Jump to content

Tony Larussa arrested for DUI


FloPoErich

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 106
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Here's an article from Brian Burwell of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that somewhat gets accross the point I was trying to make.

It doesn't do it perfectly for a few reason. One thing is that Burwell has never had a problem exagerating, ignoring, or changing facts if it will help fit his motive. He doesn't do it too bad here, but what he calls a night out on the town for La Russa was actually just a dinner where La Russa drank a little too much wine. And while passed out could be considered the correct term, asleep might be better, as it was likely physical exhaustion and not alcohol that caused that (passing out at .09 isn't real likely). Also, while it's still not saying it correctly, La Russa by and large had the alphabet correct, he jumbled some things towards the end.

And then a couple of factors that complicate the TLR and Little comparisions are that (1) Little's .19 BAC was almost a full tenth over La Russa's .093, and (2) Little had a second arrest (though no conviction).

Anyways, on to the article.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/co...E6?OpenDocument

Whether it's with the slip of a tongue, a regrettable brain cramp or that uncomfortable public gaffe, everyone makes mistakes. Human frailty is an obvious given, which is why we have cheap erasers and overpaid publicists.

Here's another given on the human scale: Sometimes the only thing that separates stupid mistakes from horrendous tragedies is a simple twist of fate. So before the legions of Tony La Russa legal defenders and public relations spinners go into full damage control trying to minimize his foolish night out on the town, maybe it's time to consider the simple twist — or twitch — that separated the Cardinals manager's embarrassing indiscretion from becoming a full blown horrid catastrophe:

The twitch of his right foot.

The only difference between a fortunate La Russa and a vilified Leonard Little was the firmness of La Russa's right foot on the brake pedal of his Ford SUV.

With La Russa passed out in the driver's seat with his vehicle idling in drive at a Jupiter, Fla. intersection early Thursday morning, it's hard to imagine how he averted a catastrophe. Imagine what could have happened if his foot had slipped off the brake. Imagine what could have happened if La Russa had been startled long before the Jupiter police arrived and tapped on his window — if hearing the sound of a car horn from an impatient driver behind him would have made him instinctively hit the gas pedal and careen through the intersection.

Imagine an oncoming vehicle approaching the intersection. Imagine La Russa's oversized SUV slamming into an oncoming car.

Someone could have died. A mother, father, son or daughter could have been lost forever.

This is St. Louis, so we're all too familiar with that awful situation. We know how many lives were changed in 1998 when Little made the worst decision of his life, unwisely choosing to get behind the wheel of his car while intoxicated.

Leonard Little, a decent man who made a horrible decision, was vilified and turned into a monster by many people in this town. No matter how many good things he's done in his life since that awful night in downtown St. Louis, the Rams' Pro Bowl defensive end will forever be remembered for killing a mother and shaking a family's foundation.

But it could have.

I keep hearing so many people trying to minimize the La Russa incident by clinging to the notion that the manager was barely over the legal limit with his 0.093 Breathalyzer. By doing that, they're being terribly naive about how the process works sometimes with selected celebrity DUI and DWI cases. How much time elapsed between the time La Russa passed out and the time he took the test? It may have been enough to allow the number to creep closer to the legal limit.

A better gauge of how impaired the manager may have been from the field sobriety tests. According to the police report, La Russa failed to walk in a straight line, "almost fell backwards" twice on the one-legged stand, and recited the alphabet with letters in the wrong order.

The only good news that came from all of this ultimately is that Tony La Russa faced the music and took complete ownership of his mistake. It wasn't one of those carefully prepared statements written by a team of lawyers and public relations experts. It was a frank and honest admission by a decent and honorable man.

"I regret it," he told reporters. "I take responsibility."

Good for him. One of the rarest things in sports is the sincere apology, and Tony La Russa just gave us one. The usual tact is to pass out awkwardly phrased prepared statements that treat the act and its subsequent public offense as two separate and not necessarily connected actions with the obligatory "IF my act offended anyone, I apologize."

La Russa didn't do that. He manned up.

"It was an embarrassment," he said.

And that was the perfect first important step on his road to personal redemption.

I'm not really adding much here, just seeing if maybe a professional journalist might be able to help me make my point a little better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EDIT: Nevermind.

