tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Life, the universe, and everything.
Forum rules
- No personal attacks against players or staff members - please be civil!
- No posting of mature images/links, keep content SFW. If it's NSFW, don't post it on these forums.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby kiryan » Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:38 pm

Tiger woods is getting ticketed for careless driving because he had an accident or because he won't talk to police about the accident...

Its an accident... they have no evidence of careless driving unless you define a mistake/accident as having been careless. Its getting stupid ridiculous, anytime anyone dies, gets hurt they want to charge you with something. What happened to honest to god accidents and "tragedies"? Some congressman backed his car up over his 3 year old niece... does he need to be charged with manslaughter? Do the parents? Or can we accept that this was a terrible accident and its none of our damn business?

Government is way way way too involved in our lives to the point that they decide whats an accident a tragedy or a "crime".

Now I wouldn't be surprised to find out that tiger was drunk or on drugs or had a fight with his wife or something like that... but they don't have any evidence so instead of just dropping it, they give him a ticket... I hope he fights it, but he'll probably just let it disappear.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby Sarvis » Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:45 pm

kiryan wrote:Some congressman backed his car up over his 3 year old niece... does he need to be charged with manslaughter? Do the parents? Or can we accept that this was a terrible accident and its none of our damn business?



Depends. Was he white?
amena wolfsnarl
Sojourner
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:14 pm
Location: grande prairie alberta canada

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby amena wolfsnarl » Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:28 pm

I remeber a few years ago Danny Heatly i think it was a young NHL player was driving 100 in a 60 i think it was and killed one of his teammates, he was drunk while he was doing this. What did he get for criminal charges????? Nothing. Im sick of famous people getting better treatment in the court systems.

Personally i say good give him a ticket....Im sure he can afford it, if hes not cooperating with the cops, hell yes he should get a ticket, it screams IM HIDING SOMETHING!, something that maybe they should be aware of. Now what hes hiding? i dont know but if u refuse to cooperate with the police yes u should recieve some kinda slap on the peepee.

Its not the polices job to interpret the law, if they feel that the person has broken the law it is thier duty to issue a ticket/arrest them. It is the judges responsibilty to interpret the law and find wether or not the defendant is guilty of said crime. Its up to him as to wether or not he wants to fight it. personally i think he'll just pay the ticket and shut up about the whole issue cause hes definetly hiding something from someone.
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby avak » Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:38 pm

One of the major problems with modern instant-access media is that we, the consumers, have a tendency to assume we have all of the relevant details. The Woods story looks really suspicious from what we know about it...Kiryan even suggests that there very well might be more to the story. Maybe along the same logical lines through which you suggest that we should mind our own business, we should trust the law enforcement to do the right thing under the circumstances.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby kiryan » Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:37 am

Its very possible I should mind my own business and that further facts will become available that warrant the ticket.

On the other hand he doesn't have to talk to the police about what did or didn't happen. If anyone, government or otherwise comes knocking on your door, you should (and used to be able to) tell them to mind their own business. Now they have so much discretion they can not only coerce you into doing what they want they can as you said write you a ticket and leave it up to to judge to figure it out.

Its not right. A private citizen shouldn't have to explain himself to the government. As a matter of fact, its your right not to explain yourself.
amena wolfsnarl
Sojourner
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:14 pm
Location: grande prairie alberta canada

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby amena wolfsnarl » Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:47 am

yup and if you decide not to cooperate its the governments/polices right to dig further into the incident possibly exposing more of whats going on and quite possibly pursuing more criminal charges that you will have the book thrown at you for because you failed to cooperate. In instances like this it is better to cooperate cause you stop wasting a whole lot of time and government resources. I think in most cases that is the best course of action....unless you did something real wrong and than you should be on a plane to another country at that point

Personally i think that the tigger is hiding something because he doesnt want to lose face to the public and ultimately his sponsors who probably have moral clauses in his contracts. I know id go out of my way to protect my multimillion dollar endorsement deals.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby kiryan » Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:46 am

I think tiger may have had a couple drinks or something, I think he was advsed by his lawyers not to talk to the police as it represents a risk regardless of whether he has done anything wrong. Who knows his exact reasons... but it doesn't make him guilty by default it demonstrates his intelligence and discipline. Its the exact same advice I give my wife and kids because once you say it you can't unsay it whether it was true in context or not true whether someone wants to twist it later ect. You are much safer if you don't say anything (innocent or guilty).

My complaint is that they have nothing, but still figured out a way to get themselves a symbolic win or punish Tiger or not cooperating.

