Author Topic: Police report released on Hancock (Read 6201 times)

MusicMan · « **on:** May 04, 2007, 10:45:24 am »

Frankly, there's nothing but bad news here.

Almost double the legal BAL limit, on a cell phone, with marijuana in the car.

JaneDoe · « **Reply #1 on:** May 04, 2007, 10:50:22 am »

Very tragic. I hope that there are some young kids who take this to heart and do not make the same mistake.

pravata · « **Reply #2 on:** May 04, 2007, 10:54:16 am »

Quote from: MusicMan on May 04, 2007, 10:45:24 am

Frankly, there's nothing but bad news here.

Almost double the legal BAL limit, on a cell phone, with marijuana in the car.

And speeding. An article that is linked from the one cited says, "None of us are immune from random tragedy." This is true. But this was not random. The chamber with the bullet in it finally came up.

Mr. Happy · « **Reply #3 on:** May 04, 2007, 10:55:18 am »

Quote from: JaneDoe on May 04, 2007, 10:50:22 am

Very tragic. I hope that there are some young kids who take this to heart and do not make the same mistake.

Oh my gosh. I feel awful. Sometimes we feel invincible, like we've got the world by the balls, but we don't. In recovery myself, I grieve over these situations.

MusicMan · « **Reply #4 on:** May 04, 2007, 10:56:26 am »

Quote from: pravata on May 04, 2007, 10:54:16 am

But this was not random. The chamber with the bullet in it finally came up.

And to echo Jane's comments - I hope that people realize that each of these factors puts another round in the chamber. I hope, but I don't count on it.

pravata · « **Reply #5 on:** May 04, 2007, 10:58:12 am »

Quote from: MusicMan on May 04, 2007, 10:56:26 am

And to echo Jane's comments - I hope that people realize that each of these factors puts another round in the chamber. I hope, but I don't count on it.

Throwing around "senseless" and "random" doesn't help. I've known people who have died senselessly and randomly. They were not in control of their own fate.

HurricaneDavid · « **Reply #6 on:** May 04, 2007, 10:59:18 am »

Don't forget no seat belt (though the police say it wouldn't have prevented death.)

Drunk + drugs + speeding + cell phone + no seat belt. Can you possibly add in any additional factors to make this situation more dangerous?

Mr. Happy · « **Reply #7 on:** May 04, 2007, 10:59:38 am »

Quote from: pravata on May 04, 2007, 10:58:12 am

Throwing around "senseless" and "random" doesn't help. I've known people who have died senselessly and randomly. They were not in control of their own fate.

It is a jealous, cunning, baffling and powerful disease.

pravata · « **Reply #8 on:** May 04, 2007, 11:02:05 am »

Quote from: HurricaneDavid on May 04, 2007, 10:59:18 am

Don't forget no seat belt (though the police say it wouldn't have prevented death.)

Drunk + drugs + speeding + cell phone + no seat belt. Can you possibly add in any additional factors to make this situation more dangerous?

Actually, it is a miracle that the only person he killed was himself.

Limey · « **Reply #9 on:** May 04, 2007, 11:03:15 am »

Quote from: Mr. Happy on May 04, 2007, 10:59:38 am

It is a jealous, cunning, baffling and powerful disease.

I understand and fully agree with your statement on alcoholism (and any other form of substance addiction). We don't know, however, if that's what we're dealing with here. Hancock may simply be a completely irresponsible pisshead, which is a possibility not dismissed by the speeding, cell phone usage and lack of seat belt.

MusicMan · « **Reply #10 on:** May 04, 2007, 11:03:22 am »

Quote from: Mr. Happy on May 04, 2007, 10:59:38 am

It is a jealous, cunning, baffling and powerful disease.

I am not going to dispute this. But to call it "random" diminishes exactly what you're talking about.

MusicMan · « **Reply #11 on:** May 04, 2007, 11:03:46 am »

Quote from: HurricaneDavid on May 04, 2007, 10:59:18 am

Don't forget no seat belt (though the police say it wouldn't have prevented death.)

Drunk + drugs + speeding + cell phone + no seat belt. Can you possibly add in any additional factors to make this situation more dangerous?

Only if it were raining.

