Post by Brad Wunder on Jun 11, 2012 14:35:18 GMT -5
Case #1, Driver of the 90 charged with ITM (Inciting Track Mayhem)
Synopsis-The driver of the 90, having won the pole, led the procession of WFs out onto the track. Now, most drivers would know that with cold tires you want to take it a bit easy on the out lap until you built up a little heat in said tires. Not the driver of the 90. He promptly looped himself in the second turn (hairpin turn 5 on GP track). The 90's spin wasn't your average run of the mill spin. He managed to go from one side of the track to the other numerous times before he was finally able to regain control. Corner workers later reported that they weren't sure if he was driving the kart of if the kart was driving him. If it weren't for the extraordinary driving skills of the rest of the NFRA drivers, the 90 would have collected the entire field.
To add insult to injury, because the 90 was on pole, and we had to wait for him to catch up and re-assume his position, we received many, many "1 to gos" resulting in almost a half hour delay. There were rumors in the pits that the delay was actually caused by the driver of the 90 needing to change his underpants. There was no testimony to that fact so it shall remain just a rumor.
Case Disposition:
ITM-Guilty 3-2 (major $5)
Case#2, Driver of the 9 charged with ITM
Synopsis-The driver of the 9, in an effort to avoid running into the leader in turn 2, had to slow down. The plaintiff in this case demonstrated an obvious lack of situational awareness and over reacted, nearly taking himself out. The court could not see how this could in any way be the fault of the 9. Furthermore, the court warned the plaintiff that these sorts of frivolous suits will not be tolerated. Court observers, however, were not surprised that a case this baseless and so obviously without merit made it to court considering the plaintiff IS an attorney (so what do you expect??).
Case Disposition:
ITM-NOT Guilty 4-1
Synopsis-The driver of the 90, having won the pole, led the procession of WFs out onto the track. Now, most drivers would know that with cold tires you want to take it a bit easy on the out lap until you built up a little heat in said tires. Not the driver of the 90. He promptly looped himself in the second turn (hairpin turn 5 on GP track). The 90's spin wasn't your average run of the mill spin. He managed to go from one side of the track to the other numerous times before he was finally able to regain control. Corner workers later reported that they weren't sure if he was driving the kart of if the kart was driving him. If it weren't for the extraordinary driving skills of the rest of the NFRA drivers, the 90 would have collected the entire field.
To add insult to injury, because the 90 was on pole, and we had to wait for him to catch up and re-assume his position, we received many, many "1 to gos" resulting in almost a half hour delay. There were rumors in the pits that the delay was actually caused by the driver of the 90 needing to change his underpants. There was no testimony to that fact so it shall remain just a rumor.
Case Disposition:
ITM-Guilty 3-2 (major $5)
Case#2, Driver of the 9 charged with ITM
Synopsis-The driver of the 9, in an effort to avoid running into the leader in turn 2, had to slow down. The plaintiff in this case demonstrated an obvious lack of situational awareness and over reacted, nearly taking himself out. The court could not see how this could in any way be the fault of the 9. Furthermore, the court warned the plaintiff that these sorts of frivolous suits will not be tolerated. Court observers, however, were not surprised that a case this baseless and so obviously without merit made it to court considering the plaintiff IS an attorney (so what do you expect??).
Case Disposition:
ITM-NOT Guilty 4-1
