D )
onto a slower car, the slow driver (young woman) got shocked by the fast appearance of the Merc, panically turned the wheel and lost control of the car, crashed and died.
The Merc driver although not even having touched that car was jailed for 18 months IIRC.
Quite explosive stuff to discuss about
WTF!!! Any links to that story?

It's hardly his fault if she got confused and killed herself.:confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,451 Posts
@gtrlux:
no he didn´t hit her car, she just reacted to hard and crashed, BTW her 2 yrs old daughter also died in that accident.
Certainly there´s been a revision of the judgement and the fine(?)
was lowered from 18 months jail into 12 months detention on probation and a 12000,-€uro fine.

this is the Wikipedia link but it is in german only.

Rolf Fischer - Wikipedia

rough translation quoted from babelfish:

The accident [work on]

After several testimonies a dark Mercedes with a Boeblinger not recognized more near was characteristic with very high speed on the mentioned motorway on the way in the morning 14 of July 2003. The vehicle with the driver or Fahrerin recognized directly by no witness is to have frightened and press thereby few minutes before 6 o'clock a driver driving before it by his rapid approximation and close rear-end collision, on which this probably came by a violent steering wheel movement into centrifuges, over which outside into the embankment drove to right edge of the lane and hit there almost without brakes against a tree. In the case of this impact the Fahrerin as well as its two-year daughter died. The accident causer continued his driving without to continue.

Determinations [work on]

Due to the large public interest and pressure the police reacted as with a capital crime. The special commission "SOKO Raser" was created immediately, which was equipped with 40 officials temporarily. However within the range Boeblingen were 13 determination teams in the use, in order to clarify a possible accident participation of altogether 707 which are applicable vehicles. The police saw itself four days after the accident and the beginning of its determinations forced to call publicly the press altogether and the boulevard press in the special one to a fair reporting.

direct accident of the drivers of a kleinlasters was direct eye-witness of the accident, since the tragic happening occurred directly before it on the motorway. It could itself however neither to the driver and/or the Fahrerin, whom remind accurate motor vehicle type still of the complete number sign. It could describe the accident-causing vehicle only as with high speed near-racing and on the vehicle had an accident afterwards a closely driving, dark Mercedes, which continued its driving without brakes and suddenly.

Accident time already the accurate accident time was today in the long run not clarified until clearly. To statements of a witness ( the headlight witness Fiene), who to the accident locally arrived briefly, is possible for it only the period of the mentioned daily against 5 o'clock 55 plus/minus 2 minutes. , the straight messages begun of a transmitter, the this belonged by it regularly approx.. 5 minutes each full hour ago aussrahlt, permitted only an approximate estimation of the accident time.

first suspicious factors regarding the which is applicable car model were in this time at least Rolf F. with a black Mercedes CL 600 Coupé and also his direct superior and director/conductor of the test driver team with a black Mercedessedan S 600 in the motorway range concerned in the same direction on the way. This team leader is duly described by the way also of coworkers as to the "link turn signal parliamentary group". Both cars were started on the early morning from the area Stuttgart and drove to the test area close Papenburg (Lower Saxony), where they also arrived later. Already on accident day teammate, who had already experienced from the tragic accident and a fast-driving, dark Mercedes as accident causers, was noticeable with Rolf F. special nervousness and that it inquired the more frequent about the accident. On the following day Rolf F. and its team leader in an office together had included themselves and according to own data with an attorney in connection law, to which them however an establishment of contact with the police advised against. However other coworkers, to who the behavior of Rolf F. and its superior seemed very strangely, informed now for their part the police.

