BREAKING NEWS: LARUSSA ARRESTED

Musial_6_Pujols_5 · Post by **Musial_6_Pujols_5** » March 22 07, 9:04 am

The Cardinals released the following statement this morning:

"The St. Louis Cardinals and Major League Baseball have been made aware of the announcement made by (police) regarding manager Tony La Russa and we take these matters very seriously.

"The Cardinals organization remains supportive of Tony and we understand that he has enlisted representation to advise him through any pending legal process.

"The Cardinals apologize for any embarrassment and or distraction this reported occurrence has created towards the team and its loyal fans."

omaha_red · Post by **omaha_red** » March 22 07, 9:04 am

well, at least we now know who he was partying with

haltz · Post by **haltz** » March 22 07, 9:05 am

skmsw wrote:2) Actually, most of my assumptions regarding what we've seen in the reports are sound. If you'd rather read wikipedia and assume that a quoted range of 15 minutes to two hours means that we can safely assume that it was two hours in TLR's case, that's fine. While you are 100% right that I am making some assumptions, and that I have absolutely no proof, in my day job I actually happen to have some professional expertise in this area.

It totally depends on when he had his last drink. If his third and fourth beers were drank just before he got in the car, then it is very likely that his peak BAC was in the station. We just don't know enough to speculate that it was ever .125.

omaha_red wrote:am i the only one that doesn't think it's that big of a deal?

No. But like I said earlier it's hysterically stupid for someone in TLR's position. The offense itself? A very forgivable mistake.

mikechamp · Post by **mikechamp** » March 22 07, 9:08 am

Musial_6_Pujols_5 wrote:Here are a few new excerpts from the Post:

"La Russa arrived at Roger Dean Stadium soon after his release. He declined to answer any non-baseball questions.

So does this mean he's not here to talk about the past?

[-(

I_Bleed_Red · Post by **I_Bleed_Red** » March 22 07, 9:09 am

StL Dan wrote:
I_Bleed_Red wrote:For a guy who always talks about doing things the "Cardinal Way" and how we have mentioned before how great it is to have a team of clean cut guys on the team that don't get in trouble with the law and this to happen. This is not good.

I know I will get flamed for this, but I just lost respect for TLR. I wouldn't even mind him being fired over this. Flame away if you wish, but that is all I have to say on this subject.
A part of me holds the same opinion, IBR.

BTW....good to see you back. Where have you been?

Threads like this remind me I should stay away as much as possible.

ghostrunner · Post by **ghostrunner** » March 22 07, 9:10 am

skmsw wrote:
I think, and have for a while , that the legal limit is too low. So I don't consider this a big deal.
Please do not hear this as a continuation of talking about LaRussa. And please don't hear it as a criticism of your opinion. In the case of the quotre above I am honestly trying to understand.

In this case, we have a man who fell asleep at the wheel, with the engine running, in the middle of the street, so that traffic was having to go around him. What about that suggests that the limit should be higher?

So we're going to take this case as the textbook lesson for DUI law? There are always other factors.

He's 63.
He's a renowned workaholic, who supposedly doesn't sleep much.
He may be on some sort of medication, as Popeye mentioned.

If we found someone asleep in a car with a blood alcohol level of .07, should we lower it again? What was the alcohol level of Michael Jordan's dad? How about the old man who killed all those people driving into the farmer's market a few years ago?

stlmark · Post by **stlmark** » March 22 07, 9:10 am

omaha_red wrote:am i the only one that doesn't think it's that big of a deal?

I sorta agree with you here Omaha. It's not all the bad, but as Haltz said, it's stupid for someone in his position.

sighyoung · Post by **sighyoung** » March 22 07, 9:11 am

I_Bleed_Red wrote:
StL Dan wrote:
I_Bleed_Red wrote:For a guy who always talks about doing things the "Cardinal Way" and how we have mentioned before how great it is to have a team of clean cut guys on the team that don't get in trouble with the law and this to happen. This is not good.

I know I will get flamed for this, but I just lost respect for TLR. I wouldn't even mind him being fired over this. Flame away if you wish, but that is all I have to say on this subject.
A part of me holds the same opinion, IBR.

BTW....good to see you back. Where have you been?
Threads like this remind me I should stay away as much as possible.

We love you, too, Bleed!

jim · Post by **jim** » March 22 07, 9:12 am

mcgee51taguchi99 wrote:
jim wrote:
The problem was he allegedly was drunk behind the wheel. I'm not saying he should be fired, I'm just saying don't give him a pass. If he is guilty, I hope he is prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
Heh, I don't. I hope he gets a reduced plea and probation just like any average Joe with a decent lawyer. I don't believe in this whole "he's famous so he can't get a break" BS.

I don't believe he should be treated any differently than any other person.

omaha_red · Post by **omaha_red** » March 22 07, 9:12 am

stlmark wrote:
omaha_red wrote:am i the only one that doesn't think it's that big of a deal?
I sorta agree with you here Omaha. It's not all the bad, but as Haltz said, it's stupid for someone in his position.

i agree with that too.. really, he should know better.. but if he's going
to get in trouble and get his name all over the news.. i'd rather have
it be for him having a beer or two and driving than for what a lot
of these famous people are getting in trouble for..