Let's be fair. Krikorian had access to the ENTIRE video and this professor only a short Youtube video clip. Kirkorian wrote, "Three seconds later, another vehicle goes by, traveling from the restaurant front door to the crash site in about seven seconds." And you can see from the video clip, that Hastings' car travels the same distance in about 3.5 seconds-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjaPHWNzTHQ
The car that slowed down was travelling the other direction. There's no indication the two cars travelling the same direction slowed down.
Why wouldn't Krikorian, a former LA Times reporter, want to not break the biggest story ever, proving Hastings was driving 35MPH? His investigation also contradicted other things Miss Dvorak claimed-
http://krikorianwrites.com/blog/2013/7/24/michael-hastings-i...
EDIT: I did a rough estimate of the professor's math. The pizza shop to the impact is about 200'. Looking closer, it appears it takes Hastings 2.5 to 3 seconds to travel that distance. So if the video surveillance is played at real time, Hastings was travelling between 45MPH and 55MPH? To be 35MPH, the time would have to be about 3.8 seconds.
Sure someone could do a more accurate estimate but it seems very unlikely that he was going 80MPH assuming the video surveillance is not delayed. It'd be interesting to get accurate measurements and use some video analysis to get a real answer.
Fair points. I think it's good that we're focusing on the video, BTW.
>Why wouldn't Krikorian, a former LA Times reporter, want to not break the biggest story ever, proving Hastings was driving 35MPH?
I have no idea. Maybe because he's a former reporter? Some other reason? I don't know. But, I think it's good to keep focusing on verifying or refuting the numbers from the video.
>Hastings was travelling between 45MPH and 55MPH?
That's what I get.
>It'd be interesting to get accurate measurements and use some video analysis to get a real answer.
It would be good to have more precise numbers (distances, times, etc). But, even with rough (but reasonable) numbers, this takes us way under 80MPH and definitely the 100MPH that some have suggested.
But, doesn't it seem like such analysis should be part of the police investigation?
The car that slowed down was travelling the other direction. There's no indication the two cars travelling the same direction slowed down.
Why wouldn't Krikorian, a former LA Times reporter, want to not break the biggest story ever, proving Hastings was driving 35MPH? His investigation also contradicted other things Miss Dvorak claimed- http://krikorianwrites.com/blog/2013/7/24/michael-hastings-i...
EDIT: I did a rough estimate of the professor's math. The pizza shop to the impact is about 200'. Looking closer, it appears it takes Hastings 2.5 to 3 seconds to travel that distance. So if the video surveillance is played at real time, Hastings was travelling between 45MPH and 55MPH? To be 35MPH, the time would have to be about 3.8 seconds.
Sure someone could do a more accurate estimate but it seems very unlikely that he was going 80MPH assuming the video surveillance is not delayed. It'd be interesting to get accurate measurements and use some video analysis to get a real answer.