Team leaders the Unfallermittler found different way time computations with a later investigation of the team leader car in the trunk on writing paper of the Papenburger team hotel for 14 July 2003. The superior of Fischer had reconstructed obviously his own travel. During a house search with the team leader Ermittler found a carefully co-ordinated computation of the travel after Papenburg, so that the superior about a half hour before the accident at the accident place must have gone past. According to statement of the wife of the team leader its man had left on this morning the house at 4 o'clock 30 and on the way after Papenburg had made themselves direct. He had likewise expressed himself. A proven fact is that the team leader arrived then at 7 o'clock 50 at the gas station winner country. From it an average cruising speed for the team leader of 67 km/h including all durchfahrenen building sites results. It had its cruising speed likewise with approx.. 60 km/h indicated. The strangeness that for its rapid style of driving with its coworkers of well-known team leaders this distance with such an relatively slow average speed wants to have driven, could not be cleared up however further. There was and exists still the assumption that both drivers, Rolf F. and its team leader, could have gone past approximately at the same time at the accident scene, since Rolf F. had reached about seven minutes later than the team leader the gas station winner country.

Rolf F. This suspect did not have indicated on the entire distance as a speed of maximally 20 km/h over the valid in each case speed limit to have driven there it already once with superelevated speed (27 km/h too much) flashed was and now his driving licence and concomitantly his vocational activity risk wanted. From its residence it drove its cars on this morning first to the firm area into Sindelfingen where it as can be prove at 5 o'clock 22 refuelled. According to agreeing statement of Rolf F. and at the time active doorman he left at 5 o'clock 28 plus minus 2 minutes then the firm area, thus briefly before the doorman at 5 o'clock 30 also the second gate half always opened as usual. During a travel with this average speed, placed behind by the police, one needed something at the same time of day under comparable circumstances with the same vehicle over 40 minutes from the firm area to the accident place. A building site could not even be considered with Karlsruhe with, which still existed on the accident day. With the speed indicated by Rolf F. thus the distance was in the actual time interval of approx.. not to create 28 minutes clearly. It would have been possible alone, if Rolf F. had on the way been outside of the building sites with an average speed of at least 160 km/h on the travel route. Close Karlsruhe was noticeable to the witness Muth briefly before the accident place a dark Mercedes within the building site distance at that time, which drove there clearly more slowly than the maximally permissible 80 km/h and which the witness thereupon within the building site also overhauled. He could not recognize the driver and/or the Fahrerin and the complete characteristic and/or note. It was however sure itself that the identification with the traffic-official abbreviation of Boeblingen (BB -) began. Further this witness at the same vehicle believes to have seen a special exhaust system, which is in series present neither with a CL 600 nor with a S 600 and also with the cars which are applicable so far by Rolf F. or the team leader was not installed.

or its team leader with the had an accident car there were further suspicious ones for a direct contact of the car of Rolf F. no signs. Whether it concerned with the accident-causing vehicle a Mercedes CL 600, S 600 or a SL of 500 roadster, that the witness from the building site range, which operates even a sedan service, due to a special exhaust system to have recognized wants and which latter motor vehicle type in series possesses, i.e. whether even still another third car is applicable as an accident causer, could not be free of doubts clarified in the reason. There were and give for all these possibilities different, not agreeing with one another testimonies and evenly also different strangenesses.

The processes and judgements [work on]

In one of the media with large attention and clearly expressed and/or published Vorverurteilung pursued court process was condemned Rolf Fischer on 18 February 2004 in the first instance by the district court Karlsruhe because of negligent toetung in two cases to one and a half years prison without probation. The condemnation was considered as disputed, because it only on indications are based and a medium influence cannot be placed in agreement. Judgement-crucially obviously the statement of the witness was short before the accident place (a headlight witness), that in one time interval of approx.. 2 seconds in his rear view mirror with own high speed the headlights, of a dark Mercedes with prove-measured unfavorable lighting conditions as a CL the 600, thus the car of Rolf F., overhauling rapidly it, to have recognized wants. In the appointment procedure at the regional court Karlsruhe became on 29 July 2004 the measure of punishment on one year detention with probation additionally 12,000, -? Fine and suspension of driver's licence for one year reduce. Although Rolf Fischer of the opinion is that he was not the draengelnde and concomitantly accident-causing driver, and its opinion after also in the appointment procedure witnesses for the defense to its favour belonged still are, did not do he without a revision, since an acquietal appears no longer attainable to him as.

Its employer-employee relationship with Daimler Chrysler was quit Rolf F. after this last judgement by its employer. It is since then unemployed (Stand:07/2005).
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top