Interestingly, here in Aus, if your car is recorded 'hooning' or similar and the police get involved, you are often guilty unless you can prove someone else was driving. The car owner is responsible for who is allowed to drive the car (stolen cars are an exception , of course).
So back when I was a young dumb and DUI, I launched out of a 7/11 and proceeded to bury the speedo...right in front of an officer of the law. Realizing my un-fortune took the next corner as fast as possible, ditched into the first parking lot, got out of the car and ran. I'm in trouble either way but getting a DUI as a minor on top of it all was not going to happen. I took the reckless driving ticket, lost my license, got in to biking. I totally could have claimed that it wasn't me except for the passenger that I left probably told on me.
In reply to akylekoz :
Ditching the vehicle kinda works. Some drunk rednecks ran off the road and got stuck near my house. Clearly they were hammered, beer cans all over the truck. They just left until they had sobered up enough. Cops came and towed the truck, they just said they got stuck and left, which is what they did, but since they were not there to be seen drunk, they "got away" with it.
In reply to Nathan JansenvanDoorn :
Same with speed camera tickets here in the US. They don't give a gig who was driving the car. The registered owner gets the ticket.
Duke said:In reply to Nathan JansenvanDoorn :
Same with speed camera tickets here in the US. They don't give a gig who was driving the car. The registered owner gets the ticket.
Not in Colorado. They're required to match the camera photo of the person to their ID. They don't actually, but when someone else driving my car got a red light ticket it was easy to get it dismissed by simply stating, "Not me."
Driven5 said:In reply to Berck :
Trying to turn this around to into some kind of argument about slow drivers being the bigger danger to society took some Olympic level mental gymnastics.
Not what I said, remotely. Slow drivers are not one the problems I'm complaining about.
GameboyRMH said:Steve_Jones said:GameboyRMH said:People get convicted on circumstantial evidence all the time.
I tried to find examples of persons getting *CONVICTED* from YouTube videos. (Edit: for vehicle code violations) Couple examples of guys live streaming their face getting arrested, one was convicted but had his sentence reduced to 3 of 180 days- so I'd assume he took a plea. There was also a motorcyclist that had a visible tattoo that they used to identify him.
All he has to say is - idk its not me, I was with my girlfriend. Girlfriend- yes he was with me. Sounds like reasonable doubt. Or- this glove doesnt even fit, you must equit, Or- Some random dude sends me those and I upload the videos with a voiceover. Or I let my friend borrow the bike. Or just nothing at all. Is this your bike? -5th. Is this your credit card? -5th. Is this your Youtube? -5th
Tracking a phone, only tracks a phone, not a person. Same with credit cards.
California doesn't pursue these because it's usually a misdemeanor not committed in the officers presence. Hit/ runs with great bodily injury would be a felony, which they can arrest on without it being committed in the presence of the officer.
Edit 2: not a lawyer, not legal advice
In reply to WOW Really Paul? :
Cell records will include cell tower location data, which isn't terribly accurate, but if you blow through 4 cell towers that are each 25km apart within 25mins, that's going to put a floor on the speed you could have been doing. They'd also be able to confirm the start location seen in the video.
thashane said:All he has to say is - idk its not me, I was with my girlfriend. Girlfriend- yes he was with me. Sounds like reasonable doubt. Or- this glove doesnt even fit, you must equit, Or- Some random dude sends me those and I upload the videos with a voiceover. Or I let my friend borrow the bike. Or just nothing at all. Is this your bike? -5th. Is this your credit card? -5th. Is this your Youtube? -5th
For the voiceover argument, it would be possible to tell through audio analysis whether the voiceover was added in post-production.
In reply to thashane :
tried to find examples of persons getting *CONVICTED* from YouTube videos. (Edit: for vehicle code violations) Couple examples of guys live streaming their face getting arrested, one was convicted but had his sentence reduced to 3 of 180 days- so I'd assume he took a plea. There was also a motorcyclist that had a visible tattoo that they used to identify him.
All he has to say is - idk its not me, I was with my girlfriend. Girlfriend- yes he was with me. Sounds like reasonable doubt. Or- this glove doesnt even fit, you must equit, Or- Some random dude sends me those and I upload the videos with a voiceover. Or I let my friend borrow the bike. Or just nothing at all. Is this your bike? -5th. Is this your credit card? -5th. Is this your Youtube? -5th
Tracking a phone, only tracks a phone, not a person. Same with credit cards.
California doesn't pursue these because it's usually a misdemeanor not committed in the officers presence. Hit/ runs with great bodily injury would be a felony, which they can arrest on without it being committed in the presence of the officer.