Fredia · « **Reply #12 on:** May 04, 2007, 11:03:59 am »

Quote from: pravata on May 04, 2007, 11:02:05 am

Actually, it is a miracle that the only person he killed was himself.

a bad tragic thing. maybe others out there who think they are invincible will see that it can happen to anyone and have a wake up call.

Mr. Happy · « **Reply #13 on:** May 04, 2007, 11:04:41 am »

Quote from: pravata on May 04, 2007, 11:02:05 am

Actually, it is a miracle that the only person he killed was himself.

Yes, one could interpret this situation that way.

Jacksonian · « **Reply #14 on:** May 04, 2007, 11:06:27 am »

Quote from: HurricaneDavid on May 04, 2007, 10:59:18 am

Don't forget no seat belt (though the police say it wouldn't have prevented death.)

Drunk + drugs + speeding + cell phone + no seat belt. Can you possibly add in any additional factors to make this situation more dangerous?

Firearms discharge.

Mr. Happy · « **Reply #15 on:** May 04, 2007, 11:08:06 am »

Quote from: Limey on May 04, 2007, 11:03:15 am

I understand and fully agree with your statement on alcoholism (and any other form of substance addiction). We don't know, however, if that's what we're dealing with here. Hancock may simply be a completely irresponsible pisshead, which is a possibility not dismissed by the speeding, cell phone usage and lack of seat belt.

You're right. I've just seen this so often (in and out of rehab, psych hospitals and AA/NA) to usually assume the worst.

Limey · « **Reply #16 on:** May 04, 2007, 11:24:51 am »

Quote from: Mr. Happy on May 04, 2007, 11:08:06 am

You're right. I've just seen this so often (in and out of rehab, psych hospitals and AA/NA) to usually assume the worst.

This may well be the other shoe that will drop shortly when the enablers around him start opening up.

hostros7 · « **Reply #17 on:** May 04, 2007, 12:22:44 pm »

Quote from: MusicMan on May 04, 2007, 11:03:46 am

Only if it were raining.

And he was getting a road-blumpkin.

WulawHorn · « **Reply #18 on:** May 04, 2007, 12:36:04 pm »

I kinda assumed this might be the case. Not necessarily all those factors, but at least the drinking doesn't surprise me whenever you are talking about a one car accident after midnight.

I still stand by my earlier statement that it was jackass of the media to run their reports prior to the tox screen- now is the time to preach on the dangers of drinking, druggin/ cellphoning, and driving. Also- let the family have their grief without piling on while the body is still warm.

Now is the time for postmortem. Agreed 100% with the sentiments above that this was not a "random" fate type event.

Limey · « **Reply #19 on:** May 04, 2007, 01:28:56 pm »

This news makes this story a little less frivolous.

Frobie · « **Reply #20 on:** May 04, 2007, 01:56:07 pm »

Such a waste.

Quote from: Limey on May 04, 2007, 01:28:56 pm

This news makes this story a little less frivolous.

Paris, you're a freakin' bazillionaire. Hire a car. A nice one.

MusicMan · « **Reply #21 on:** May 04, 2007, 02:03:29 pm »

Quote from: Frobie on May 04, 2007, 01:56:07 pm

Paris, you're a freakin' bazillionaire. Hire a car. A nice one.

Or just ride home with whatever guy is deluded enough to find you attractive that night.

In other words... just do whatever it takes to ensure that I never have to hear about you again.

homer · « **Reply #22 on:** May 04, 2007, 02:15:01 pm »

Quote from: MusicMan on May 04, 2007, 02:03:29 pm

Or just ride home with whatever guy is deluded enough to find you attractive that night.

...and has a full charge on his HandyCam.

Limey · « **Reply #23 on:** May 04, 2007, 02:28:54 pm »

Quote from: Frobie on May 04, 2007, 01:56:07 pm

Paris, you're a freakin' bazillionaire. Hire a car. A nice one.

[rant]Not wanting to get this one off the rails into OWA's E-Extra, but this isn't about whether she can afford a cab, it's about total and complete disregard for the law. She was busted for drunk-driving and pleaded no contest. She was banned from driving, and this was explained to her by the court and she signed a document saying that she understood the terms of her probation, including the driving ban. She then had to be stopped from driving away from the courthouse. She was busted a few days later, doing 70mph down Sunset Blvd. She was supposed to enroll in an alcohol education program, and she still has yet to do so.

