Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, March 16, 2017

Marlins pitcher Jose Fernandez to blame for fatal boating crash, investigation concludes

Miami Marlins pitcher Jose Fernandez, drunk and speeding, was behind the wheel and to blame when his boat plowed into a jetty off South Beach, killing two others, police concluded in a report released Thursday.

Had Fernandez lived, he would likely have been charged with a host of crimes including manslaughter, according to the final report by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission.

Investigators made the conclusion because the physical damage to Fernandez’s body matched the damage on the boat’s center console. His DNA was also found on the throttle and steering wheel.

The boat, investigators concluded, was traveling at more than 65 miles per hour — just over the top speed of the vessel.

RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 11:05 AM | 115 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: jose fernandez, marlins

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. Boxkutter Posted: March 16, 2017 at 12:07 PM (#5418274)
It's a shame because now the families of the other two friends are going to use this to sue and take every cent they can from Fernandez's innocent daughter.
   2. Cargo Cultist Posted: March 16, 2017 at 12:22 PM (#5418282)
It's straight up manslaughter. They will sue, and they will win, and it's legitimate.

As to Fernandez being drunk (and responsible), I recall catching a lot of flak from the usual suspects for even just suggesting that might be the case.

Hah! Told ya so.
   3. SoSH U at work Posted: March 16, 2017 at 12:27 PM (#5418284)
Hah! Told ya so.


Congratulations. This is obviously a proud moment in the Cultist household.
   4. slothinator Posted: March 16, 2017 at 12:28 PM (#5418285)
Hah! Told ya so.


Well thank God you've been vindicated in this matter. That's what really counts.

EDIT - Coke, SoSH, yadda yadda
   5. Covfefe Posted: March 16, 2017 at 12:30 PM (#5418286)
As to Fernandez being drunk (and responsible), I recall catching a lot of flak from the usual suspects for even just suggesting that might be the case.

Hah! Told ya so.


I really don't get this impulse.

No one here "knew" Jose Fernandez - the biggest connection any of us had to him was that he was a very good baseball player and as we all like baseball, we obviously enjoy watching good baseball players play baseball. So our "loss", such as it is, was the loss of seeing more good baseball played.

Taking some sort of joy or satisfaction in pointing out that a dead guy none of us knew or had any connection to beyond the entertainment value he provided WAS also responsible for two other deaths (who none of us also knew) just seems weird.

I'm no stranger to schadenfreude and who doesn't love a good toldja so! -- guessing the right dead person among three dead people as the cause and thus source of such just seems odd and morbid.

EDIT: I suppose we'll just make it the Cokes all around thread
   6. AuntBea calls himself Sky Panther Posted: March 16, 2017 at 12:37 PM (#5418289)
The estate only has $2 or $3 million, apparently. Once the lawyers get their cut, there won't be much to split between the 3 or 4 families involved.
   7. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 12:56 PM (#5418302)
It's a shame because now the families of the other two friends are going to use this to sue and take every cent they can from Fernandez's innocent daughter.


It's a shame because two people are dead.

Look, sh^t happens, he made a mistake and it turned out to have horrific consequences. But there's no need to sugar coat it.

Some of us DID raise the (quite reasonable) possibility at the time that Fernandez was at fault and we were shouted down. To what end?

It doesn't mean he was a terrible person. It does mean that he wasn't a saint, that he made some terrible decisions that night that cost him and his friends their lives, wreaking havoc on three families. His friends probably should have made better decisions themselves. But it is what it is.
   8. madvillain Posted: March 16, 2017 at 01:03 PM (#5418306)
That sucks and it lowers my opinion of him quite a bit. Do dumb #### sure, but don't take others out on the way.
   9. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: March 16, 2017 at 01:12 PM (#5418313)
As to Fernandez being drunk (and responsible), I recall catching a lot of flak from the usual suspects for even just suggesting that might be the case.

Hah! Told ya so.