I like the point someone else made that both Little and LaRussa had the means to arrange alternate transportation. If you can afford and reach a cab, there's no damn excuse to drive your car under the influence.

1 hour ago, ShutUpLutz! said:

and the drunken doodoobags jumping off the tops of SUV's/vans/RV's onto tables because, oh yeah, they are drunken drug abusing doodoobags

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EDIT: Nevermind.

I like the point someone else made that both Little and LaRussa had the means to arrange alternate transportation. If you can afford and reach a cab, there's no damn excuse to drive your car under the influence.

I read your original post before you edited it. Your points are valid. I guess I just can't judge a person on one act.

And I can't for one second pretend I know how I would feel if I had someone close killed by a drunk driver. But even if my opinion changed, that doesn't mean that my emotionally charged opinion would be more correct.

But to be honest, I think I'd be on the forgiving side. That's who I am.

As for there being no excuse. I absolutely agree. Doesn't matter if they CAN'T afford/get to a cab. There is still no excuse.

But it doesn't mean they're bad people for slipping from their norm and having ridiculously bad judgement in one instance. (Though, again, Little probably had at least two moments, and his norm is a bit up in the air. If the norm is that he'll drink and drive, then that's certainly not just momentary bad judgement, it's bad character.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a feeling if this happened and the Cardinals didn't win the WS last year his job would be in some danger. If I recall there was some heat on him around August.

ecyclopedia.gif

www.sportsecyclopedia.com

For the best in sports history go to the Sports E-Cyclopedia at

http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com

champssigtank.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not my perspective at all and you know it.

Little's the recipient of a lot of unfair hatred.

But that doesn't mean I view him as some kind of victim of his own idiotic mistake. Obviously the women who died (and her family and friends) were victims of that action.

All I'm saying is that anybody who goes out driving with a .20 BAC (and I don't know at all if that's what Little's BAC was, but we'll just say) is every bit as wrong regardless of whether their action results in a death or not.

That's it. Period. Don't spin my words into saying something I'm not.

Okay then, fair enough. In that case, I think you made a poor choice of words in this situation. Saying Little encountered "bad luck" with his DUI fatality gives the impression of one being sympathetic toward his situation, and that it may not have been as serious in nature as the punishment he received. My apologies for misinterpreting your statements.

However, someone who gets boozed up behind the wheel -again- after having previously been in such a situation, and having fatal consequences result from it, well, I don't know if the hatred that person's receiving is necessarily "unfair."

The only thing unfair at all here would be if that guy isn't serving a life sentence.

I'm sorry, but that overreaction stuff ticks me off.

If you make the choice to liter and throw some trash on the ground, someone walks by, slips on that trash, cracks their head open and dies, are you to be considered a murderer and go to prison for life?

I understand drunk driving is more of a serious offense, but I don't agree that it makes that type of overreaction anymore acceptable.

Overreaction? HE KILLED PEOPLE! HE GOT A SECOND CHANCE, DID IT OVER AGAIN AND IT RESULTED IN DEATH... how can you defend this?

I can sure as hell bet you wouldn't feel the same way if he plowed into someone you love when this happens again.

This creep should be behind bars for the rest of his life -- he got his chance, he blew it, he killed people, he's scum.

Incredible.

---

Chris Creamer
Founder/Editor, SportsLogos.Net

 

"The Mothership" News Facebook X/Twitter Instagram

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not my perspective at all and you know it.

Little's the recipient of a lot of unfair hatred.

But that doesn't mean I view him as some kind of victim of his own idiotic mistake. Obviously the women who died (and her family and friends) were victims of that action.

All I'm saying is that anybody who goes out driving with a .20 BAC (and I don't know at all if that's what Little's BAC was, but we'll just say) is every bit as wrong regardless of whether their action results in a death or not.

That's it. Period. Don't spin my words into saying something I'm not.

Okay then, fair enough. In that case, I think you made a poor choice of words in this situation. Saying Little encountered "bad luck" with his DUI fatality gives the impression of one being sympathetic toward his situation, and that it may not have been as serious in nature as the punishment he received. My apologies for misinterpreting your statements.

However, someone who gets boozed up behind the wheel -again- after having previously been in such a situation, and having fatal consequences result from it, well, I don't know if the hatred that person's receiving is necessarily "unfair."

The only thing unfair at all here would be if that guy isn't serving a life sentence.

I'm sorry, but that overreaction stuff ticks me off.

If you make the choice to liter and throw some trash on the ground, someone walks by, slips on that trash, cracks their head open and dies, are you to be considered a murderer and go to prison for life?

I understand drunk driving is more of a serious offense, but I don't agree that it makes that type of overreaction anymore acceptable.

Overreaction? HE KILLED PEOPLE! HE GOT A SECOND CHANCE, DID IT OVER AGAIN AND IT RESULTED IN DEATH... how can you defend this?

I can sure as hell bet you wouldn't feel the same way if he plowed into someone you love when this happens again.

This creep should be behind bars for the rest of his life -- he got his chance, he blew it, he killed people, he's scum.

Incredible.

Minor correction-Fortunately no one died when he blew the second chance. The first one was the fatal DUI.

On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said:
You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now.
On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said:
Today, we are all otaku.

"The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert

POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010

The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not my perspective at all and you know it.

Little's the recipient of a lot of unfair hatred.

But that doesn't mean I view him as some kind of victim of his own idiotic mistake. Obviously the women who died (and her family and friends) were victims of that action.

All I'm saying is that anybody who goes out driving with a .20 BAC (and I don't know at all if that's what Little's BAC was, but we'll just say) is every bit as wrong regardless of whether their action results in a death or not.

That's it. Period. Don't spin my words into saying something I'm not.

Okay then, fair enough. In that case, I think you made a poor choice of words in this situation. Saying Little encountered "bad luck" with his DUI fatality gives the impression of one being sympathetic toward his situation, and that it may not have been as serious in nature as the punishment he received. My apologies for misinterpreting your statements.

However, someone who gets boozed up behind the wheel -again- after having previously been in such a situation, and having fatal consequences result from it, well, I don't know if the hatred that person's receiving is necessarily "unfair."

The only thing unfair at all here would be if that guy isn't serving a life sentence.

I'm sorry, but that overreaction stuff ticks me off.

If you make the choice to liter and throw some trash on the ground, someone walks by, slips on that trash, cracks their head open and dies, are you to be considered a murderer and go to prison for life?

I understand drunk driving is more of a serious offense, but I don't agree that it makes that type of overreaction anymore acceptable.

Overreaction? HE KILLED PEOPLE! HE GOT A SECOND CHANCE, DID IT OVER AGAIN AND IT RESULTED IN DEATH... how can you defend this?

I can sure as hell bet you wouldn't feel the same way if he plowed into someone you love when this happens again.

This creep should be behind bars for the rest of his life -- he got his chance, he blew it, he killed people, he's scum.

Incredible.

Minor correction-Fortunately no one died when he blew the second chance. The first one was the fatal DUI.

It's not just minor the way Chris posted.

He had an accident resulting in a death on his first DUI. On the second one he wasn't convicted.

I have a feeling if this happened and the Cardinals didn't win the WS last year his job would be in some danger. If I recall there was some heat on him around August.

Eh. I don't know about that. Maybe if the division collapse had actually happened all the way, but there wasn't really any more heat than normal. And even if there was heat from the fans, there wasn't from the owners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not my perspective at all and you know it.

Little's the recipient of a lot of unfair hatred.

But that doesn't mean I view him as some kind of victim of his own idiotic mistake. Obviously the women who died (and her family and friends) were victims of that action.

All I'm saying is that anybody who goes out driving with a .20 BAC (and I don't know at all if that's what Little's BAC was, but we'll just say) is every bit as wrong regardless of whether their action results in a death or not.

That's it. Period. Don't spin my words into saying something I'm not.

Okay then, fair enough. In that case, I think you made a poor choice of words in this situation. Saying Little encountered "bad luck" with his DUI fatality gives the impression of one being sympathetic toward his situation, and that it may not have been as serious in nature as the punishment he received. My apologies for misinterpreting your statements.

However, someone who gets boozed up behind the wheel -again- after having previously been in such a situation, and having fatal consequences result from it, well, I don't know if the hatred that person's receiving is necessarily "unfair."

The only thing unfair at all here would be if that guy isn't serving a life sentence.

I'm sorry, but that overreaction stuff ticks me off.

