Tom_Spangler wrote:PubBurgers wrote: I could and may very well be wrong but this sounds like a case of the media playing the "he was high on the marijuanas!!!" card.Who knows, maybe he liked to have a toke before a race to calm his nerves.
Maybe he did, I'm certainly not saying he didn't. What I'm saying is I know of no test that can measure what, blood pot content? Every test I'm aware of is more of a smoked it sometime in the not too distant past timeframe.
If I had to guess you can probably get bits of lung tissue and test it.
PubBurgers wrote:Sultan wrote: From Motorsports.com "According to a toxicology report, Ward was under the influence of marijuana at the time of his death, and there was enough in his system to impair judgment."I'm not defending the guys actions and I'm not saying he wasn't stoned at the time but last I knew there wasn't a test that accurate. It's not as easy as figuring BAC. That's why Colorado and Washington are having all sorts of fun trying to nab people driving stoned. Also, to be under the influence at the time of accident he'd have to have toked up at the track, it doesn't last that long (not that I'd know anything about that). I could and may very well be wrong but this sounds like a case of the media playing the "he was high on the marijuanas!!!" card.
Sort of true and sort of not. Its been a few years since I've studied up on this stuff (used to prosecute DUI cases), but my dusty recollection is that the active THC in the blood can be separated from that which has been processed by the body and is no longer active (I believe its converted to a compound called THC-COOH, which is the portion that remains in the body for longer periods of time). If there are significant amounts of the active THC in the blood (it stops processing when blood is drawn either from a living or deceased donor), an inference can be drawn that the person is "under the influence" of MJ, since the active THC is what causes the high/intoxication.
Usually, you need a toxicologist to interpret the results to determine whether the levels are high enough to bring a person "under the influence", as, at least in my state, there aren't set levels like there are with alcohol. (I.e. .08 or greater is "under the influence" for alcohol) The toxicologists I have used in the past have always hesitated to say a person is "under the influence" unless they have a relatively high level of the active component in their system, since they acknowledge MJ affects people differently based on their body make up and usage history. Hope that helps.
In reply to PubBurgers:
If I remember correctly:
Drug testing looks at carboxylated THC(THC COOH), which is both the metabolite and the natural form of THC. The freebase form (achieved by heating) is the psychoactive one, I suppose you could take a blood sample off a guy who died high and gauge how high he was based on freebase THC content of the blood. Though AFAIK, there is no scientific data charting freebase THC blood content with impairment like there is with alcohol.
Kenny_McCormic wrote: In reply to PubBurgers: If I remember correctly: Drug testing looks at carboxylated THC(THC COOH), which is both the metabolite and the natural form of THC. The freebase form (achieved by heating) is the psychoactive one, I suppose you could take a blood sample off a guy who died high and gauge how high he was based on freebase THC content of the blood. Though AFAIK, there is no scientific data charting freebase THC blood content with impairment like there is with alcohol.
I'm all for learning something new. So given this information maybe they can prove it. The root cause of the situation is still a series of incredibly poor decisions on his part.
Florida is full of idiots doing things lately while on synthetic marijuana.
We used to race against a guy named Shane Heiml. A silver spoon kid if there ever was one. Trouble was, he was known for firing one up before a race, or worse. Not a single person used to like to race against him. It was well known among the spotters, and they would inform their drivers when he was around. There's no room for it at a racetrack, period. Firing one up to calm you down is a disaster in the making. You can tell a difference in driving and behavior. He and his crew went through suspensions, and when he finally made it to the big leagues, he failed Nascar testing enough to be lifetime banned.
The sad ending was that he finally cleaned up his life and then wrecked a sprint car and is now paralyzed.
Stewart might choose to settle out of court but it may depend on how much the family demands. Too much and it should go before a jury with all the evidence and a little thing called "contributory negligence".
http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=341
Ward's parents said: "Our son got out of his car during caution when the race was suspended," the statement said. "All the other vehicles were reducing speed and not accelerating except for Stewart, who intentionally tried to intimidate Kevin by accelerating and sliding his car toward him, causing the tragedy. The focus should be on the actions of Mr. Stewart. This matter is not at rest and we will pursue all remedies in fairness to Kevin."
It sounds like they are in denial, a trait shared with too many parents these days. If they want "fairness" for Kevin, they should take whatever is offered them instead of further exposing their son for the angel he wasn't.
In reply to racerdave600:
That's the kid that is paralyzed from a roll cage collapse. AFAIK he had overcame his drug problems after the lifetime ban and was trying to work up the ranks again until the accident.
moparman76_69 wrote: In reply to racerdave600: That's the kid that is paralyzed from a roll cage collapse. AFAIK he had overcame his drug problems after the lifetime ban and was trying to work up the ranks again until the accident.
