Jump to content
CoachWrestling

AJ Ferrari reportedly "got into a bad wreck". No other info

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

what does your cousin have to do with anything?

according to reports, no one was injured.

if there were it would be a different conversation.

 

You are incorrect again. According to the reports the passenger had internal injuries and was air lifted to the hospital. The reports also said the other driver refused medical treatment, not that there were no injuries. The other driver also had a car. There was certainly damage to that car. 

But you already knew all this. By purposely ignoring what you read, you just appear to be shilling for the athletes who you need access to to run your business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

You are incorrect again. According to the reports the passenger had internal injuries and was air lifted to the hospital. The reports also said the other driver refused medical treatment, not that there were no injuries. The other driver also had a car. There was certainly damage to that car. 

But you already knew all this. By purposely ignoring what you read, you just appear to be shilling for the athletes who you need access to to run your business.

I understood it to be that Ferrari was the one air lifted and has/had internal bleeding.   His passenger went by ambulance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

i know of no significant injuries. if there are, that's a different story. i even said that in a previous post. 

but yet you've moved on to my motives, morals, and business. 

got it. 

So you can judge others but can't be judged yourself? Whatever you say you lil clown baby.

Edit: I also liked how you moved the goalposts from only material damage to "no significant injuries".

Edited by wrestlingphish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

You are incorrect again. According to the reports the passenger had internal injuries and was air lifted to the hospital. The reports also said the other driver refused medical treatment, not that there were no injuries. The other driver also had a car. There was certainly damage to that car. 

But you already knew all this. By purposely ignoring what you read, you just appear to be shilling for the athletes who you need access to to run your business.

"The statement goes on to read that, Ferrari was transported by helicopter to Oklahoma City"

"One of the occupants of the burning vehicle was flown from the scene in a medical helicopter and another was transported by ambulance, Barta said. The occupant of the second vehicle declined treatment."

https://www.stwnewspress.com/sports/developing-aj-ferrari-involved-in-car-wreck-monday-night/article_e57df90a-7d91-11ec-972f-6b9bfa3a93b7.html

 "Ferrari, who was driving, was airlifted to OU Health in Oklahoma City, where he was treated for various injuries, but had no broken bones"

"“He has fluid in his lungs that is affecting his oxygen levels and some bad bruising with some internal bleeding"

https://www.stwnewspress.com/sports/developing-aj-ferrari-involved-in-car-wreck-monday-night/article_e57df90a-7d91-11ec-972f-6b9bfa3a93b7.html

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Husker_Du said:

i know of no significant injuries. if there are, that's a different story. i even said that in a previous post. 

but yet you've moved on to my motives, morals, and business. 

got it. 

Released and home... correct , doesn't seem to be significant at this point. He will need to be check out multiple times and cleared. 

https://www.oklahoman.com/story/sports/college/cowboys/2022/01/26/a-j-ferrari-oklahoma-state-wrestler-released-hospital-after-crash/9211489002/

“He’s home,” Smith said. “Sore. Tender. What you would expect after seeing that car. He’s sore, really sore. Hopefully it’s all from him just getting banged around, and nothing else. They’ll look at him in a couple days and see if we need to do anything else.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Husker_Du said:

what is missing from your lives that you want a person to suffer criminally / scholastically / athletically for making a bad decision?

whether or not AJ faces any repercussions has zero affect on me or anyone else. and yet i think rational, self aware people would hope he learned from this and makes better decisions next time.

not some of you though. some of you literally request the worst possible outcome for a person that, by all reports, caused nothing more than damage to material things. 

 

1 hour ago, Husker_Du said:

i know of no significant injuries. if there are, that's a different story. i even said that in a previous post. 

but yet you've moved on to my motives, morals, and business. 

got it. 

I was with you until the "nothing more than damage to material things". As has been pointed out, and is in every article posted in this thread, every article I have seen online, and in tweets, that there were serious, though not life threatening injuries that include "internal, arm, leg and head injuries" to Isai Rodriguez (ESPN) and that A.J. has "fluid in his lungs that is affecting his oxygen levels and some bad bruising with some internal bleeding“ according to his father's facebook. Certainly more than just a dumb decision that only resulted in damage to material things.