I'm really disappointed, although not surprised, that some of you think its tantamount to a crime to be uncooperative with the government. That somehow you've found a way to say not cooperating with the government is harming your collective interests because of the time and money they waste. You should be pissed off about the waste, the waste incurred when the government is operating outside the principles of the constitution... that they are wasting their time investigating a situation where there doesn't seem to be any damages to a 3rd party, involving a person of virtually impeccable character.

What is harming your interests is the governments encroachment into our personal lives. Do you even know what freedom is? or privacy? or what makes our country great?
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby Sarvis » Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:55 am

Ah Kiryan, even your ranting delusions can't spoil my mood right now... :)
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby Corth » Wed Dec 02, 2009 5:05 am

Perhaps Tiger will fight the charges. Lord knows he could afford to put together the bestest traffic offense dream team ever.
Ashiwi
Sojourner
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 5:01 am

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby Ashiwi » Wed Dec 02, 2009 5:40 pm

He was driving, he hit a fire hydrant. The damage he did necessitated the replacement of the fire hydrant and additional work from the city.

Unless you can prove somebody was at fault, he needed to be charged with something. Or is it now okay for celebrities to destroy public property without any consequences? He left the legal boundaries of the road/driveway in his vehicle. How difficult does this need to be?

The media attention is ridiculous, and everybody needs to let it go, but unless he can show that somebody else was at fault, he's the one driving, he's responsible, he gets the ticket. That's how it works.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby kiryan » Wed Dec 02, 2009 5:56 pm

As far as I know in the states I have lived in, when you have an accident that destroys public property, you get a bill for the damage. I had a friend who was learning to drive and hit a fire hydrant, cost him $1,000 plus the damage to his truck. Fortunately, he didn't get cited for "careless driving".

The ticket is something entirely different. Accidents happen, to cite people for every accident is ridiculous and to cite them only when they exercise their right to be private should be an abuse of power.
amena wolfsnarl
Sojourner
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:14 pm
Location: grande prairie alberta canada

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby amena wolfsnarl » Thu Dec 03, 2009 4:26 am

In canada we call this charge driving with undue care and attention. They take this pretty seriously here, if there are no outside conditions to cause your crash i.e. icy roads, deer running across the road, and it is found that the driver was not paying enough attention to the vehicle he was driving the driver is charged with this. It is a mandartory court apperrance where the judge will decide wether or not to pull your liscense, depending upon your previous driving record. The reasoning behind this.... Cars kill people. People need a reminder of this every now and than. TIger got a ticket cause there was no external factors to his accident that cause him to crash, perhaps if he was more forthcoming with the police he would have avoided this. Now imagine if he had hit a person walking thier dog? the ticket is a reminder that vehicles can kill people and perhaps hitting a fire hydrant and a tree is nothing serious...but it could have been.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby kiryan » Thu Dec 03, 2009 4:51 am

The ticket is tax revenue, most tickets are simply revenue. And don't forget the special interests, insurance companies who will get a nice hefty increase in Tiger's premiums as a result.

Do you honestly believe Tiger getting ticketed, or 99% of people for that matter, are going to conduct themselves differently while driving? It was n accident, you don't change behavior because of an accident. Do you think statistically people who have received tickets for this get into fewer accidents after being ticketed? I very much doubt it.

Besides, the thousands of dollars in damage to his car and insurance premiums is probably a lot more incentive than a stupid $150 ticket. In your example, with the judge having the option to revoke your license, it makes a little more sense. Thats not going to happen here.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby Corth » Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:28 pm

I think it's kind of a state specific thing. In NY, where I live, it's rare to see any sort of citation issued as a result of a routine accident. On the other hand it seems in other states accident participants are often cited. In any event, the charge in the Tiger Woods case is meaningless. It's 4 points and a couple hundred dollars. Not enough to come close to suspending his license. Nonetheless, I would absolutely love to see him fight the charge. There must be some sort of negligence element to it, and I have no idea where the authorities find evidence of negligence. It is certainly not per se negligence to simply get into an accident. Of course fighting the charge would open him up to questions about the circumstances immediately prior to the accident - so undoubtedly he is just going to pay the fine and move on.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby Sarvis » Thu Dec 03, 2009 3:01 pm

Corth wrote:It is certainly not per se negligence to simply get into an accident.


It's pretty hard to hit a brightly colored stationary object without being negligent if you ask me...

From what little I can piece together, it sounds like he got into a fight with his wife and, in a "fit of rage" stormed off in his car. I've done that too, and I can honestly tell you I probably shouldn't have been driving in that mental state.

