Jim Leyritz Charged...

[infrared41]

Jim Leyritz has been charged with DUI manslaughter.

Link to ESPN Story

Sports Illustrated story

[HedleyLamarr]

No Braves fans sympathizefor this guy....

[DG_ThenNowForever]

No Braves fans sympathizefor this guy....

I'm surprised this thread hasn't seen more traffic. That Hancock guy from St. Louis also drove drunk, but as least he didn't kill anybody. I haven't read the article, but if the headline is accurate, than Leyritz is as bad a person as Vick, if not worse. He killed someone with his vehicle while driving drunk; it doesn't get much worse than that.

But then again, I haven't read the article, so there may be a world of details I'm missing.

Also, why would anyone sympathize with him?

[HedleyLamarr]

Also, why would anyone sympathize with him?

I would love to see STL FANATIC's response. But since Leyritz never played for the Cardinals, I won't hold my breath for a reply.

[CDuffy26]

A sad story really. I can almost gaurentee that he was drunk from his party that he "probably" had that day.

[Island_Style]

Uh-oh, soon he is going to be playing catcher

[STL FANATIC]

He killed someone with his vehicle while driving drunk; it doesn't get much worse than that.

Well he could have intentionally killed someone in coldblood.

That's definitely worse.

Guy effed up big time.

I don't know if he's done it before or not.

I can't defend the action. I'm not sure about the person.

All I know is it's very possible two lives were ruined tonight, one being tragically ended, because of a idiotic mistake.

Just because I'm forgiving doesn't mean I don't recognize the severity.

Is this a problem that can ever be contained? I honestly don't think harsher penalties would do it. Those who do it already do it because they're sure they'll get away, not because they know if they get caught the penalties are only (fill in the blank).

Better education? Maybe...I think it's pretty much common knowledge. It's a matter of ignoring that knowledge.

The responsibility remains on the individuals who do it, but perhaps as a society there's some sort of better system we can have in place to help prevent it? Some sort of transportation means from places where one can become intoxicated?

I don't know.

I'm as tired of having these things occur as anybody.

[CC97]

Is this a problem that can ever be contained? I honestly don't think harsher penalties would do it. Those who do it already do it because they're sure they'll get away, not because they know if they get caught the penalties are only (fill in the blank).

Start charging these people with attempted homicide and throw them in jail for a min. 15 years... that'll sober some drivers up pretty fast

[STL FANATIC]

Is this a problem that can ever be contained? I honestly don't think harsher penalties would do it. Those who do it already do it because they're sure they'll get away, not because they know if they get caught the penalties are only (fill in the blank).

Start charging these people with attempted homicide and throw them in jail for a min. 15 years... that'll sober some drivers up pretty fast

I'm not convinced it would. It might. But I'm just not sure consequences are a deterrant to the people who do this.

But beyond that, I have two other problems with that.

Homocide is the wrong term. Even if it's just semantics, that implies intention to kill. Manslaughter would be the right term, I think.

Secondly, with penalties that large, something has to be done in regards to clarity. What I mean is that some people can be just over the legal limit and be honest to God absolutely fine (BAC is no perfect science in measuring drunkeness). But maybe they speed and get pulled over anyways. Suddenly, they're in jail for 15 years and they had no idea where they were in regards to the limit. So there needs to be something available for people there.

Maybe it's every car being sold with a breathalizer. That doesn't mean it has to be the kind that won't drive unless you blow legal (that'd be great, but I imagine that's quite expensive or they'd already do it?). Just have it so that there's no excuse for people not knowing what their BAC is.

If those things were done, I'd still feel sympathy for the people that made an honest to God mistake and were losing 15 years of their life...but I'd at least know they had every opportunity to make the right decision and that the punishment, while harsh for a mistake, was hopefully working towards the greater good to erradicate the problem.

[Waffles]

Washing a new red shirt with your white laundry is a mistake.

Forgetting your anniversary is a mistake.

Drinking and driving and ramming into and killing an innocent mother of two is not a mistake.

It's a willful, stupid, arrogant, negligent act that Leyritz (if guilty) deserves a lot more than 15 years for.

I'm sure he didn't mean to hurt anyone, but that doesn't change the fact that he (allegedly) chose to drink and drive. He didn't mistakenly drink or mistakenly drive (allegedly). He (allegedly) made the choices that set this all in motion - the choice to drink, and the choice to drive - and he now must face the consequences he completely deserves if he's found guilty. I can't muster up a single ounce of sympathy for Jimmy Leyritz.

[STL FANATIC]

Washing a new red shirt with your white laundry is a mistake.

Forgetting your anniversary is a mistake.

Drinking and driving and ramming into and killing an innocent mother of two is not a mistake.

It's a willful, stupid, arrogant, negligent act that Leyritz (if guilty) deserves a lot more than 15 years for.