Edit 2: not a lawyer, not legal advice
You wouldn't make a very good cop or investigator. Look at his hands in the video. Not very hard to ID. Maybe they picked him up months later and those wounds healed, but there is a good chance they still help ID him. He also left from a parts store parking lot, which likely had cameras. Or places he stopped before the video started. They tag him at a gas station, and it's game over. Someone else took his bike, keys, phone, camera, pants, hands, shoes, and voice for the video. Good luck with that. There are a number of ways to ID the rider if they have the will to pursue it. They usually don't, which had emboldened people like him, but if they do, it's not difficult. It would be really hard to get away with much crime today, figuring out who did it is not hard. Having the will and resources to is the hang up.
I still stand by my first stance on this. berkeley that guy. berkeley all those morons that act like him, bike/car/truck/whatever. You do NOT have the right to put my life or wellbeing nor my passengers at risk because you want to be a jackass. Period. End of discussion. There is no defending this E36 M3.
In reply to GameboyRMH :
Sitting at my coordinates on google bounce around in a multi mile range....cell triangulation mimicking gps is nowhere near as accurate as satellite GPS.
Boost_Crazy said:In reply to thashane :
You wouldn't make a very good cop or investigator. Look at his hands in the video. Not very hard to ID. Maybe they picked him up months later and those wounds healed, but there is a good chance they still help ID him. He also left from a parts store parking lot, which likely had cameras. Or places he stopped before the video started. They tag him at a gas station, and it's game over. Someone else took his bike, keys, phone, camera, pants, hands, shoes, and voice for the video. Good luck with that. There are a number of ways to ID the rider if they have the will to pursue it. They usually don't, which had emboldened people like him, but if they do, it's not difficult. It would be really hard to get away with much crime today, figuring out who did it is not hard. Having the will and resources to is the hang up.
You're totally right. *If I was* a good cop or investigator, I would tell you that we live in a world of constant surveillance, and that if you're ever arrested by law enforcement that your best course of action is to immediately admit guilt and hope that the Judge is lenient in your sentencing. That the only reason thousands of these videos exist, likely with over a million cumulative views is just because the cops are too lazy or too busy to do anything about it.
Can you see his hands or the wounds while the violations are occurring? You know the hands part of the video cuts at 1:57 - you are just assuming that it happened on the same day because he's wearing the same attire. You are also assuming that enough CCTV footage or other form of evidence was still obtainable from the hands portion of the video, to where he gets on the highway. The video was posted over a month ago, the press release about the warrant is from over a week ago, we really have no idea other than what we can see on YouTube. He could've taken that video 6 months ago, or he could've uploaded it on the same day. Yes people are convicted with circumstantial evidence all the time. Everyone suspects it's the same guy, just like everyone suspected OJ Simpson in 1994 who was found "not guilty" criminally, but later unanimously found responsible in a civil case in 97.
Look I'm with Bob - berk this guy for putting the non-consenting public at risk and profiting from it. IMO the worst part is - now others are attempting the same thing trying to gain their own moment of fame. Everytime the algorithm feeds me one of these videos, I report them. And to say that his channel is demonetized, that doesn't include his merch.
Guess we'll all have to wait if/when this goes to trial to see the outcome
In reply to thashane :
You're totally right. *If I was* a good cop or investigator, I would tell you that we live in a world of constant surveillance, and that if you're ever arrested by law enforcement that your best course of action is to immediately admit guilt and hope that the Judge is lenient in your sentencing. That the only reason thousands of these videos exist, likely with over a million cumulative views is just because the cops are too lazy or too busy to do anything about it.
Yes, my whole point is that law enforcement is taking this instance seriously. And/or he left so much evidence even a caveman could put a case together.
Can you see his hands or the wounds while the violations are occurring? You know the hands part of the video cuts at 1:57 - you are just assuming that it happened on the same day because he's wearing the same attire. You are also assuming that enough CCTV footage or other form of evidence was still obtainable from the hands portion of the video, to where he gets on the highway. The video was posted over a month ago, the press release about the warrant is from over a week ago, we really have no idea other than what we can see on YouTube. He could've taken that video 6 months ago, or he could've uploaded it on the same day. Yes people are convicted with circumstantial evidence all the time. Everyone suspects it's the same guy, just like everyone suspected OJ Simpson in 1994 who was found "not guilty" criminally, but later unanimously found responsible in a civil case in 97.
It doesn't matter. There is more than likely enough evidence that he is the responsible party. Beyond a reasonable doubt. Not no doubt. He could have had an unknown twin commit the crime. It could have been Steven Spielberg using his filmmaking connections to frame him with a fake video because he left a mean movie review. But those aren't very reasonable. If it's just the video? Then he likely walks. But what is it they say, the average criminal makes 10 mistakes? This guy made little effort to cover his tracks- he filmed and posted his crime! My bet is he left a pretty obvious trail of breadcrumbs.