She simply doesn't think that the law applies to her. She needs some time in the big house, making CCTV bongo vids with her new best friends, in order to understand what the word "consequences" means.[/rant]

Frobie · « **Reply #24 on:** May 04, 2007, 02:39:11 pm »

Quote from: Limey on May 04, 2007, 02:28:54 pm

[rant]...[/rant]

Oh, I don't disagree with that at all. I just am amazed by people who could take such simple and obvious steps to keep from, you know, going to jail and stuff yet fail to do so.

Limey · « **Reply #25 on:** May 04, 2007, 02:46:17 pm »

Quote from: Frobie on May 04, 2007, 02:39:11 pm

Oh, I don't disagree with that at all. I just am amazed by people who could take such simple and obvious steps to keep from, you know, going to jail and stuff yet fail to do so.

Jail is full of people to stupid to keep themselves out. Wealth should not make a difference.

Phil_in_CS · « **Reply #26 on:** May 04, 2007, 02:57:37 pm »

Quote from: Limey on May 04, 2007, 02:46:17 pm

Jail is full of people to stupid to keep themselves out. Wealth should not make a difference.

If I did this, I would go to jail. I don't see what the issue is, other than I can't spend millions on lawyers like she and OJ can.

MusicMan · « **Reply #27 on:** May 04, 2007, 03:00:18 pm »

Quote from: Phil_in_CS on May 04, 2007, 02:57:37 pm

If I did this, I would go to jail. I don't see what the issue is, other than I can't spend millions on lawyers like she and OJ can.

The money OJ spent on lawyers had very little to do with his acquittal. Shoddy police work, even worse prosecutors, and 12 of the most criminally stupid people to ever populate a jury did.

And even still... if that case had occurred any time after the premiere of "CSI", then he would have been convicted.

Limey · « **Reply #28 on:** May 04, 2007, 03:04:13 pm »

Quote from: MusicMan on May 04, 2007, 03:00:18 pm

The money OJ spent on lawyers had very little to do with his acquittal. Shoddy police work, even worse prosecutors, and 12 of the most criminally stupid people to ever populate a jury did.

...which can also be blamed, partially, on crap prosecutors who botched jury selection. A showboating judge wasn't much help either.

See fuck, cluster.

ETA: "Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer," said English jurist William Blackstone. The LA District Attorneys office has taken the Blackstone ratio and made it a goal, not a caution against overzealous prosecution.

Phil_in_CS · « **Reply #29 on:** May 04, 2007, 03:07:03 pm »

and congrats on your pontification, MM

Limey · « **Reply #30 on:** May 04, 2007, 03:10:00 pm »

Quote from: Phil_in_CS on May 04, 2007, 03:07:03 pm

and congrats on your pontification, MM

[deadpan zombie] He's one of us, now. [/deadpan zombie]

MusicMan · « **Reply #31 on:** May 04, 2007, 03:12:51 pm »

Does this come with the little car?

pravata · « **Reply #32 on:** May 04, 2007, 04:29:48 pm »

Jocketty and Cardinals manager Tony La Russa both acknowledged the Cardinals continue to provide alcohol to players after games, but said use of alcohol in the clubhouse has diminished over the years. Jocketty said the team will "examine and discuss" its policy.
link

Noe · « **Reply #33 on:** May 04, 2007, 04:36:46 pm »

Quote from: pravata on May 04, 2007, 04:29:48 pm

Jocketty and Cardinals manager Tony La Russa both acknowledged the Cardinals continue to provide alcohol to players after games, but said use of alcohol in the clubhouse has diminished over the years. Jocketty said the team will "examine and discuss" its policy.
link

I believe that the Oakland A's are the only organization that does not allow liquor to be served in the clubhouse, either home or away clubs. Have you seen those Oakland A's lately? I'm surprised that has not been a revolt and a storming of Billy Beane's Bastille.

BTW - they did this in response to a DUI by Estaban Loiaza. Probably an indeminity thing, but they did it nonetheless.

Limey · « **Reply #34 on:** May 04, 2007, 04:41:58 pm »

Quote from: Noe in Austin on May 04, 2007, 04:36:46 pm

BTW - they did this in response to a DUI by Estaban Loiaza. Probably an indeminity thing, but they did it nonetheless.

Host liquor liability: If you give people drinks and they go and do something stupid, you're responsible.