Edited by Crotalus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Idaho said:

Released and home... correct , doesn't seem to be significant at this point. He will need to be check out multiple times and cleared. 

https://www.oklahoman.com/story/sports/college/cowboys/2022/01/26/a-j-ferrari-oklahoma-state-wrestler-released-hospital-after-crash/9211489002/

“He’s home,” Smith said. “Sore. Tender. What you would expect after seeing that car. He’s sore, really sore. Hopefully it’s all from him just getting banged around, and nothing else. They’ll look at him in a couple days and see if we need to do anything else.”

Wow - this is great news and I wish him and the others involved a quick and full recovery.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/25/2022 at 6:10 PM, buckshot1969 said:

I don't think posting guns on SM is very responsible either. Now people know where to find a loaded gun in a trunk...

I grew up around guns but guns were never around if you get my drift. We took them hunting or to the range and that was it. We didn't show them to everybody, we didn't take pictures with the entire fam holding guns and then send them as Christmas cards and we didn't carry them into Pizza Hut because it's our right. We were trained on Daisy bb guns and after being responsible with them we were allowed to use a real gun. BTW, shooting a gun at night into the darkness is EXTREMELY dangerous, how the hell did he know what was 500 yards away?

Hopefully he'll fully recover and this will be a wakeup call because somebody could have easily been killed or crippled from what I've read.

Name checks out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those of you so inclined to read about it, there is an interesting discussion of what is known as "moral luck" in ethics.   It might possibly relate to the accident after all the facts come out.

Here is a link to the Wikipedia page on the subject and an excerpt from it below.  The topic, of course, is more complex and fascinating once one delves in to the philosophical literature, but here is one quick way to start an inquiry:

Moral luck describes circumstances whereby a moral agent is assigned moral blame or praise for an action or its consequences even if it is clear that said agent did not have full control over either the action or its consequences. 

Given the notion of equating moral responsibility with voluntary action, however, moral luck leads to counterintuitive solutions. This is illustrated by an example of a traffic accident. Driver A, in a moment of inattention, runs a red light as a child is crossing the street. Driver A tries to avoid hitting the child but fails and the child dies. Driver B also runs a red light, but no one is crossing and only gets a traffic ticket.

If a bystander is asked to morally evaluate Drivers A and B, they may assign Driver A more moral blame than Driver B because Driver A's course of action resulted in a death. However, there are no differences in the controllable actions performed by Drivers A and B. The only disparity is an external uncontrollable event. If it is given that moral responsibility should only be relevant when the agent voluntarily performed or failed to perform some action, Drivers A and B should be blamed equally. This may be intuitively problematic, as one situation resulted in a death.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_luck#:~:text=Moral luck describes circumstances whereby,the action or its consequences.

 

Edited by dmm53

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's incredibly fortunate that Ferrari was released and is ok, and that everyone else involved seems unharmed as well.  Willie is right that other than the injury to himself, the majority of damage is basically property.  But I think there need to be changes moving forward, and somebody can tell me if i'm being overly harsh here...

1.  I don't want to see Ferrari criminally charged even if reckless driving is a possibility based on the reported details. I understand why some of the more "law and order" folks out there want to see him charged based on what could have happened and to set an example to others. But given that nobody was seriously hurt, I think the consequences of criminal prosecution are not the most beneficial-and I believe that criminal prosecution is often over-applied and can do more harm than good in many instances. I don't see what's wrong with just issuing traffic tickets/points on license/driver school or whatever-not that huge of a deal relative to what could have been if another driver had died. 

2.  OSU needs to take it upon themselves to make it clear that the type of behavior that has been happening cannot continue.  I hope their actions are not punitive, but rather focus on getting him the help necessary to change. His personality is awesome and one of his biggest assets, but he needs to couple that personality with decisions that are not reckless.  Posting videos of yourself firing guns into the night is not "20 year old behavior."  Neither is passing 3 cars at night on a 2 lane highway in a no-pass zone. I believe in less of the "old school" approach though of putting the blame on him and basically telling him to "fix up or leave"-but rather bring in professionals who can actually help him understand why he is making decisions that could erase his own potential. OSU needs to ask what about the environment they currently are presenting him are contributing to this behavior and what changes they can make to help him. Putting his personal development ahead of his wrestling development at this point is critical.  