Look I'm with Bob - berk this guy for putting the non-consenting public at risk and profiting from it. IMO the worst part is - now others are attempting the same thing trying to gain their own moment of fame. Everytime the algorithm feeds me one of these videos, I report them. And to say that his channel is demonetized, that doesn't include his merch.
Guess we'll all have to wait if/when this goes to trial to see the outcome
My guess is that he takes a plea when they show him the mountain of evidence. He could get lucky with a jury, but if they charge him with every count, he could be in some big trouble if he looses that roll of the dice. But this is the same guy who splits lanes at 150+, maybe he won't play it safe.
Just saw on the news that this guy got arrested...Can't find a link yet
In reply to TJL (Forum Supporter) :
32, older than I expected, but I guess you don't always outgrow stupid
He's being charged with a misdemeanor. Wow.
He's a complete shiny happy person.
He may be a skilled driver, but my kids are not. They are driving legally. He is not. If he kills one of my kids, I will happily face manslaughter charges for separating his head from his neck.
Auto enthusiasts should never find anything about this remotely acceptable. The reason there aren't more convictions is because we aren't vocal enough when people do E36 M3 like this.
berkeley him.
Berck said:Even the lane change risk is way overstated. At those speeds, you're just not going to change lanes fast enough to hit him.
It's not a car merging into him that's the risk. When the closing speed is 80mph, someone will change lanes ahead and there won't be enough time/room to react or he'll decide to go one way then car driver catches a flash of headlights and jerks back into the spot he was heading for.
When I was younger and racing motorcycles, my friend and I went through traffic like that a handful of times, except slower (140mph or so), and wearing enough gear that we might survive a crash if we didn't hit anything solid. There were a couple instances where we realized we had simply been lucky. We were dumb but not that dumb and toned it down quite a bit.
In reply to mfennell :
As noted, and I suspect many on here are aware of this, but as the speed of a motorcycle increases, the arc that it can turn greatly increases, and the speed at which you can change where that arc goes also decreases. So, for example, you can have someone do something say 100 yards in front of you, and if you can do nothing to avoid the collision.
That is the way I always visualized things on a motorcycle (and at FAR lower speeds), as an arc that extends in front of the motorcycle and changes as you lean the motorcycle.
I think if you did the "math" on the dynamics in that video, you would find it would take some rather small changes in what the cars did in many circumstances that would guarantee a crash.
11GTCS said:In reply to CyberEric :
So an hour and a half for the rest of us mere mortals?
What used to take two hours now takes all day...
chandler said:Caperix said:Rodan said:In the late 1980s, a Senator named John Danforth from Missouri introduced a bill that would have banned high performance "killer motorcycles". It didn't pass, but for those of us into sports bikes at the time, it was pretty worrying. If we'd had youtube then, and idiots like Gixxer Brah, it would have had a much better chance of passing. That kind of ban isn't really on the radar today, but this kind of crap will bring it back. What he's doing is not only stupid, it's extremely dangerous to everyone around him. With a speed differential of nearly 100mph, any crash is not only going to end him, it's highly likely to kill the poor schmuck in the car he hits, or cause a chain reaction collision with multiple vehicles.
I would support a tiered lisecence system like many other countries use. I spent 20 years riding around savannah GA & the number of military guys that said if you weigh more than 150 lbs a 600 won't move you was crazy. Nothing like a new rider on a 200hp 1000 trying to show off in traffic
The guys I used to ride with would do 180 on i57 going north toward Chicago. They left me behind on a blackbird once and I've never ridden on the street since. My wife worked as a surgical nurse and she called me and said hey guess who is in here; first guess nailed it as the ring leader of that group. You get comfortable with yourself but it's everyone else around you that you can't ever be comfortable with unless your on a track.
My first paycheck job was at a small local bike shop. (Thus my Schwinn predilection) I was a 16 year old wide eyed dork eager to hear stories, and the owner, who'd just bought the business from his dad who'd started it in 1950, would sometimes tell them.
He was in the Army, and used the hell out of the GI Bill. His day job was a firefighter, helped by his paramedics education. (24 hours on/48 hours off, so he had time to work the bike shop too) He also had two young daughters, and a motorcycle.
On one ride, he was behind a group of guys on Harleys, no helmets, just out for a nice day ride. The tail end Charlie hit some gravel in a corner and went down. The guy's riding partners had no clue what happened and kept on going. Joe said that he stopped, and ended up holding the guy's skull together for close to an hour before an ambulance arrived.
He thought of his daughters the whole time, and next week his motorcycle was sold...
You'll need to log in to post.