Still never hit a fire hydrant though...
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby kiryan » Thu Dec 03, 2009 6:24 pm

You were holding a coffee, you hit a rock and shift your vision to the right to make sure you didn't spill it while your hands on the steering wheel start veering to the right and your foot engages the accelerator more aggressively due to the forces. You hit a fire hydrant, obvious negligence.

negligence: failure to act with the prudence that a reasonable person would exercise under the same circumstances

a reasonable person is the average person. This is a common thing that could happen to the average person and is not negligence because its within the body of normal. Just like driving while your pissed off at your wife or husband or after a breakup with your girlfriend. Its not negligence. It may be careless, but I'd suggest that careless is also defined by terms like "average person".
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby Sarvis » Thu Dec 03, 2009 6:49 pm

kiryan wrote:You were holding a coffee, you hit a rock and shift your vision to the right to make sure you didn't spill it while your hands on the steering wheel start veering to the right and your foot engages the accelerator more aggressively due to the forces. You hit a fire hydrant, obvious negligence.

negligence: failure to act with the prudence that a reasonable person would exercise under the same circumstances

a reasonable person is the average person. This is a common thing that could happen to the average person and is not negligence because its within the body of normal. Just like driving while your pissed off at your wife or husband or after a breakup with your girlfriend. Its not negligence. It may be careless, but I'd suggest that careless is also defined by terms like "average person".


I have serious worries about you being on the road if you need to stare at your hand for the length of time it would take you to drive all the way off the road and into a fire hydrant.

How do you feel about drunk driving laws Kiryan? I know that when I'm enraged and get behind the wheel I drive faster, more recklessly and am putting myself and others at risk. It's not particularly different in effect than drunk driving.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby kiryan » Thu Dec 03, 2009 8:40 pm

What do you mean how do I feel about them? I think they are reasonable. I might prefer to not have the laws and just put people in jail for what damage they actually cause instead of pre-emptive tickets which don't change the behavior of drunks anyways.

I think the average reasonable person would consider drunk driving careless. The average drunk person may not, but thats not what I said. At such point that the average reasonable person considers drunk driving fine, you couldn't call it negligent by definition.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby Sarvis » Thu Dec 03, 2009 8:50 pm

kiryan wrote:What do you mean how do I feel about them? I think they are reasonable. I might prefer to not have the laws and just put people in jail for what damage they actually cause instead of pre-emptive tickets which don't change the behavior of drunks anyways.

I think the average reasonable person would consider drunk driving careless. The average drunk person may not, but thats not what I said. At such point that the average reasonable person considers drunk driving fine, you couldn't call it negligent by definition.


If someone is equally impaired by alcohol as by anger, why is it ok to drive angry and not ok to drive drunk according to you?
Ashiwi
Sojourner
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 5:01 am

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby Ashiwi » Sat Dec 05, 2009 4:55 am

It may be due to local regulations, but I think around here a ticket is issued because the fault has to be assigned. If you hit a hydrant and it's not your fault, you don't pay for it. If you hit a hydrant and it's your fault, you get a ticket and likely fined for the cost of repairs. If somebody's actually at fault for negligence or driving dangerously, why is there a problem with giving him a ticket? If he ran up on the road and hit a jogger, would it have been better, since the jogger could have verified that his wife was chasing him with a golf club?
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby kiryan » Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:15 pm

It still sounds more like retaliation for refusing to talk to police.

I'm quite sure the city can figure out how to send Tiger a bill for the damage without giving him a ticket and wthout figuring out who is to "blame". It was his car that did the damage, he was driving.

I'd love to see him fight the case. So mr prosecutor, prove your case without Tiger or his wife's testimony, no eye witnesses. Prove that this accident was due to "careless" driving. I'd like to see them prove Tiger was driving.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby kiryan » Tue Dec 08, 2009 12:20 am

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/nation ... ion=recent

State backed Tiger, rebuffed cop’s subpoena plea

A bid by Florida cops to probe whether Tiger Woods mixed a powerful potion of painkillers, sleeping pills and booze before he crashed near his home was rejected by a Sunshine State district attorney, according to a newly disclosed document.

--

So this is apparently why they wanted to talk to him and why he intelligently declined to be available. They suspected him of DWI, but when they couldn't make progress issued him a ticket for going 40 instead of 46.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby kiryan » Tue Dec 08, 2009 1:14 am

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34314438/ns ... ?GT1=43001

The owner of the chimp that tore that woman's face off is not going to be prosecuted. I guess you must think thats ridiculous, since it must be inherently negligent and careless to have a chimp around who can literally tear someones face off.

Accidents happen and are not always the result of careless or negligent behavior.
amena wolfsnarl
Sojourner
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:14 pm
Location: grande prairie alberta canada

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby amena wolfsnarl » Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:30 am

kiryan wrote:http://www.bostonherald.com/news/national/south/view/20091207state_backed_tiger_rebuffed_cops_subpeona_plea/srvc=home&position=recent

State backed Tiger, rebuffed cop’s subpoena plea

A bid by Florida cops to probe whether Tiger Woods mixed a powerful potion of painkillers, sleeping pills and booze before he crashed near his home was rejected by a Sunshine State district attorney, according to a newly disclosed document.

--

So this is apparently why they wanted to talk to him and why he intelligently declined to be available. They suspected him of DWI, but when they couldn't make progress issued him a ticket for going 40 instead of 46.



After a witness claims that tiger was under the influence of drugs and alcohol, and mysteriously crashes into a fire hydrant for no apparent reason, the district attorney declined to get a blood test? WTF is that? all signs point to him being under the influence in my opinion, why the fuck wasnt the subpeona passed? Thats fucking ridicolous! If it was a regular person do you think for one minute that subpeona wouldnt get passed? This kinda bull shit is what really pisses me off, people getting treated like a better class of citizen cause they are famous.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby kiryan » Tue Dec 08, 2009 6:25 pm

It said a witness had seen tiger consume alcohol earlier in the day... It didn't say that night. The crash happened at 2am?

it also says that tiger was prescribed vicodin... not clear to me that he had been prescribed that day or sometime in the past. Doesn't say they saw him take any.

You want him subpoeaned on this kind of flimsy bullshit?

The government actually did its job here. There wasn't enough evidence that a crime had occured so it didn't let the cops go on a wild goose chase. Now if Tiger had slurred his speech or the officer could smell alcohol... and they had denied the subpoeana that would be something entirely different and 100% outrageous.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby kiryan » Tue Dec 08, 2009 6:58 pm

I'll add this, apparently Tiger was asleep on the grass when the officers arrived. I assume he woke up and was alert ect and didn't appear to be under the effects of sleeping drugs. If he was groggy, that should've been in the subpoena and I would probably wonder why he got special treatment.

Must be nice to live somewhere where its nice enough to sleep on the grass this time of year =)
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby avak » Tue Dec 08, 2009 7:26 pm

You know, that's just it...it cuts both ways with fame. We cry foul when there is preferential treatment that benefits the celebrity, but rarely does anyone bat an eyelash at the intense scrutiny. If this were not Tiger Woods, would anyone in the world be talking about it -besides- Tiger and his wife? Of course not. He is falling from grace -because- of his fame. Because of the unequal treatment that his celebrity has bestowed on him.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby Sarvis » Tue Dec 08, 2009 7:33 pm

kiryan wrote:...didn't appear to be under the effects of sleeping drugs.


Other than the fact that he was sleeping in the grass next to a car accident?

If he was groggy, that should've been in the subpoena and I would probably wonder why he got special treatment.


Adrenaline can be a wonderful thing.

Must be nice to live somewhere where its nice enough to sleep on the grass this time of year =)


Agreed. :(
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby kiryan » Wed Dec 09, 2009 1:40 am

arenaline can be a wonderful thing, so can not actually being under the influence when the police come knocking.

I think the quote from Arnie palmer was priceless, something to the effect of if you want to be a normal 23 yo, give the 50 million back and quit playing golf. you don't get to make 50 million playing golf and be treated like a normal guy.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby kiryan » Wed Dec 09, 2009 4:33 am

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/20 ... nment%2529

TMZ reported early Tuesday that Woods was admitted to the hospital as an overdose patient under the alias "William Smith."

Sources at the Health Central Hospital said Woods’ admissions chart specified "OD" and mentioned he was having trouble breathing., TMZ reported.

--

If thats accurate, then it looks like celebrity status got him off of a DWI.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby Sarvis » Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:38 am

kiryan wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2009/12/08/david-letterman-tiger-woods-jokes/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%253A+foxnews%252Fentertainment+%2528FOXNews.com+-+Entertainment%2529

TMZ reported early Tuesday that Woods was admitted to the hospital as an overdose patient under the alias "William Smith."

Sources at the Health Central Hospital said Woods’ admissions chart specified "OD" and mentioned he was having trouble breathing., TMZ reported.