Edited by Billyhoyle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, dmm53 said:

For those of you so inclined to read about it, there is an interesting discussion of what is notion as "moral luck" in ethics.   It might possibly relate to the accident after all the facts come out.

Here is a link to the Wikipedia page on the subject and an excerpt from it below.  The topic, of course, is more complex and fascinating once one delves in to the philosophical literature, but here is one quick way to start an inquiry:

Moral luck describes circumstances whereby a moral agent is assigned moral blame or praise for an action or its consequences even if it is clear that said agent did not have full control over either the action or its consequences. 

Given the notion of equating moral responsibility with voluntary action, however, moral luck leads to counterintuitive solutions. This is illustrated by an example of a traffic accident. Driver A, in a moment of inattention, runs a red light as a child is crossing the street. Driver A tries to avoid hitting the child but fails and the child dies. Driver B also runs a red light, but no one is crossing and only gets a traffic ticket.

If a bystander is asked to morally evaluate Drivers A and B, they may assign Driver A more moral blame than Driver B because Driver A's course of action resulted in a death. However, there are no differences in the controllable actions performed by Drivers A and B. The only disparity is an external uncontrollable event. If it is given that moral responsibility should only be relevant when the agent voluntarily performed or failed to perform some action, Drivers A and B should be blamed equally. This may be intuitively problematic, as one situation resulted in a death.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_luck#:~:text=Moral luck describes circumstances whereby,the action or its consequences.

 

Don’t try to scramble my brain!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Billyhoyle said:

It's incredibly fortunate that Ferrari was released and is ok, and that everyone else involved seems unharmed as well.  Willie is right that other than the injury to himself, the majority of damage is basically property.  But I think there need to be changes moving forward, and somebody can tell me if i'm being overly harsh here...

1.  I don't want to see Ferrari criminally charged even if reckless driving is a possibility based on the reported details. I understand why some of the more "law and order" folks out there want to see him charged based on what could have happened and to set an example to others. But given that nobody was seriously hurt, I think the consequences of criminal prosecution are not the most beneficial. I don't see what's wrong with just issuing traffic tickets/points on license/driver school or whatever-not that huge of a deal relative to what could have been if another driver had died. 

2.  OSU needs to take it upon themselves to make it clear that the type of behavior that has been happening cannot continue.  I hope their actions are not punitive, but rather focus on getting him the help necessary to change. His personality is awesome and one of his biggest assets, but he needs to couple that personality with decisions that are not reckless.  Posting videos of yourself firing guns into the night is not "20 year old behavior."  Neither is passing 3 cars at night on a 2 lane highway in a no-pass zone. I believe in less of the "old school" approach though of putting the blame on him and basically telling him to "fix up or leave"-but rather bring in professionals who can actually help him understand why he is making decisions that could erase his own potential. OSU needs to put his personal development ahead of his wrestling development at this point.  

Two people were taken to the hospital, one by helicopter. That's not property damage.

An act can be criminal even if the resulting injuries are minor. Whether this act was criminal is at least a close question. Of course, there are many non-beneficial consequences of criminal charges, but they still bring charges all the time.

If he is charged, he can always invoke the "my personality is awesome defense" and he can flex. No jury will ever convict.

Would you be so lenient if the reckless driver was a black kid from Houston. Somehow I doubt it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, NJDan said:

Two people were taken to the hospital, one by helicopter. That's not property damage.

An act can be criminal even if the resulting injuries are minor. Whether this act was criminal is at least a close question. Of course, there are many non-beneficial consequences of criminal charges, but they still bring charges all the time.

If he is charged, he can always invoke the "my personality is awesome defense" and he can flex. No jury will ever convict.

Would you be so lenient if the reckless driver was a black kid from Houston. Somehow I doubt it. 

His friend going to the hospital appears to have been precautionary (he told the XC coach he wanted to compete this weekend)-and there's zero chance he would want to press charges. And I'm not sure whether injuries to yourself even count in terms of prosecution...

