Channel 6 Investigative Reporter On Michael Hastings. Police and Fire told NOT to comment

Aw heck, the government would make stuff up. I'm sure the report on this accident will be just like the report on the TWA800 accident--completely made up to advance a political agenda.

reply to post by Salander


Well, think that a little closer to home would be to compare the Hastings "accident" to the shooting death of RFK. The LAPD didn't handle that case very well either. If you know what I mean.

Originally posted by gorgi
They dont comment because its an on going investigation. Its always like this. Just because you dont get the answer you like doesnt make a strange conspiracy.

Boy, it says it all right in your signature doesn't it! Just keep your eyes shut, and move along, alright!
P.S. your math sucks......

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Originally posted by Samuelis
Drone attack anyone? Has this possibility been considered yet?
Sorry if this is out of touch, I'm new to the debate. What kind of weaponry do American drones possess, and would the damage suggest such an impact?

That must have been one of those Super-Stealth drones with the Super-Stealth missiles no one can see, hear, smell or see evidence of afterward.

That's kinda reaching isn't it? I know this happened around 4:30 in the morning and in many places, that's a time of silence and totally empty streets. Los Angeles never full sleeps and it's freeways are always within a mile or so of almost every physical point anywhere from South Orange County to Santa Barbara County with all in between. Freeways which have people on them, 24/7 - 365 days a year.

It's not like this happened in Nye, Nevada or something where it wouldn't have been witnessed, even at that hour, by hundreds of people if anything airborne had anything whatsoever to do with it.

edit on 8-7-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

Drones are made to not be detected, obviously this attack wouldn't have been a missile or anything along those lines, instead I was suggesting he was being followed by a drone that had the capability to remotely control his vehicle, and upon collision maybe added some type of stealth explosive into the mix. I disagree that people would be aware of a drones presence in the night sky.

I believe the end position of the engine, together with the raging inferno would be evidence for some people. Let's not forget the type of technology at their disposal.

reply to post by gorgi


That is not true. You can get an accident report or a police report usually 3 days after the event. They don't have to wait for tox reports to write a report.

Taking the bold step of ruling out foul play is hardly "not commenting."

Can't have it both ways.

reply to post by Erongaricuaro


I believe the phrase they used was "there was no evidence to suggest foul play".
Doublespeak.

Originally posted by Samuelis

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Originally posted by Samuelis
Drone attack anyone? Has this possibility been considered yet?
Sorry if this is out of touch, I'm new to the debate. What kind of weaponry do American drones possess, and would the damage suggest such an impact?

That must have been one of those Super-Stealth drones with the Super-Stealth missiles no one can see, hear, smell or see evidence of afterward.

That's kinda reaching isn't it? I know this happened around 4:30 in the morning and in many places, that's a time of silence and totally empty streets. Los Angeles never full sleeps and it's freeways are always within a mile or so of almost every physical point anywhere from South Orange County to Santa Barbara County with all in between. Freeways which have people on them, 24/7 - 365 days a year.

It's not like this happened in Nye, Nevada or something where it wouldn't have been witnessed, even at that hour, by hundreds of people if anything airborne had anything whatsoever to do with it.

edit on 8-7-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

Drones are made to not be detected, obviously this attack wouldn't have been a missile or anything along those lines, instead I was suggesting he was being followed by a drone that had the capability to remotely control his vehicle, and upon collision maybe added some type of stealth explosive into the mix. I disagree that people would be aware of a drones presence in the night sky.

I believe the end position of the engine, together with the raging inferno would be evidence for some people. Let's not forget the type of technology at their disposal.

edit on 8-7-2013 by Samuelis because: (no reason given)

Drones are made to be stealthy not invisible. Nothing is TRUE stealth that the public even knows to speculate on...if such things do exist.

If they do though, just how highly classified and highly compartamentalized a unit do you believe had part in the killing of a garden variety investigative reporter? This was no Woodward or Bernstein and your suggestion would have the United States dedicating it's MOST valuable, classified and national security sensitive assets and people to kill one average guy on an L.A. street in the middle of the night.

Wouldn't a gang banger with a 9mm handgun and a cover story about robbery have been a bit safer and easier? I mean, really... sometimes the theories to support an idea are more outlandish than the event they are about. Ugh...

Originally posted by gorgi
They dont comment because its an on going investigation. Its always like this. Just because you dont get the answer you like doesnt make a strange conspiracy.

Pick any major incident (killing sprees etc) over this last year. Then, count how many times "they" have come out with names pics and other "evidence" of the people they tell us committed said crimes before the accused even get a trial before a judge and jury. Why don't they ever refuse to comment then? (these days)

Things are truly backwards right now. "They" don't even say things like "this is an ongoing investigation and we cannot comment at this time" unless it's to cover up massive corruption which is being exposed more than ever now.

You don't see anything wrong with this picture?

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Drones are made to be stealthy not invisible. Nothing is TRUE stealth that the public even knows to speculate on...if such things do exist. If they do though, just how highly classified and highly compartamentalized a unit do you believe had part in the killing of a garden variety investigative reporter? This was no Woodward or Bernstein and your suggestion would have the United States dedicating it's MOST valuable, classified and national security sensitive assets and people to kill one average guy on an L.A. street in the middle of the night. Wouldn't a gang banger with a 9mm handgun and a cover story about robbery have been a bit safer and easier? I mean, really... sometimes the theories to support an idea are more outlandish than the event they are about. Ugh...

Well it entirely depends on the subject of his investigations and how badly they needed it kept secret. I'm not sure he's quite the "garden variety" reporter.

I don't understand how it would be considered outlandish when you look at the people involved. What would really be outlandish would be if you were to believe that a 2013 Mercedes Benz could explode in such a fashion?

Could you point me to any other such instances in recent times with similar year make and model?

I find it amusing when people blindly underestimate the power of the machine.

reply to post by Samuelis


The man lost control of his vehicle on a wide boulevard over a long straight stretch and ended up where the car sat, in flames (with the gas tank basically sitting along a concrete curb....or SPARK source) and he died instantly. Whats the mystery? What precisely is 'against known physical laws' here? We're also in a 100% public place with residential on both sides of the street (people to see everything) and some traffic on the street, even at that time of the morning.

Yes.. the engine coming out of the car is interesting....and Mercedes may have some explaining to do.

Now you ask that we show a similar wreck, similar make, similar model and similar outcome...and I'm going to say that's absurd to ask people for. Prove your side has anything but pure conjecture based on guesswork .....as it's the logical story your version questions with a rather elaborate framework for a "set-up".

I mean, this gets into Hollywood movie level of nuts. Now we're into Stealth Drones? What's next? A UFO zapped him with some energy beam, phased to the same frequency as the L.A. Air at 4:30am so the people all around this saw and heard nothing?

Yeah... Sometimes the theory behind these things are far more entertaining to imagine than what actually happened. It seems to often be the case that just doing what it appears DID happen is far easier than actually trying to deliberately create the event using the elaborate plans and schemes. Ever heard of Mr. Murphy? He LOVES people who over think and over plan things...and why I usually doubt claims when that is what it's based around.

KISS is the concept that makes life work...and KISS in this case is pretty much what they say happened. Poor guy likely didn't even feel it, which is a blessing.

Originally posted by boncho
Wow. Okay wait... Some people were arguing before about the engine being so far away, and using that as a basis of why it wasn't suspicious. But this report just said it was found more than 100 ft behind the car? In the opposite direction??

I have been adamant that this accident is beyond suspicious. But if you are going to tell me that he was travelling 100MPH and the engine somehow flew in the opposite direction 100 ft, I have a bridge to sell you.




Another thing, I mentioned before that there was no chance in hell Mercedes would take this lying down. They are probably more interested than the authorities ("Stop investigating that Jimmy, told from the higher ups").

There is no way the amount of time and $$ they put into their brand, they are going to let people think their cars are 70's Pinto's ready to blow up on impact.



There is something more to this story. And this is coming from a skeptic.

edit on 8-7-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)

perhaps you would like to read the rest of, and then weigh in further on this thread

This is from examiner.com and I don't know about their reliability. The paragraph prior to this linked to City News Service which requires subscription.

An eyewitness at the scene, Jose, employed at nearby business ALSCO Inc said, the car was travelling very fast and he heard a couple explosions shortly before the car crashed.

If true, it is being kept very quiet but certainly makes sense with the heat of the fire.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
...The man lost control of his vehicle on a wide boulevard over a long straight stretch and ended up where the car sat, in flames (with the gas tank basically sitting along a concrete curb....or SPARK source) and he died instantly. Whats the mystery?
...Prove your side has anything but pure conjecture based on guesswork .....as it's the logical story your version questions with a rather elaborate framework for a "set-up".
...
Yeah... Sometimes the theory behind these things are far more entertaining to imagine than what actually happened. It seems to often be the case that just doing what it appears DID happen is far easier than actually trying to deliberately create the event using the elaborate plans and schemes.
...KISS is the concept that makes life work...and KISS in this case is pretty much what they say happened. Poor guy likely didn't even feel it, which is a blessing.

"Wide boulevard" is a relative term.
When you say "your side", you are presuming that there is a/one side in opposition to another...which ("another"), I presume to be the side you have chosen/elected by the remainder of your comments. (And this does not account for those that have abstained from choosing either side...until certain questions are adequately laid to rest.)
While I agree that there are a number of enigmatic pieces of the puzzle that must fall into place for any of the "somebody did this to him" theories to work...an honest (& intelligent) mind would have to admit the same about the "logical story" being questioned.
If you disagree with that statement...would you mind stepping us through what you believe the "logical story" to be?
I would appreciate that.
I'm sure others would, as well.
I would be pleased to reciprocate if you so wish.
Sometimes - all we need is for someone to show us the KISS answer...
Usually, however, KISS answers are only claimed, and discussion migrates to derogatory comments of ridicule and contempt. (from all sides)
If you don't have time to put such an answer together - no problem.
Looking forward to 'next time around.
Thanks!

Originally posted by gorgi
They dont comment because its an on going investigation. Its always like this. Just because you dont get the answer you like doesnt make a strange conspiracy.

