Jump to content

La Russa arrested for DUI in Feb; charged day before hire


Baron
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Baron said:

Well what did he say? 

Nothing groundbreaking, but it was at least a thoughtful response.  Main take away:

"Not much I can say but I get it.  I get the frustration, the disappointment and understand why fans are shaking their heads."

He then went on to thank me for being a partial season ticket owner talk about how hopefully we can shift our focus to the players on the field and talked about their accomplishments and how good they will be.  He also thanked me for actually putting my name on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, bmags said:

It was fortunate for Tony he managed so many years in STL which thanks to anheiser busch owning the state legislature has the most liberal alcohol laws in the country. My favorite was you were allowed 1 less open containers in your vehicle than people.

Do we have any belief that this was just the second time Tony put others in danger?

My brain is trying to convince me that the reason Reinsdorf has no problem with this is that he and LaRummy go out drinking and drive home from there all the time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ChiHawks10 said:

I get the whole "never blow" thing when it comes to breathalyzers and DUIs... but... if I had a single glass of wine at dinner, I'd have no issues blowing.  You don't blow because you know you're going to blow over, and know you're in the wrong, and the breathalyzer is irrefutable evidence that you broke the law.

The breathalyzer they use in the field is far from foolproof.  They do another breathalyzer at the station, and it's a bigger and more accurate device.  People get out of DUIs because they're under the legal limit at the station, even if they failed the field sobriety test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Quin said:

Man, I fucking feel for Boyer here. You can tell why he's exasperated in this email.

So the answers people get back aren't the important part. That is these guys going in and saying that they got 500 emails, people canceling tickets etc that has a chance at adding up to a change. It's one thing to just complain, but is different to target the organization directly with those complaints. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brooks has always been good at getting back to fans.  Like others have said, I feel for these other Sox employees who are now put in this situation to deal with this mess while in the meantime the guy that put them there just gets to run and hide.

Edited by Rowand44
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jose Abreu said:

So it seems like people are getting the same general response

 

"I understand your frustration

-

We have great players

-

Thanks for reaching out"

I don't know what else they're actually allowed to say at this point other than that. I'm sure they'd love to speak freely and say this whole situation is FUBAR, but they gotta keep it general while the higher ups work on some sort of audible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, southsider2k5 said:

So the answers people get back aren't the important part. That is these guys going in and saying that they got 500 emails, people canceling tickets etc that has a chance at adding up to a change. It's one thing to just complain, but is different to target the organization directly with those complaints. 

100% agree.  Only reason I sent an email.  Paper trail of real people cancelling their tickets with the reason why.  No butts in the seats is about the only statement we can really make.

Edited by BFirebird
  • Fire 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bmags said:

Brooks boyer is giving y'all the macro treatment.

Honestly what else can he say? The big IQ play here is to go after sponsers. I would hope the ownership group would look at this differently if sponsers come to them with concerns over thousands of complaints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sleepy Harold said:

I don't know what else they're actually allowed to say at this point other than that. I'm sure they'd love to speak freely and say this whole situation is FUBAR, but they gotta keep it general while the higher ups work on some sort of audible.

I wish they actually were working on an audible

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, reiks12 said:

Honestly what else can he say? The big IQ play here is to go after sponsers. I would hope the ownership group would look at this differently if sponsers come to them with concerns over thousands of complaints.

This a great thought too.  If people have  contacts, please share.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Buehrle5687 said:

The breathalyzer they use in the field is far from foolproof.  They do another breathalyzer at the station, and it's a bigger and more accurate device.  People get out of DUIs because they're under the legal limit at the station, even if they failed the field sobriety test.

I understand that.  I've blown in a breathalyzer three times in the field since I was 18, and all were to confirm I was not drinking.  One was in Starved Rock State park where we were camping when like 20 years old. I had just ridden like 50 miles on my bike, and had not had a drink.  Blew 0.  The other two were random DUI checkpoints.  I had not been drinking at either one, and blew 0's.  The field breathalyzer is inadmissible in court, it just gives probable cause to arrest you, at which point you'll take the one at the station, or have a blood test done.


If you had one glass of wine with dinner, you should not be afraid to blow.  If you are, you did not have one glass of wine, and you're afraid you'll blow over.

Edited by ChiHawks10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...