And I said it could be charged. If he is charged, he probably would be convicted.  That's just how the legal system works.  Do I think the best decision as a society is to take somebody like this and immediately prosecute? Absolutely not.  And yes, the type of action that DAs in cities like Houston used to take against minorities (and the results of those actions) is exactly why I think the old "law and order" mentality is antiquated.  But as I said, I understand the logic behind a  "letter of the law" approach to prosecution-I just don't buy it or think it's best for society.  

 

7 minutes ago, hammerlockthree said:

it boils down to "there is an arbitrary element to life"

And the legal system.  But one thing is true, which is that anybody who continues to push their "moral luck" will eventually run out of it. 

Edited by Billyhoyle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, madcat11 said:

Don’t try to scramble my brain!

Ha!  Is scrambling only permitted on the mat and in the frying pan?

The "muscle" known as the brain needs to be worked out and trained as well; no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Billyhoyle said:

It's incredibly fortunate that Ferrari was released and is ok, and that everyone else involved seems unharmed as well.  Willie is right that other than the injury to himself, the majority of damage is basically property.  But I think there need to be changes moving forward, and somebody can tell me if i'm being overly harsh here...

1.  I don't want to see Ferrari criminally charged even if reckless driving is a possibility based on the reported details. I understand why some of the more "law and order" folks out there want to see him charged based on what could have happened and to set an example to others. But given that nobody was seriously hurt, I think the consequences of criminal prosecution are not the most beneficial-and I believe that criminal prosecution is often over-applied and can do more harm than good in many instances. I don't see what's wrong with just issuing traffic tickets/points on license/driver school or whatever-not that huge of a deal relative to what could have been if another driver had died. 

It's up to the prosecutor/district attorney (with input from the passenger and the other driver) whether he is charged.  They examine the evidence and determine whether there is probable cause that a law was broken.  End of story.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ShakaAloha said:

It's up to the prosecutor/district attorney (with input from the passenger and the other driver) whether he is charged.  They examine the evidence and determine whether there is probable cause that a law was broken.  End of story.  

This seems a bit naive to assume that they will base it entirely on probable cause and input from the other drivers.  The DA in NYC or Philadelphia would likely never press charges for something like this, regardless of what anyone else wanted.  While maybe the DA in Oklahoma could have a more "law and order" philosophy. Prosecution has always been in part discretionary and based on the moral leanings and even political goals of the prosecutor (and not just following the letter of probable cause and the law).  

Edited by Billyhoyle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Billyhoyle said:

This seems a bit naive to assume that they will base it entirely on probable cause and input from the other drivers.  The DA in NYC or Philadelphia would likely never press charges for something like this, regardless of what anyone else wanted.  While maybe the DA in Oklahoma could have a more "law and order" philosophy. Prosecution has always been in part discretionary and based on the moral leanings and even political goals of the prosecutor (and not just following the letter of probable cause and the law).  

whats the actual point of this post? You're talking as if we know ferrari was drunk or something. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one needs to "press charges" for a crime to be prosecuted. A DA might decided not to prosecute if witnesses are not willing. But here, there are other witnesses who were in other cars.  FWIW, here is the definition of "reckless driving" in New York. No injury of any kind is required. I assume the OK law is similar. What AJ did seems to fit. Of course, that does not necessarily mean a DA will move forward. 

"Reckless driving. Reckless driving shall mean driving or using any motor vehicle, motorcycle or any other vehicle propelled by any power other than muscular power or any appliance or accessory thereof in a manner which unreasonably interferes with the free and proper use of the public highway, or unreasonably endangers users of the public highway. Reckless driving is prohibited. Every person violating this provision shall be guilty of a misdemeanor."

Edited by NJDan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, hammerlockthree said:

whats the actual point of this post? You're talking as if we know ferrari was drunk or something. 

I'm saying I don't want to see him charged with reckless driving even if his reported actions (passing 3 cars at night on a 2 lane highway in a no pass zone leading to a crash) may technically fit the requirement for probable cause of that law. 

Edited by Billyhoyle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...