They don't comment on pending investigations, yet they commented that though it was pending they were no longer investigating homicide leads.

Ok I have to admit this is new news to me, but the details have gotten me curious.

I have looked at a number of the crash scene photos (right and left) as well as raw video from before the fire dept. rolled up on scene. To me this looks a little suspicious.

One, the burn and heat pattern on the vehicle seems to have burned the hottest on the drivers compartment side.

Two, the Mercedes-Benz C250 is a rear wheel drive vehicle. In order to eject the engine and drive train it would have had to rolled. But, in the early video, the roof line seems intact compared to an undamaged model of the same year. Also of note the hood can be seen along with the vehicle where it came to rest.

The question still remains why the engine and drive train came to rest behind the vehicle crash site. That is IF it was truly behind the crash sight or was ejected upon impact and traveled across the street into the oncoming lane. There is at least one reference point in the video I was watching that may lend it's self to a birds eye view from G-earth. I have yet to map this and look at it more closely.

Since "official" reports are not being released, I say we start an ATS crash investigation. Is that not why we are here?....to deny ignorance and research the truth.

reply to post by miner49r

I think some clearing/vetting needs to be introduced before everyone goes off on wild tangents...due to errors in the reporter's statements...
The engine & tranny did not end up 150'-200' in the direction opposite to the momentum of the Mercedes.
It ended up resting on the east side of North Highland Avenue, in front of the house at the corner of Clinton Street and North Highland Avenue...as can be seen in this photo from the LoudLabs video...



You can verify the house location/address by the two oddly-slanted trees...
When inching up and down both sides of the street in Google Maps - Street View...this is the only place on that street/block with such a configuration of two-oddly-slanted trees (to include the light pole, etc, et al)...as shown in this pic' taken from Google Maps - Street View...



(*Note - the trees were two years younger in the 'Street View' photos*)

reply to post by WanDash


I do believe right...there may be some erroneous reporting here as well. I may be watching the same Live labs video as you are.

Do you see the severed hydrant early in the video? I believe that gives some indication as to which direction the vehicle was headed. It crossed into the medium, severed the hydrant at a high rate of speed, impacted/embedded the tree into the vehicle and spun 90 degrees around the tree.

After watching the vid several times over...I believe the engine/drive train was ejected forward/latterally, into the oncoming lane upon impact with the tree. Since the engine and the vehicle wound up on the same side of the road, it gives the appearance of being "behind" the car.





ETA: Clip of vehicle busting a red light at high rate of speed moments before accident.

Originally posted by miner49r
reply to post by WanDash

 

...Do you see the severed hydrant early in the video? I believe that gives some indication as to which direction the vehicle was headed. It crossed into the medium, severed the hydrant at a high rate of speed, impacted/embedded the tree into the vehicle and spun 90 degrees around the tree.
...

At first, I and others were convinced there must have been a "hydrant" there, as well...but after investigation, this is what was found (again, from Google Maps - Street View)...



As to the car rolling (or some such)...I have not been able to come to a conclusion based on the video.
I thought, by going as-near-frame-by-frame as possible, that there was a chance it breached the curb prior to the water valve...but, with almost no disturbance of the turf from there to the tree... So - I'm not hanging on that as a probability.

You can, however (imo), see in this excerpt from the LoudLabs video, that the roof/top appears caved almost dead-center...



This, in conjunction with the fact that the engine would probably NOT have found a clear path out of the vehicle otherwise, suggests (to me) that, upon impact, the rear end left the ground in such a manner that the hood/top of the car slammed into the tree...then, fell back to the ground slightly askew to the original angle of impact.

reply to post by GrantedBail


She mentioned that they were told Not to comment about the investigation and that is probably because they want to make sure all of the facts are in before they do so. It is not that they are hiding something but rather want to be certain on the facts. The "Extremely Hot Fire": that she mentioned could have been attributed to the fact that the tires were burning. It takes a 400 degree ignition source to get rubber tires to burn, but when they do they burn hot. Watch the video and look at the tires. If you notice the brightest orange areas are around the tires. Like she said about the engine and tranny according to the physics professors the engine typically would go forward with the momentum. Which it did Until it was acted on by the tree and then due to a ricochet was Launched to behind the car. Make note that when something ricochets it accelerates. It is interesting the First possibility she mentions is that he could have been drinking and driving because he was near the clubs on Sunset Boulevard. The second thing she mentioned was that the car could have malfunctioned and then follows that up with something could have been on the car that Triggered the explosion. AND, most certainly Mercedes is going to say that their cars just don't blow up because that would then be a liability issue. Also that report came out from Washington University NOT San Diego. Plus the fact that the report she mentions was the first report saying that they had to be physically connected to it to have control and she never mentioned that part. In her closing statement she said that the LAPD has ruled foul play out of the equation.

If you did or didn't notice she was very careful about what she said. At frame 2:36 she caught herself and corrected about possibilities Not possibility. Kind of like she was going to say something and then changed her mind.

I do think it is fair to mention that she did indicate 2 possible factors: Drinking and Mechanical Failure but as she mentioned it is still to early to know until they release the official reports