Bullshit. They were giving me ####, and they were giving Ray #### for defending my speculation. People were doing the smart thing in that thread in that they were ignoring you.

Original thread.
   10. SoSH U at work Posted: March 16, 2017 at 01:23 PM (#5418325)
Bullshit.

They were giving me ####, and they were giving Ray #### for defending my speculation. People were doing the smart thing in that thread in that they were ignoring you.


In that case, I formally rescind my congratulations, Cargo. Better luck patting yourself on the back following the next tragedy.
   11. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 01:26 PM (#5418332)
It's a shame because now the families of the other two friends are going to use this to sue and take every cent they can from Fernandez's innocent daughter.

That's not the actual shame.

Why does his innocent daughter deserve the money any more than the innocent wives and children of the other guys?
   12. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 01:37 PM (#5418345)
People have their justifications, preposterous as they may be.
   13. Lassus Posted: March 16, 2017 at 01:40 PM (#5418348)
People have their justifications, preposterous as they may be.

What happened, did you crop out the Young Masters Steinbrenner from the top step there?
   14. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 01:40 PM (#5418349)
"You lied to me first!"
   15. ReggieThomasLives Posted: March 16, 2017 at 01:43 PM (#5418353)
The estate only has $2 or $3 million, apparently. Once the lawyers get their cut, there won't be much to split between the 3 or 4 families involved.


That seems crazy then I realize with signing bonus he only made $6.5M from baseball, unknown amounts from endorsements.

When he couldn't reach agreement on an extension from the Marlins, I assume that his agent put insurance in place for a career ending injury, but that doesn't include life insurance?
   16. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: March 16, 2017 at 01:44 PM (#5418354)
Why does his innocent daughter deserve the money any more than the innocent wives and children of the other guys?


Agree entirely.
   17. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 01:57 PM (#5418365)
When he couldn't reach agreement on an extension from the Marlins, I assume that his agent put insurance in place for a career ending injury, but that doesn't include life insurance?

If he didn't have life insurance, he was being very, very foolish. He had something well north of $100M of expected future earnings to protect.

A $50M 20 Year Term policy for a very healthy 25 y.o. male would be around $20,000 a year.
   18. Lassus Posted: March 16, 2017 at 01:59 PM (#5418368)
Why does his innocent daughter deserve the money any more than the innocent wives and children of the other guys?
Agree entirely.


If the other two guys were also drunk and high (and I have no idea), I can't really say that I would entirely agree philosophically with that moral calculus.

EDIT: That is to say, I don't think anyone would deserve it more than any other, including those widows and children. I guess that's subjective and harsh, but, it doesn't mean all that much other than my opinion.
   19. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:01 PM (#5418369)
If he didn't have life insurance, he was being very, very foolish. He had something well north of $100M of expected future earnings to protect.

A $50M 20 Year Term policy for a very healthy 25 y.o. male would be around $20,000 a year.


This. I'm also pretty sure that the proceeds of a life insurance policy that named his daughter as a beneficiary could not have been seized by the families of the survivors (if I'm wrong on this, I'm sure one of our resident lawyers will correct me).
   20. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:01 PM (#5418370)
If the other two guys were also drunk and high (and I have no idea), I can't really say that I would entirely agree philosophically with that moral calculus.


It doesn't matter whether they were drunk or high if they weren't driving the boat.
   21. Perry Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:11 PM (#5418372)
It seemed to me that Oscar Taveras was instantly and universally branded a worthless piece of #### after the drunk driving wreck that killed him and his fiancee. It will be interesting to see if Fernandez gets the same treatment now that the facts are known, or if his greater fame and perceived likability shields his reputation to some degree.
   22. Lassus Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:16 PM (#5418377)
It doesn't matter whether they were drunk or high if they weren't driving the boat.

My own (personal, fully granted) liability calculus - inasmuch as it conveys to financial recompense for the relatives of all parties - does not sway in any specific direction if they themselves were too drunk and high not to get on a boat being driven by someone else who was drunk and high.
   23. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:26 PM (#5418390)
That is to say, I don't think anyone would deserve it more than any other, including those widows and children. I guess that's subjective and harsh, but, it doesn't mean all that much other than my opinion.

I would agree they don't necessarily deserve the money more, but they don't deserve it less either.
   24. SoSH U at work Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:27 PM (#5418392)
My own (personal, fully granted) liability calculus - inasmuch as it conveys to financial recompense for the relatives of all parties - does not sway in any specific direction if they themselves were too drunk and high not to get on a boat being driven by someone else who was drunk and high.


Is it worse if they were sober and let some drunk and high guy drive the boat?

Presumably all three of them knew Fernandez wasn't in a condition to drive the boat (and that fast) How exactly you want to exactly parcel blame between the parties is subjective, but responsibility for the tragedy is shared to some extent.
   25. Covfefe Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:31 PM (#5418394)
I'll grant that it's got some important differences -- namely and foremost that yes, Fernandez's actions made him responsible for not just his own death, but the death of two other people and also, that Mike Royko was friends with John Belushi....

But this sort of stuff just always brings me back to an old Royko column - sorry, the only one I can quickly find it via a google books link, but I'm guessing most people of a certain age are relatively familiar with it - that was a follow-up to grief he received following a sort of obit column he had written immediately after Belushi's death.

In essence, it's the sort of 'grave-dancing' aspect that is just beyond me... I just don't get it.
   26. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:44 PM (#5418404)
In essence, it's the sort of 'grave-dancing' aspect that is just beyond me... I just don't get it.


The problem is that engaging in reasonable speculation about why a tragedy occurred is not "grave dancing."

It's useful both for understanding what happened and for preventing future tragedies.

And for more accurately characterizing someone's life and death and character and decisionmaking abilities.

Driving severely drunk (car or boat) is a mistake that people often make. It doesn't make them the worst people in the world - so I don't get that approach to this either - but it's a terrible thing. Fernandez made his own decisions and I see no need to sugar coat what happened for the sake of preserving a whitewashed romanticized memory of him that he doesn't deserve.

Certainly there's no reason to romanticize his memory simply because he could pitch a baseball at a high level, which is all that's driving the fanboys who descend on these threads to attack everyone for sizing up the world as it is and the man as he was.
   27. PreservedFish Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:45 PM (#5418408)
I'm wondering who Cargo Cultist thinks "the usual suspects" are. Everybody?
   28. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:51 PM (#5418415)
Some of us DID raise the (quite reasonable) possibility at the time that Fernandez was at fault and we were shouted down. To what end?

Fanboyism, and nothing but -- an eccentric trait indeed in middle and late middle-aged men.

Certainly there's no reason to romanticize his memory simply because he could pitch a baseball at a high level.

The opposite, actually. Athletes in the US are a far bigger threat to civilians than civilians are to athletes. On the nation's college campuses, the threat ratio is utterly absurd -- see, e.g., the recent horrors at Baylor. Which is why a sober observer can only chuckle on the extremely rare occasion that a civilian enters the playing surface at all of the "OMG he's on the field, WHO KNOWS WHAT KIND OF HORRORS HE COULD HAVE PERPETRATED!!!"

   29. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:51 PM (#5418416)
Better luck patting yourself on the back following the next tragedy.


That's not patting, and that's not his back.
   30. RJ in TO Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:51 PM (#5418417)
Who cares what Cargo Cultist thinks? And why are you idiots even acknowledging his perpetually turdulescent posts?
   31. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:52 PM (#5418418)
I'm wondering who Cargo Cultist thinks "the usual suspects" are. Everybody?

You know, the riff-raff. Hippies, commies, furriners, queers...
   32. Covfefe Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:53 PM (#5418419)
The problem is that engaging in reasonable speculation about why a tragedy occurred is not "grave dancing."

It's useful both for understanding what happened and for preventing future tragedies.

And for more accurately characterizing someone's life and death and character and decisionmaking abilities.

Driving drunk (car or boat) is a mistake that people often make. It doesn't make them the worst people in the world - so I don't get that approach to this either - but it's not good. Fernandez made his own decisions and I see no need to sugar coat what happened for the sake of preserving a whitewashed romanticized memory of him that he doesn't deserve.

Certainly there's no reason to romanticize his memory simply because he could pitch a baseball at a high level.


Sure - I guess I'm aiming the question... or statement of lack of understanding more at CC than anyone else, I suppose.

Though, so far as romanticizing his memory -- I guess I don't know that anyone is really doing that... at least, romanticizing his memory as a person. In addition to causing the death of two people, he might also have been a thoroughly rotten human being for all we/I know.

I guess I would just say that romanticizing of him is pretty much restricted to romanticizing his pitching and the fact that his pitching was pretty great at a young age and likely would have gotten better.

Not trying to pick a fight here because I don't think one really exists to be picked... Just saying my 'attachment' to him is no more than it is with everyone else: A good baseball player that people who like baseball would obviously enjoy seeing play baseball and it's a shame we won't get to see him play more baseball. Certainly bigger tragedies in the world, and certainly even bigger tragedies around his death and the deaths of two others that are beyond "us".

   33. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:53 PM (#5418421)
I would agree they don't necessarily deserve the money more, but they don't deserve it less either.

There's literally no sense in which they don't deserve the money. They suffered a wrongful death at the hands of the person from whom they seek money.
   34. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:56 PM (#5418425)
It's useful both for understanding what happened and for preventing future tragedies.


You yabbering on about a boat wreck on the internet contributes absolutely nothing to either "understanding" or "preventing future tragedies." Literally nothing..
   35. Eddo Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:58 PM (#5418428)
The problem is that engaging in reasonable speculation about why a tragedy occurred is not "grave dancing."

I don't believe anyone is saying you're "grave dancing", only Cargo Cultist, who did literally say "Told ya so".
   36. PreservedFish Posted: March 16, 2017 at 02:59 PM (#5418429)
Literally. Literally literally literally.
   37. Covfefe Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:00 PM (#5418430)
Literally.


Well, no... literally it was HA! Told ya so.
   38. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:00 PM (#5418431)
I'm wondering who Cargo Cultist thinks "the usual suspects" are. Everybody?


The pushback in the original thread linked above came from Darren, Wahoo Sam, Tin Angel, Jose is el absurd pollo, Scott Lange, and lars6788, guys who rarely if ever post in OTP*. They aren't the usual anything. The OTP regulars were mostly making or defending the speculation: me, Ray, Clapper, SOSH. It's just more CC trying to make everything be about him.

*I have no idea what SBB and RETARDO said.
   39. Eddo Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:00 PM (#5418432)
You yabbering on about a boat wreck on the internet contributes absolutely nothing to either "understanding" or "preventing future tragedies." Literally nothing..

Sometimes you don't need to snipe back at Ray just because he's Ray.

A very well-publicized incident of drunken boating leading to death can absolutely help prevent future tragedies. There is definitely a sentiment that drinking while driving a boat is not as bad as drinking while driving a car, and that's probably not true.
   40. PreservedFish Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:01 PM (#5418433)
Of those three consecutive comments that use the word literally, I would give Eddo's an A+ for perfect usage, Rickey's an A- (almost true but arguably a tiny exaggeration), and SBB's a "WTF?"
   41. Lassus Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:02 PM (#5418435)
turdulescent

That is literally a great word.
   42. PreservedFish Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:05 PM (#5418442)
I know that it's probably turd + adolescent, but I keep reading it as turd + phosphorescent.
   43. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:06 PM (#5418444)
There's literally no sense in which they don't deserve the money. They suffered a wrongful death at the hands of the person from whom they seek money.


Indeed. "But he has a daughter who deserves the money too" is not an element of a damages calculation in a wrongful death suit.

The calculus focuses on the lives of those LOST.
   44. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:11 PM (#5418449)
Indeed. "But he has a daughter who deserves the money too" is not an element of a damages calculation in a wrongful death suit.

The calculus focuses on the lives of those LOST.


The daughter has literally done nothing to "deserve" Jose Fernandez' millions of dollars. She was born to a rich father. There's no deserve in that. Standard play rules of inheritance say she gets the money when she comes of age, but she doesn't *deserve* it in any real, moral way.

The men who chose willingly to go out partying with Jose Fernandez on his boat were not coerced nor forced into those actions that anyone can tell. As such, their accidental deaths are on them, not him, nor his family.

The extended family of those men have literally done nothing to deserve Jose Fernandez' money. "My son got on a boat to drink and blow lines with a baseball superstar" is not a valid argument for them to "deserve" money from the Fernandez estate. The fact that our society has set up the assumption that "my brother got killed with a famous rich person, so we get to sue that person now" is bad, not good. But regardless, deserve's got nothing to do with it.
   45. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:12 PM (#5418450)
The boat, investigators concluded, was traveling at more than 65 miles per hour — just over the top speed of the vessel.


Also, this is literally impossible. The listed "top speed" of 65 MPH is clearly wrong if the vessel was traveling faster than that.
   46. geonose Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:13 PM (#5418451)
Why does his innocent daughter deserve the money any more than the innocent wives and children of the other guys?
Agree entirely.

If the other two guys were also drunk and high (and I have no idea), I can't really say that I would entirely agree philosophically with that moral calculus.


Neither of the others had a wife. Children, well, I can't say for sure, but there is nothing in any report that mentions that either had a child.

Both had alcohol in their systems, but both were also under the legal limit. One also had cocaine and the other didn't.

I don't know how that changes the calculus. Just sayin'.
   47. madvillain Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:15 PM (#5418453)
Also, this is literally impossible. The listed "top speed" of 65 MPH is clearly wrong if the vessel was traveling faster than that.


I'm guessing they meant that's the rated top speed. Like an aircraft. Above that, #### might start falling apart, or not be controllable.
   48. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:16 PM (#5418455)
I'm guessing they meant that's the rated top speed. Like an aircraft. Above that, #### might start falling apart, or not be controllable.


Almost certainly. As semi-professional writers, they should have said that.
   49. Lassus Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:18 PM (#5418458)
A "suggested" inserted prior to "top" would have more or less fit that bill.
   50. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:18 PM (#5418460)
The men who chose willingly to go out partying with Jose Fernandez on his boat were not coerced nor forced into those actions that anyone can tell. As such, their accidental deaths are on them, not him, nor his family.

The extended family of those men have literally done nothing to deserve Jose Fernandez' money.


I'm just explaining to you how the law works. Your preferences are not codified therein.

The extended family of those men have literally done nothing to deserve Jose Fernandez' money. "My son got on a boat to drink and blow lines with a baseball superstar" is not a valid argument for them to "deserve" money from the Fernandez estate. The fact that our society has set up the assumption that "my brother got killed with a famous rich person, so we get to sue that person now" is bad, not good. But regardless, deserve's got nothing to do with it.


A person doesn't need to be famous and rich in order for a plaintiff to bring a wrongful death suit.

You seem to be upset that Fernandez's memory and legacy are sullied. And they are. But the fault is not with those who point to the facts of what he did and render the conclusions that follow about him from those; the fault is with him. When he drove the boat drunk and had a huge hand in the deaths of two people -- and not just a little drunk but severely inebriated -- he forfeited the right to have his memory and legacy purified. And I don't care for fanboys here demanding that that be done so that they can continue to live in whatever 15 year old fanboy world they are living in. The real world is out there. People can live in it, or not.
   51. