re: So Tony Stewart ran over and killed another driver at a race last night

Some observations:

Criminal case

I don't think that it came as a surprise to most of us that no formal criminal charges would be brought unless something earth shattering was revealed by the investigation. Obviously nothing earth shattering was there.

In one of the stories I read the DA's comments were unsettling to me because he referenced Ward having marijuana in his system to the level enough to impair judgment and I think it's a bit of stretch to jump to that conclusion. LINK

An autopsy was done and some of the results have been released. I doubt the autopsy report itself will be released because NY law probably does not permit it. So I would have to guess that Ward's blood was what was tested and it revealed the presence of marijuana which, as a general rule, will remain in the blood for some hours following use before it can no longer be detected. It can also be quantified but the literature shows that you cannot to any degree of scientific certainty conclude that an individual is impaired or intoxicated based on the presence of marijuana in the blood at some level, i.e., it is totally different than the tests which measure for alcohol in the human system. LINK LINK LINK. Of course I guess it depends on the context you place on the DA's statement--maybe he was not insinuating Ward was impaired but that it was theoretically possible he could have been, but then why make an issue of it if it's really a non-issue?

That issue aside it makes no real difference to prosecution of the criminal case because contributory negligence would not be a defense to the array of criminal charges Stewart might have faced. It is doubtful the marijuana evidence would pass the test of legal relevancy although if a criminal case had been filed I'm sure the defense would have sought to have such evidence admitted, the prosecution would have sought to have such evidence excluded, and the judge would have been required to have made a ruling on the admissibility of that evidence.

Bottom line is if the prosecution would have had a solid case to prosecute they would have done so, marijuana evidence or not. They just didn't have the case.

Civil case

There will still be a civil case IMO and it is more likely that the marijuana evidence will be admitted in that case IF it proceeds to trial because Ward's own conduct in terms of his own negligence is relevant in a civil case. In my earlier posts I noted that NY has a very favorable plaintiff's law in that in civil cases they apply the doctrine of pure comparative fault. What that means is that even if Ward was found to be 95% negligent and Stewart 5% Ward's estate still gets a recovery. So if the damages were $10M in that context Ward's estate gets $500,000. The damages will be substantial because he was a young person who was killed so you throw in loss of potential earnings over a lifetime along with the other elements of damages it will amount to a case of substantial damages.

My guess is as is true with most cases it will end up being settled, probably for some undisclosed amount that will not be made public.