It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

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

page: 7
57
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock
...I am going to disagree based on the location of the witness to the car and the direction he was pointing to indicate the driver was having some problems. According to the witness location the yellow mark marks the spot the motor came out and that the driver was coming from that direction. Same with the debris field. The debris field follows the direction that the car was coming from and not parts tossed forward by impact.

The car was travelling south on North Highland Avenue.
In the first video (1:12 in length), the LoudLabs camera/car was sitting in the gas station parking lot on the southwest corner of Santa Monica Blvd at North Highland Avenue... The vehicle was travelling south through that intersection (you can verify this in Google Maps - Street View - the photo was taken in February 2011, and the Walgreens that is under construction in that photo, is fully functioning when the Mercedes passes through the intersection in the video).
While the video has numerous "cuts and edits", it can be verified that after initially passing North Highland Avenue, the LoudLabs car returns to North Highland'...and turns left (being - in a south-bound direction)...just prior to Melrose Place...which is the intersection they pass through, with the flaming car directly ahead.
Again - if you look at the photos/pics I posted a couple of pages back, you will see that the engine settled near two oddly-slanted trees...and those two trees are found ONLY in front of the house that sits on the northeast corner of Clinton' & North Highland'.

I have made numerous miscalculations and misinterpretations through the development of this story...but have gained my bearings pretty well as time moves on... You don't have to believe me, though!!!!




posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ShadellacZumbrum
 


I live in a nowhere town as well. The other day I seen a paint truck go by spraying lines......I was like


It must be time to move.



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by miner49r
reply to post by WanDash
 


I agree... no missiles. Possibly something on board...maybe.

I am going back to street view and see if I can make sense out of the water plume and directions. I don't mean to doubt your layouts, but something still does not add up.

Reaching here, ....but was he on the wrong side of the road, crossed the median hit the tree and spun? This may be a good topic for an investigative thread of it's own.


Ok I will look at it and you guys post a bit better for positioning.

However the 2nd witness made some statements we should consider.
edit on 9-7-2013 by Logarock because: n



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by WanDash
 


I believe you as I myself may have been the victim of some misgivings.

Is there a chance that when the engine ejected that it could have taken out the hydrant?

From your 8X10 glossy with the circles and the arrows it looks like it might have traveled near the hydrant.

Then where is the hydrant?



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by WanDash
 


But there is no debris field when the news guy rolls up on the car. Late in the film he positions himself in front of the car and scans the debris field.
........

Ok I have to edit this, the second witness was filmed in front of the car and if that's the case it does look like the motor was ejected and flew done the road as you guys said.


edit on 9-7-2013 by Logarock because: n



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:01 PM
link   
If the car bottomed out it certainly could have injured the gas tank enough to cause a leak. In that short distance the gasoline vapors could have gathered enough to ignite on impact.



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum
reply to post by WanDash
 

...I believe you as I myself may have been the victim of some misgivings.
...Is there a chance that when the engine ejected that it could have taken out the hydrant?
...From your 8X10 glossy with the circles and the arrows it looks like it might have traveled near the hydrant.
...Then where is the hydrant?

There was no hydrant...
Here it is...untouched (this photo taken from the west side of the street - or - the north-bound side)...


Bigger picture - files.abovetopsecret.com...

Here, I have outlined it in red...


Bigger picture - files.abovetopsecret.com...

I don't think there's any chance the engine left the vehicle in a fashion that it could have returned to the "water main"...then ricocheted (from that angle) to travel 150 - 200 feet in the opposite direction.



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by WanDash
 


Ya,. . now you just getting into "Magic Bullet" territory.

Well,.. . since there we no other large parts that seperated from the vehicle. At least not anything heavy enough to land on it and break the line from a top impact, that is going to be a little harder to explain.

Because I am pretty damn certain that the engine did not break it and the continue to roll as far as it did. There would have been too much loss of force.
edit on 9-7-2013 by ShadellacZumbrum because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum
If the car bottomed out it certainly could have injured the gas tank enough to cause a leak. In that short distance the gasoline vapors could have gathered enough to ignite on impact.



Yea it looks liken the 2nd witness is trying to saying that the car was skipping and speeding. But he also seems to indicate the car was already of fire.



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock
...Ok I will look at it and you guys post a bit better for positioning.

However the 2nd witness made some statements we should consider.

Here is one of the best pictures (from the LoudLabs video) to gain reference...
The camera is situated "just south" of the "Jewish" gentleman spraying water on the car.
The "Jewish" gentleman is on the west side of the street (or...the south-bound side)...
The rear-end of the car is point toward him (pointed west)...
The busted water main is just north of the car (to the left).
At the "far left" of the picture, you see a white picket fence with an arch entry-way...
That house is a couple of houses "north" of where the crash occurred...on the east side of the street...being in the opposite direction of where the engine came to rest (at the other end of that block, but on the same/east side of the street/median).
I can discuss the "witness testimony" after reviewing it again...




Bigger picture -- files.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Logarock
 


Did the witness say the vehicle was Completely airborn?



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by WanDash


I don't think there's any chance the engine left the vehicle in a fashion that it could have returned to the "water main"...then ricocheted (from that angle) to travel 150 - 200 feet in the opposite direction.


Yea your right. It looks like the debris filed is junk the engine carried with it as it broke through the grill.

Plus the picture of the motor.....its as clean as a wistle....no blast residue.
edit on 9-7-2013 by Logarock because: n



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum
reply to post by Logarock
 


Did the witness say the vehicle was Completely airborn?


He indicated by hand gestures that it was skipping and bottomed out several times. That's what it looked like he was trying to say.



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock
...He indicated by hand gestures that it was skipping and bottomed out several times. That's what it looked like he was trying to say.

Do you recall him saying that it "fishtailed"?
The exceptionally odd part is that he seemed to say that it went through the motions of "swerve & overcorrect" before going into the tree -?-?- But - my experience would say that there would have been some kind of tire/skid marks, at least at the point of "overcorrect" (or - fishtail, as he called it).



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by miner49r
reply to post by WanDash
 


Awesome representation and diagram


But, ... there is one fact that still remains that bothers the heck out of me. The severed erroneous hydrant or water main or whatever it is in the video.

It is clearly out of the line of travel yet it was severed. it can be seen a few times in the raw video.



Miner posted this. Witness testimony at 3:15
edit on 9-7-2013 by Logarock because: n



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:45 PM
link   
Ok ... I have a view from across the street and have found they mystery water main / gusher.

Red is the fateful tree
Blue Jewish guy with hose
Yellow the gusher



ATS Big Picture
edit on 9-7-2013 by miner49r because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock
Miner posted this. Witness testimony at 3:15

There is another longer interview with this witness done the following day...
I will try to find it...

ETA: Okay - found it in the following post (in another thread)...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

If you read past that post...at some point you'll find that someone (may have been JBA2848) uncovered the fact that this "eye witness" goes by quite a few very different names... (**)
edit on 7/9/2013 by WanDash because: found it



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by WanDash

Originally posted by Logarock
Miner posted this. Witness testimony at 3:15

There is another longer interview with this witness done the following day...
I will try to find it...


Is it on this thread?



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Logarock
 


I find it interesting that the witness says when he crossed Melrose it looked like he Accelerateds and that is when he lost control.

He also said that the car was going at maximum speed.

So, if he was going at maximum speed, how in the hell did he have any pedal left to work with to accelerate before he lost control.

edit on 9-7-2013 by ShadellacZumbrum because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum



Thanks for the post. And so the car was on fire before impact. Is it even conceivable that his car could have bottomed out enough to have caused a hole in the tank?
edit on 9-7-2013 by Logarock because: n



new topics

top topics



 
57
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join