Thursday December 19, 2013
Jump to content
Evidence against two men accused of beating Giants fan and paramedic Bryan Stow into insensibility at Dodger Stadium in Los Angles on March 31, 2011, is being heard by a judge to decide whether or not they are indeed the guilt parties and should be prosecuted.
The attack caused head trauma, severely disabling Stow, and causing other injuries for which he is still being treated, What makes the attack particularly atrocious is the fact that the men are accused of trailing Stow to the parking lot and attacking him even after he walked away from a confrontation.
Stow was shoved the men involved, punched in the side of head, knocked to the asphalt, and kicked in the head after he was unconscious.
One of the men, Marvin Norwood, was allowed to make a telephone call while he was under interrogation. A videotape of the conversation shows Norwood admitting involvement in the attack in a phone call to his mother.
"Mom, you good?" Norwood says on the phone borrowed from one of the detectives. "You sure? Hey, I got arrested for that Dodger Stadium thing."
After a brief pause, he adds, "I was involved. I was. To a certain extent I was."
Moments later, he says, "I will very certainly go down for it."
In the recording, Norwood mentions the name of his co-defendant, Louie Sanchez. His last words on the conversation were, "I'm sorry."
Two more witnesses who attended the March 31, 2011, game told of being bothered by the drunken Sanchez, who was throwing peanuts and spraying soda on a woman in the bleachers.
So what is it this kind of thing might make you wonder?
Why do people go to games?
Tom; It has nothing to do with "the game". It does have something to do with stupidity, boorishness, lack of self-control and a few other low things. Don't you agree?
Some people should never be allowed to have alcohol anywhere but it isn't known until to late.
I don't know why alcohol is served at sports events and that includes rodeos. Any sports event. If you can't enjoy something without alcohol then stay home or go to a bar where they are more prepared to deal with idiots.
Yes, I did sell alcohol for 6 years. And there were many people who were not allowed in my bar for any reason. They could not come in for coffee, coke or take out alcohol. They were not allowed in the restaurant which was in the same building either. As an owner I had the right to refuse service to anyone or ask them to leave at any time.
I don't know the laws in other states and I am sure some have changed in Az. since I had a license. The one where you are allowed to take a gun in a place where alcohol is served is one of the more stupid things that have been changed. If you think you need a gun to go into a place where alcohol is served then stay out.
Yes, John, I agree. I strongly agree. But what worries me is why that type of person goes to a game. And they do, in droves. I know that because I know of several people who no longer go because of that type of behavior. Both of my sons have quit going to the ASU/U of A games anymore because it is impossible to enjoy what is going on down on the field. And I went to just one Cardinals game and saw all I wanted to see. It's as though the boors are the one who dominate the time in the stadium; the play on the field seems immaterial.
Pat, I agree with you where alcohol is concerned. As everybody must have guessed by now, I am the farthest thing from a prude, but if it were left to me I would ban the sales of alcohol at all games of any kind. As far as I can see from the little I have observed, it actually ruins the game--for for the drunk as well as everyone else. The drunk no longer is enjoying the action; he's nothing more than a wannabe player looking for some kind of competition. I look upon people like that this way: Those who can play tough, do. Those who can't, play tough guy.
And as a long time Second Amendment guy I would ban the possession of a weapon in any place where alcohol is served. Not because a gun is inherently dangerous, but because a drunk is inherently dangerous, and an armed drunk is obviously even more dangerous. After all, why do people drink? Because is releases inhibitions; and I don't mind telling you that it's a good idea for armed people to be exercising all their inhibitions. Besides, anyone who feels a need to swagger into a saloon wearing a six gun is a hundred twenty years out of sync and maybe ought to swagger into a psychiatrist instead. Nothing is perfect, and laws should be sensible and non-intrusive, but one that keeps alcohol and guns apart would kinda sorta fit that description.
I believe the law reads you can take a gun in but are not able to be served alcohol. Yeah right.
If someone has a vest or jacket on, the bartender can't see the gun. But they are held responsible.
"I believe the law reads you can take a gun in but are not able to be served alcohol. Yeah right."
I can see that now.
"Excuse me, Sir, but I can't serve you while you are wearing that six gun."
Draws gun. "Say's who?"
"What was it you wanted?"
"If someone has a vest or jacket on, the bartender can't see the gun. But they are held responsible."
And that gets interesting too.
"I'm sorry, lady, but ever since I spent six month in jail for missing someone with a gun I'm strip searching everyone who comes in. Now, you wanna hold still please?"
Posting comments requires a free account