That's what makes it so sad. In truth, he was a very good racer and had a lot of talent. Think Kyle Busch kind of talent. He almost never beat us however due to stupidity on track. He clearly was messed up pretty bad even then.
GameboyRMH wrote: "There are tests that can detect if you toked up going back months (based on hair samples), but I'd assume if they're saying he had it *in his system* they'd have evidence of something more recent.
you can smoke a joint Fri evening and get tested on Mon. and you'll more than likely fail …
Bobzilla wrote:racerdave600 wrote: Unfortunately it still will not prevent the Ward family for filing a civil suit. I'm sure there will be a substantial sum of money changing hands before this is over.I can't see how any judge in the country could possibly rule in favor of the dude stoned on an illegal substance advancing on a race car on a hot race track. How would that even be possible?
because jury …..
Ian F wrote: In reply to GameboyRMH: Which is probably how it'll get pitched to the Ward family. Maybe Smoke will bend... maybe he won't. Maybe the Ward family will take the high road and accept their son screwed up and paid the ultimate price.
they've already been quoted as saying that Stewart gunned his engine in an attempt to intimidate their son … this after the no bill from the GJ
edit: oldsaw beat me to it
as far as they're concerned (as it looks to me) their special snowflake couldn't possible be the problem … that mean ole (rich) Stewart has to be the problem
Joe Gearin wrote: So he smoked, and then got smoked by Smoke?
That's ironic now, isn't it.
wbjones wrote:Ian F wrote: In reply to GameboyRMH: Which is probably how it'll get pitched to the Ward family. Maybe Smoke will bend... maybe he won't. Maybe the Ward family will take the high road and accept their son screwed up and paid the ultimate price.they've already been quoted as saying that Stewart gunned his engine in an attempt to intimidate their son … this after the no bill from the GJ edit: oldsaw beat me to it as far as they're concerned (as it looks to me) their special snowflake couldn't possible be the problem … that mean ole (rich) Stewart has to be the problem
"he was such a good boy"
right up there with
"he was just getting his life back on track!"
A guy locally shot at police through the front door of his house, the police returned fire and killed him. The guy's mother actually, really and quoted in the newspaper said "he didn't mean it." How can you not mean bullets??
I don't know what marijuana has to do with the court decision. Dude did some stupid E36 M3 and got hit by another dude on a hot track. What it comes down to is weather or not Stewart did anything criminal.
This marijuana bullE36 M3 is just something else the media can put in the news. It's relevant to the kids actions, not the court case.
N Sperlo wrote: It's relevant to the kids actions, not the court case.
Except for the fact that it's the kid's boneheaded actions that got him killed, and hence caused the court case in the first place.
If it goes to trial I would expect the defense to try to bring it up to try and build his case that Ward had done a number of things to contribute to the accident including being impared. Sadly the best thing for Stewart to do would probably be to settle. Attorneys will do a pretty good job of convincing most juries that as a professional he should be able to expect all the things that could happen and prepare for them.
I wish Mr Stewart could just walk away given that Mr Ward should never have left his vehicle and tried to intercept another vehicle. Just stupid and what was his plan when he did stop Mr Stewart? Just talk to attempt to inflict bodily harm.
Mr Ward's family needs to respect that their son was in the wrong and find another outlet for their anger.
Datsun1500 wrote: There needs to be a rule about smoking pot, that'll help
You can smoke pot, as long as you wait for the track safety officials to get there first. 
I think you can wait for the safety officials, smoke a little doob, then throw your bong at the windshield of he guy you were pissed at before you became so mellow.
Datsun1500 wrote: There needs to be a rule about smoking pot, that'll help
Actually I wouldn't be surprised if they have a rule that covers it, and probably allows for random breathalyzers. No quick and accurate test for being baked though.
A guy got disqualified from the last offroad obstacle/mud pit thing I did because he got caught by an official holding someone else's beer.
they do …. anyone remember Jeremy Mayfield ? or AJ Allmendinger ? Randy LaJoie ?
I used to drag race bikes a good bit at the local track and it was a mess. There were always guys drinking and smoking pot before hoping on their bikes and hitting the track, so it could be pretty interesting being lined up next to them.
Rules against murder don't eliminate murder, but I don't think anyone would argue they haven't been helpful...same with this and the "stay in your car" rule. Maybe the new rule in NASCAR saved the life of the inventive jackass mentioned earlier - at least track workers were there and they were on lap 2 under yellow.
We don't see people drinking some "liquid courage" before going out anymore as was common in the early 1900s...even Rush had a scene where Hunt had a swig before going out.
Datsun1500 wrote: There needs to be a rule about smoking pot, that'll help
Haha!
(Insert Nelson pointing picture here)
You'll need to log in to post.