I'm sure he didn't mean to hurt anyone, but that doesn't change the fact that he (allegedly) chose to drink and drive. He didn't mistakenly drink or mistakenly drive (allegedly). He (allegedly) made the choices that set this all in motion - the choice to drink, and the choice to drive - and he now must face the consequences he completely deserves if he's found guilty. I can't muster up a single ounce of sympathy for Jimmy Leyritz.

All your adjectives are spot on, but it's still a mistake. An error in judgement.

My point is simply that even with all those adjectives, this wasn't done with intent or in cold blood.

I really don't know how I feel about the part where someone else is involved and injured or killed. You've got the cases where people get off lucky and nobody is harmed. And then you've got the cases where the driver is unlucky and the other people involved are way beyond unlucky and somebody else is injured or killed.

It's the same act either way. Pure chance decides whether someone is hurt. I really don't know whether that should deserve more punishment or not.

In any case, the 15 years Chris mentioned as a precedent wasn't for Leyritz, he mentioned it as attempted homicide (even though I disagreed with the homicide over manslaughter term). Attempted being key. The way he suggested, that would be a minimum of 15 years if nobody was hurt. If someone was hurt, I imagine under Chris' system you'd face even worse consequences.

I, myself, feel 15 years might be about right (and I hope the measures I suggested before would be put into place).

Again, say all the nasty adjectives of about it you want, it's still an error in judgement, not a cold blooded action. 15 years would severly change but perhaps not ruin one's life (I understand in this case one life was lost, others severly changed, but one is enough--an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind). It'd give them a chance to learn from their mistake and not just punish them for it. Of course if it happened again after they served 15 years, give them plenty more.

I'm finally about 20 now. I've got a long ways to go. Obviously my views on issues like this are growing and changing and will continue to do so for awhile.

I'll probably never lose my sympthetic, forgiving feelings for just about everyone. I'll never take back my defense of a man's character/potential character. I'll never take back my claim that a guy who makes an error in judgement (no matter how despicable and awful) deserves to die for it.

But I can understand the need to be tough when necessary to try and rid our society of problems like this, and I'm starting to feel the need to be tougher and tougher about it. But I'll probably always stay on the forgiving side. The side that wants to ultimately give those who make mistakes a second chance.

[infrared41]

My point is simply that even with all those adjectives, this wasn't done with intent or in cold blood.

Bull- . There is intent the minute you decide to drive after drinking. You said it yourself...

Better education? Maybe...I think it's pretty much common knowledge. It's a matter of ignoring that knowledge.

It's absolutely common knowledge and anytime someone drinks and drives they know exactly what they're doing.

Leyritz (allegedly) didn't "intend" to kill anyone but he did intend to drink and drive. I'm sure those idiots in Colorado didn't "intend" to kill that seven year old kid with the Mortal Kombat moves but that doesn't change the end result. Leyritz's alleged actions led to the death of an innocent bystander. He was allegedly under the influence when he did it. He allegedly killed someone while committing a crime. That is homicide plain and simple. You can get all weepy and heartfelt if you feel like it but I am betting the victim's family doesn't see it the same way you do. Jim Leyritz allegedly got behind the wheel of a car while he was in no condition to drive and ended up killing someone. If he's guilty I hope they hang his ass. Only a -ing moron drives drunk. He deserves what he gets and you can spin however you want but he allegedly murdered someone.

[STL FANATIC]

My point is simply that even with all those adjectives, this wasn't done with intent or in cold blood.

Bull- . There is intent the minute you decide to drive after drinking. You said it yourself...

Better education? Maybe...I think it's pretty much common knowledge. It's a matter of ignoring that knowledge.

It's absolutely common knowledge and anytime someone drinks and drives they know exactly what they're doing.

Leyritz (allegedly) didn't "intend" to kill anyone but he did intend to drink and drive. I'm sure those idiots in Colorado didn't "intend" to kill that seven year old kid with the Mortal Kombat moves but that doesn't change the end result. Leyritz's alleged actions led to the death of an innocent bystander. He was allegedly under the influence when he did it. He allegedly killed someone while committing a crime. That is homicide plain and simple. You can get all weepy and heartfelt if you feel like it but I am betting the victim's family doesn't see it the same way you do. Jim Leyritz allegedly got behind the wheel of a car while he was in no condition to drive and ended up killing someone. If he's guilty I hope they hang his ass. Only a -ing moron drives drunk. He deserves what he gets and you can spin however you want but he allegedly murdered someone.

I think that's a fine comparison.

But in niether case should it be murder.

It's manslaughter.

Murder implies an intent to kill.

Manslaughter allows for neglegence, intentional or not. And of course the end result might be the same.

