In more than one appearance on San Diego’s Channel 6 News, “investigative” journalist Kimberly Dvorak has stated that the engine from Michael Hastings’ Mercedes c250 landed behind the wreck — defying, in her own words, the laws of physics.
She even claims to have consulted university professors. Here she commences dispensing this rank nonsense at the 2:00 mark:
I am astonished that such statements can be received with straight faces. Yes, the crash did happen in Hollywood, but only in cinematic productions are the laws of physics defied.
I will now show you where the engine really landed.
Here is a screenshot from the Loudlabs footage, taken at the scene after the crash:
Note the streetlight pole to the left. Note also the manhole cover and the concrete slab it sits in, as well as the trees leaning over the sidewalk.
All of these are clearly visible in the following aerial shot from Google Maps – click to enlarge:
That is the northeast corner of the intersection of North Highland Avenue and Clinton Street.
Zooming out — again, click to enlarge:
The car was speeding south on Highland as indicated by the white arrow.
The yellow flash indicates an explosion that took place. This explosion demolished the front end of the car and threw the engine southeast.
That is the only way the engine could have reached its final position.
Had the car hit the tree fully intact, the engine could not have passed through the tree, much less flown down the block.
I think two bombs were involved: one that destroyed the front end and threw the engine, and one that blew the gas tank, which could account for the massive fire. My analysis leading to this conclusion takes into account and matches up the damage to the car and to the tree:
Long story short, the Mercedes was already a wreck when it hit the palm tree, rotated, and landed, burning, in its final position facing slightly southeast.
There were many long days when outside of eating, sleeping, and answering to Nature, my sole activity was studying the details of that crash scene and deducing a scenario that explains all its oddities.
I’m glad wasn’t trying to swallow food when I saw Kimberly Dvorak on TV telling the world that the engine landed north of the wreck, behind it.
I sent a “friend request” to Kimberly on Facebook. She accepted it. I did not complain publicly on her timeline. I figured she had just gotten it backward somehow and decided to give her the benefit of the doubt. So I sent her private messages politely pointing out her error, providing a link where she could see for herself where the engine really landed, and asking that she correct it.
In Facebook, when you send a private message to someone, and they click in the message window, you are notified that the message has been seen.
Kimberly Dvorak saw my messages, and she never did respond.
Next thing I knew, I was watching a video of her up on RT news, spouting the same utter nonsense about university professors declaring that the laws of physics had been violated by the engine landing behind (north of) the wreck.
I have not yet seen Kimberly Dvorak retracting these ridiculous statements.
If she really did consult “university professors”, and they corroborated her nonsense, then they did not take the time to become familiar with the crash scene.
If she truly believes that the engine landed behind the wreck, then she should not be trusted as a source of information, especially when she ignores reliable sources of it.