Matt · « **Reply #35 on:** May 04, 2007, 04:56:50 pm »

What the hell does "rant" mean?

mihoba · « **Reply #36 on:** May 04, 2007, 04:59:43 pm »

Quote from: Matt on May 04, 2007, 04:56:50 pm

What the hell does "rant" mean?

rant: (transitive verb) to utter in a bombastic declamatory fashion

Limey · « **Reply #37 on:** May 04, 2007, 05:02:36 pm »

Quote from: mihoba on May 04, 2007, 04:59:43 pm

rant: (transitive verb) to utter in a bombastic declamatory fashion

"The Master of the Revels despises us all for vagrants and peddlers of bombast."

Matt · « **Reply #38 on:** May 04, 2007, 05:33:24 pm »

Quote from: mihoba on May 04, 2007, 04:59:43 pm

rant: (transitive verb) to utter in a bombastic declamatory fashion

Not a Family Guy fan eh?

MRaup · « **Reply #39 on:** May 04, 2007, 09:18:51 pm »

Another quality AB with runners in scoring position... Nicely done Luke.

mihoba · « **Reply #40 on:** May 04, 2007, 09:50:59 pm »

Quote from: Matt on May 04, 2007, 05:33:24 pm

Not a Family Guy fan eh?

Sorry, no. I watch no TV, except Astros baseball.

I should have known, however. My bad.

HurricaneDavid · « **Reply #41 on:** May 05, 2007, 12:00:01 am »

Quote from: Noe in Austin on May 04, 2007, 04:36:46 pm

I believe that the Oakland A's are the only organization that does not allow liquor to be served in the clubhouse, either home or away clubs.

From the AP...

"The Astros do not provide alcohol to players in their clubhouse. Manager Phil Garner recalled the Brewers, where he began his managerial career in 1992, banning alcohol that season."

Of course there's a difference between allowing liquor and providing it, and between their clubhouse and their clubhouse on the road... but still, I was surprised to read this. Furthermore...

"The drinking as a whole has dropped off significantly in the clubhouse, and from what I see, just generally, in baseball as a whole," Garner said. "I think there was a drinking culture in baseball years ago, and I don't think it's there anymore."

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ap-cardinals-alcoholban&prov=ap&type=lgns

remy · « **Reply #42 on:** May 05, 2007, 12:11:55 am »

Didn't the red sox all basically admit to taking shots of Jack Daniels before game 4 vs. the yankees in '04? And subsequently in games 5, 6 and 7 IIRC!

Col. Sphinx Drummond · « **Reply #43 on:** May 05, 2007, 11:23:56 am »

Quote from: Limey on May 04, 2007, 02:28:54 pm

[rant]

She simply doesn't think that the law applies to her. She needs some time in the big house, making CCTV bongo vids with her new best friends, in order to understand what the word "consequences" means.[/rant]

It's all about the street cred, baby.

Phil_in_CS · « **Reply #44 on:** May 05, 2007, 11:42:17 am »

Quote from: remy on May 05, 2007, 12:11:55 am

Didn't the red sox all basically admit to taking shots of Jack Daniels before game 4 vs. the yankees in '04? And subsequently in games 5, 6 and 7 IIRC!

You have a source for that?
it would give me another reason to laugh at them.

loganck · « **Reply #45 on:** May 05, 2007, 11:55:50 am »

Apparently it was something Millar said on "Best Damn..."

Quote

Before starting Game 6 (of the ALCS). It was about 35 degrees out there at Yankee Stadium, I went around and got a thing of Jack Daniels and we all did shots of Jack Daniels about 10 minutes before the game. And we won Game 6. So Game 7 of course, we had to do shots of Jack Daniels. And we won Game 7, so guess what? I'm glad we won in Game 4 (in the World Series) because these Crown Royal shots and Jack Daniels shots started to kill me. And that's how the Sox did it."

Quote

I wish I'd never opened my mouth," he told ESPN's Peter Gammons. "It was one of those group team things, like shaving our heads last year. What we had was one small Gatorade cup, with a little Jack Daniels in it. We passed it around and everyone symbolically drank out of the same cup, because we are a team. It wasn't as if guys were drunk."

The link I found was some Boston blog, so grain of salt and all that.

http://thebostonblogger.blogspot.com/2004_11_01_archive.html