If you make the choice to liter and throw some trash on the ground, someone walks by, slips on that trash, cracks their head open and dies, are you to be considered a murderer and go to prison for life?

I understand drunk driving is more of a serious offense, but I don't agree that it makes that type of overreaction anymore acceptable.

Overreaction? HE KILLED PEOPLE! HE GOT A SECOND CHANCE, DID IT OVER AGAIN AND IT RESULTED IN DEATH... how can you defend this?

I can sure as hell bet you wouldn't feel the same way if he plowed into someone you love when this happens again.

This creep should be behind bars for the rest of his life -- he got his chance, he blew it, he killed people, he's scum.

Incredible.

Minor correction-Fortunately no one died when he blew the second chance. The first one was the fatal DUI.

It's not just minor the way Chris posted.

He had an accident resulting in a death on his first DUI. On the second one he wasn't convicted.

Eh, my bad... am I still allowed to think he's an idiot? I just hate drunk drivers, with a passion.

---

Chris Creamer
Founder/Editor, SportsLogos.Net

 

"The Mothership" News Facebook X/Twitter Instagram

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris, I find the hate to be overreacting, but I won't argue it.

One of the things I'm saying is that some drunk drivers simply make one time mistakes (as I think Tony did...Little obviously made it twice, and it's still yet to be seen if it can be called a mistake or if it's his idiotic nature). That much you definitely seem to disagree on...somewhat anyways.

The other point I'm making though, is if you hate a drunk driver who happens to be involved in a fatal accident, you should hate the drive that was just as drunk but didn't get involved in an accident.

I don't want it to seem like I take drunk driving lightly.

It seems I'm just more willing to forgive and give extra chances than most people. (And again, I promise you that that is regardless of their affiliation with any organization.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the reason why the legal age for driving comes before the legal age for drinking is so you will have enough practise driving in case you ever need to do both at the same time.

That's my theory. Same goes for driving/gambling. And driving/buying pornography.

--Roger "Time?" Clemente.

champssig2.png
Follow me on Twitter if you care: @Animal_Clans.

My opinion may or may not be the same as yours. The choice is up to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's with the applause he received? That seem weird to anyone else? How many players (or even other coaches, I guess) would receive applause after a DUI?

I think the applause probably has a lot to do with the fact that LaRussa immediately owned up to what he did, showed remorse, apologized for the embarassment he created for his family and employer and didn't try to claim victim status. Sadly, in this day and age, that's considered a laudable achievement.

...

Reminds me of a Chris Rock (I think) bit where he's making fun of guys who go on Ricki Lake and other shows like that and say "I don't ever hit my wife, I take care of my kids..." etc. and then they get thunderous applause. YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO THOSE THINGS!!! You don't get applause for the things you're supposed to do anyway!

What you want? A cookie?

#CHOMPCHOMPCHOMP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the reason why the legal age for driving comes before the legal age for drinking is so you will have enough practise driving in case you ever need to do both at the same time.

That's my theory. Same goes for driving/gambling. And driving/buying pornography.

--Roger "Time?" Clemente.

Well, I will say one thing along these lines. And im sure this isnt going to sound good but ill continue anyway. There are times im sure some of us have had where we've gone out drinking but kept it in moderation because we do need to drive home, but have misjudged our tolernce. Ive had times where ive gone out to a party and had a few drinks but kept it in moderation and have waited a few hours or so before leaving only to realize halfway home I really shouldnt be driving. So while im not saying its cool what LaRussa did, I can see where its possible to misjudge your tolerance.

But that doesnt discount the fact that I shouldve been smart enough to just aviod it in the first place. Or the fact that im underage and that adds to the bad judgement. Or, in LaRussa's case, that he fell asleep WHILE driving..............

spacer.png

On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said:
She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems I'm just more willing to forgive and give extra chances than most people....

....as long as they're wearing St. Louis or University of Illinois apparel.

No. That's not true. Those are when I post most, but I challenge you to find threads about other players who have committed crimes where I reccomend they be thrown to the curb.

I forgive and give extra chances to all.

But it evidently doesn't matter how many times I say it, you're going to keep being ignorant and ignore it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems I'm just more willing to forgive and give extra chances than most people....

....as long as they're wearing St. Louis or University of Illinois apparel.

You don't mean the school that's currently #1 in the Fulmer Cup....Right?

On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said:
You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now.
On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said:
Today, we are all otaku.

"The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert

POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010

The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

STL, like Chris said wait until someone you care about is in an accident because some moron was stupid enough to drink and drive.

Little is a classless punk. If he didn't play in the NFL he would be in jail where he belongs. He KILLED someone for crying out loud. Paint it any way you want, you're still defending murder.

He killed someone and then repeated the action that resulted in that killing for a second time. He's either stupid or he cares about his own personal enjoyment more then he does about the lives of others around him.

Now I agree, second chances are a wonderful thing, but I think Little should have spent some significant jail time before he got his. Even when he didn't he still wasted his second chance.

So talk about the beauty of third, fourth, and fifth chances until you're blue in the face. It's white noise now. I don't wish ill on anyone, but honestly I don't think you'll truly know what your talking about until someone you love is involved in an accident brought on by a drunk driver, because that seems to be the only thing that will knock you down from your pedestal.

As for La Russa, you may be right. He may be a stand-up guy most of the time. That doesn't change what he's done though. That doesn't change the fact that he couldn't control himself and he endangered not only his life, but the lives of every other motorist that night (and it's only by the grace of G-d that he didn't hit anyone). So, in my mind at least, that one act of self-centred idiocy should cost him his job as a high-ranking member of baseball's world champion club.

It seems I'm just more willing to forgive and give extra chances than most people....

....as long as they're wearing St. Louis or University of Illinois apparel.

No. That's not true. Those are when I post most, but I challenge you to find threads about other players who have committed crimes where I reccomend they be thrown to the curb.

I forgive and give extra chances to all.

But it evidently doesn't matter how many times I say it, you're going to keep being ignorant and ignore it.

I'm not saying you're lying, but I have honestly yet to see this kind of defence from you regarding personnel from a non-St. Louis team. I mean you didn't even post in the thread about Gustavo Chacin.

So if your defence of Little and La Russa is really based on the motives you claim they are, then do yourself a favour and speak up when the player/coach/owner/towel boy in questions doesn't play for a St. Louis team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now I agree, second chances are a wonderful thing, but I think Little should have spent some significant jail time before he got his. Even when he didn't he still wasted his second chance.

So talk about the beauty of third, fourth, and fifth chances until you're blue in the face. It's white noise now. I don't wish ill on anyone, but honestly I don't think you'll truly know what your talking about until someone you love is involved in an accident brought on by a drunk driver, because that seems to be the only thing that will knock you down from your pedestal.

I agree with your point, but I don't like that line of reasoning. Losing someone in a car accident shouldn't be what it takes for one to realize drinking and driving is indefensible. I've been lucky in that regard and I do recognize the stupidity, the selfishness and the danger of driving drunk. Some things are inexcusable -- driving while drunk is one of them, personal experience or not.

To your other point about LaRussa, I mean, I guess it's okay he still has his job. After all, he didn't kill anyone, right? But all that kept him from being another Leonard Little is happenstance (I think this is the point STL was trying to make earlier, but kept on using the wrong wording). Had LaRussa killed someone like Little did, there wouldn't even have been a discussion -- LaRussa would be facing far serious consequences (we hope) than worrying about his job.

I would admire the Cardinals organization, especially considering their stadium sponsor, if they showed some courage and took a firm stand against drunk driving and fired LaRussa. It might be bad for baseball, but it would certainly be terrific for the community. Too often, drunk drivers, especially those of the celebrity ilk, don't face consequences for their actions. If the community of St. Louis and beyond saw that drunk driving could lead someone like LaRussa, someone at the apex of his profession, lose his job over a DUI, I think we would all benefit.

EDIT: Whoops....I definitely read your post wrong. You and I agree on LaRussa. I'll leave my post as is, but we definitely are of the same thinking on what the Cardinals should do.

1 hour ago, ShutUpLutz! said:

and the drunken doodoobags jumping off the tops of SUV's/vans/RV's onto tables because, oh yeah, they are drunken drug abusing doodoobags

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you bring up a really good point about setting an example, but I just don't see it happening. I think we'll probably see him catch hell for this all year long, and then retire at the end of the season. I just can't find it in me to think he should be fired for this. We're talking about one of the all-time greats here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.