--

If thats accurate, then it looks like celebrity status got him off of a DWI.


Wait, so to not draw attention he chose another famous black man's name as his alias?
Botef
Sojourner
Posts: 1056
Joined: Fri May 10, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Eastern Washington
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby Botef » Wed Dec 09, 2009 6:02 am

Thats what happens when you get jiggy wit it with a cocktail waitress.
amena wolfsnarl
Sojourner
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:14 pm
Location: grande prairie alberta canada

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby amena wolfsnarl » Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:52 am

kiryan wrote:arenaline can be a wonderful thing, so can not actually being under the influence when the police come knocking.

I think the quote from Arnie palmer was priceless, something to the effect of if you want to be a normal 23 yo, give the 50 million back and quit playing golf. you don't get to make 50 million playing golf and be treated like a normal guy.



Okay lets take a loot at this from the perspective of the DA....
Reports of the driver of vehicle drinking earlier in the day
driver crashes a SUV into both a tree and a fire hydrant on a reportedly clear street with no valid reason for it ( still not proven that his wife was chasing him with a golf club)
Reports of access to subscription drugs
driver 'sleeping' on the lawn after a car crash

hmmmm nothing suspicious about this at all....i dont see any further need to perhaps do my job and investigate this more possibly getting a subpeona for a blood sample to check to see whats in his system, nope nothing to see here. he musta had something in his eye....yeah thats it.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby kiryan » Thu Dec 10, 2009 5:55 pm

circumstantial evidence can be used to pursue any manner of witch hunt which is why the constitution and the courts have upheld strict rules on how much probable cause you must have before you invade someone's privacy. Do you want the SS knocking on your door because you have a prescription and someone said they saw you at a communist party meeting?

Drinking earlier in the day ridiculous reason, drinking a couple hours ago = good evidence.
Access to prescription drugs including sleeping pills? simply posessing them raises suspicion?
sleeping on the lawn... it was 2am and he's immobilized (for fear of doing any permanent damage to his body I'm sure). I'd go to sleep too with or without drugs. I sure as hell wouldn't get up and be walking around when I make millions playing golf. Really, what does he care, hes not going to die, he's set for life, he could buy a 100 new cars tomorrow. No big deal... I'd be chill too.
Accidents happen... people fumble with their phone, drop coffee on themselves, have seizures there are all sorts of reasonable explanations to why someone might hit a fire hydrant on a deserted street in the middle of the night. Fortunately for tiger, he's not obligated to explain himself thanks to the 5th amendment.

1 eye witness that had him drinking within a couple hours or taking prescription drugs would be enough for me to agree the subpoena should've been granted. They obviously didn't get one. All you have is a hodge podge of guess work that could turn out to be true.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby teflor the ranger » Mon Dec 14, 2009 5:55 am

What's the difference between Tiger Woods and Santa Claus? Santa stops at 3 ho's.
Ashiwi
Sojourner
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 5:01 am

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby Ashiwi » Tue Dec 15, 2009 8:16 pm

What's the difference between a Cadillac and a golf ball?

Tiger Woods can drive a golf ball.
Botef
Sojourner
Posts: 1056
Joined: Fri May 10, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Eastern Washington
Contact:

Re: tiger woods crash: f*ing ridiculous

Postby Botef » Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:52 am

It is near the Christmas break of the school year. The students have turned
in all their work and there is really nothing more to do. All the children
are restless and the teacher decides to have an early dismissal.

Teacher: "Whoever answers the questions I ask, first and correctly can leave
early today."

Little Johnny says to himself "Good, I want to get outta here. I'm smart and
will answer the question."

Teacher: "Who said 'Four Score and Seven Years Ago'?"

Before Johnny can open his mouth, Susie says, "Abraham Lincoln."

Teacher: "That's right Susie, you can go home."

Johnny is mad that Susie answered the question first.

Teacher: "Who said 'I Have a Dream'?"

Before Johnny can open his mouth, Mary says, "Martin Luther King."

Teacher: "That's right Mary, you can go."

Johnny is even madder than before.

Teacher: "Who said 'Ask not, what your country can do for you'?"

Before Johnny can open his mouth, Nancy says, "John F. Kennedy."

Teacher: "That's right Nancy, you may also leave."

Johnny is boiling mad that he has not been able to answer any of the
questions.

When the teacher turns her back Johnny says, "I wish these b*****s would
keep their mouths shut!"

The teacher turns around: "NOW WHO SAID THAT?"

Johnny: "TIGER WOODS. CAN I GO NOW?"

Return to “T2 General Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests