To all those who are still denying the evidence you either don't understand the pictures I posted or you are living in a state of denial.
Those pictures are after the fact, and general geometry of the roads (that are apparently old, because there is not longer a right turn only lane). They can help with figuring out what happened.
The Tesla driver hit the Honda 500 feet after the 2 lanes merged. Yes, 500 feet! Do you understand what this means? If he was driving the speed limit then he was illegally driving outside of his lane for 6 seconds.
You are assuming he traveled the full 500 feet outside the lane. Do we know this to be the case?
But we can see from the pictures that he was driving faster than that.
How? Sure we see two horribly destroyed cars. But how do we know what speed each one was going? Even if we can assume a combined impact speed how do we know how much the Tesla was carrying, versus the Accord?
So he was speeding and he was not in his lane for 500 feet. That is not an accident. That is not a cup of coffee on his windshield. That is not a flick of the wrist. That is not a distracted driver looking at his touch screen. It is obviously a driver who is stubbornly continuing to race.
I am glad you know this.
But as I said earlier, even if he was racing there was still room for all 3 cars to pass safely. So of course he drifted into the Honda. Anyone who understands high-speed driving knows that cars have a limit when making a turn at high speeds. Model S is a heavy car and it cannot defy the laws of gravity. At high speeds during a turn, it will drift. There is no other logical explanation.
That you can think of. How about he was cruising along in his solo lane. A MB stops in front of him abruptly. He swerves to the 'safe' lane, maybe he goes too far. Maybe the MB started to swerve to the 'safe' lane, as he braked abruptly. The Tesla driver drifts further out and into incoming traffic. There are an infinite amount of 'logical' explanations.
I think the deny'ers fall into 2 categories:
1) Those who initially posted their views prior to seeing the evidence and now don't want to admit that maybe they were wrong.
2) Those who somehow think that admitting a fellow Tesla driver made a mistake somehow looks poorly on all of us. This is obviously foolish as there are all types of Tesla drivers, good and bad.
The deny'ers are being as stubborn as the Mercedes and Tesla drivers when they both failed to yield when they should have.
I am not denying. I am not accepting. Both require faith in a couple of photographs, and some 'eyewitness' newspaper reports. As someone who read a newspaper article about something I was VERY familiar with. And saw it not only got the wrong conclusion, it got bad quotes that were never checked, and then reported those quotes incorrectly. Everyone is going on very shaky information. The only person who really knows what happened is probably the driver of the Tesla, and he might not even remember it correctly.
I feel that this was probably the fault of the Tesla driver (it
seems that he was in the wrong lane). But I have no idea. I don't claim to. I personally don't think
anyone should claim to know what happened. It is presumptuous! But claim all you want. But without real evidence you won't convince rational people that your story is correct. Even if the pieces fit.
I would look up iguanodon and read about the crystal palace statues. They used pieces to construct something that wasn't really an iguanadon. It took some real thought and analysis to really figure out what they looked like.