But there is a difference between intention to kill and being a dumba** and intentionally doing something that could (and perhaps did) kill someone.

I'm not even arguing for less severity in punishment right now (though I might...depends what we're talking about). But I'm not okay lableing someone a murderer just because they pull a completely dumba** move.

[Waffles]

Perhaps I'm playing semantics here, but the word mistake, to me, just doesn't seem to assign enough responsibility for the consciousness of Leyritz's (alleged) actions. I know the dictionary definition of mistake includes errors in judgment, but I think there is a significant distinction to be made between careless, thoughtless errors in judgment (the laundry and the anniversary) and reckless, conscious errors in judgment (drunk driving). Mistake, to me, is too convenient; it lets Leyritz off too easy. "I made a mistake" sounds a lot nicer, a lot more innocent than "I knowingly and consciously got behind the wheel of a car while drunk and plowed into a car, killing an innocent person."

In addition, I think dangerously/lethally reckless actions are, in many ways, "cold-blooded". Cold-bloodedness indicates a disregard for "consideration, compunction, or clemency" and when someone does something dangerous and reckless that endangers the lives of themselves and others, they are acting in the same disregard, just not with the same direct intentions.

In either event, I'm generally okay with the idea of forgiveness, but I also feel pretty comfortable drawing the line well before DUI manslaughter.

[STL FANATIC]

Perhaps I'm playing semantics here, but the word mistake, to me, just doesn't seem to assign enough responsibility for the consciousness of Leyritz's (alleged) actions. I know the dictionary definition of mistake includes errors in judgment, but I think there is a significant distinction to be made between careless, thoughtless errors in judgment (the laundry and the anniversary) and not reckless, conscious errors in judgment (drunk driving). Mistake, to me, is too convenient; it lets Leyritz off too easy. "I made a mistake" sounds a lot nicer, a lot more innocent than "I knowingly and consciously got behind the wheel of a car while drunk and plowed into a car, killing an innocent person."

In addition, I think dangerously/lethally reckless actions are, in many ways, "cold-blooded". Cold-bloodedness indicates a disregard for "consideration, compunction, or clemency" and when someone does something dangerous and reckless that endangers the lives of themselves and others, they are acting in the same disregard, just not with the same direct intentions.

In either event, I'm generally okay with the idea of forgiveness, but I also feel pretty comfortable drawing the line well before DUI manslaughter.

I can't quite disagree with any of that. I'm somewhere in the middle right now.

I mean...I'll pretty much always forgive. It's my nature.

But beyond that. I'm getting tired of this. This problem needs solving. Mistake very well may be too weak of a term...I'm not sure what to use...but allow me to use it for a moment...it's too preventable of a mistake, too serious of a mistake to just watch happen over and over.

I've got a forgiving nature, and that's always going to come into play. But I'm ready to see something done to erradicate this stuff.

[infrared41]

Perhaps I'm playing semantics here, but the word mistake, to me, just doesn't seem to assign enough responsibility for the consciousness of Leyritz's (alleged) actions. I know the dictionary definition of mistake includes errors in judgment, but I think there is a significant distinction to be made between careless, thoughtless errors in judgment (the laundry and the anniversary) and not reckless, conscious errors in judgment (drunk driving). Mistake, to me, is too convenient; it lets Leyritz off too easy. "I made a mistake" sounds a lot nicer, a lot more innocent than "I knowingly and consciously got behind the wheel of a car while drunk and plowed into a car, killing an innocent person."

In addition, I think dangerously/lethally reckless actions are, in many ways, "cold-blooded". Cold-bloodedness indicates a disregard for "consideration, compunction, or clemency" and when someone does something dangerous and reckless that endangers the lives of themselves and others, they are acting in the same disregard, just not with the same direct intentions.

In either event, I'm generally okay with the idea of forgiveness, but I also feel pretty comfortable drawing the line well before DUI manslaughter.

That's exactly the point I was trying (and failed) to make. Well said Waffles. You put it in better terms than I could.

[AndrewPF]

Uh-oh, soon he is going to be playing catcher

Ooh! This boy got JOKES!

but really though, very sad.

[HedleyLamarr]

What....no New Yorker is gonna start an "I am a Yankee" speech?

[slapshot]

What....no New Yorker is gonna start an "I am a Yankee" speech?

New Yorkers may be arrogant (but knowledgable) fans, but they seem to do a better job at separating themselves from the game.

[STL FANATIC]

What....no New Yorker is gonna start an "I am a Yankee" speech?

Didn't get to me the first time.

Saw me try and start a legitimate discussion.

Saw me express a view of forgiveness but harshness and a need to find a solution to this problem.

So you had to ignore all of that and see if you could get to me a second time.

Funny, that's just what I'd expect from you.

Well I directly responded to you, so I guess you win.

Good job.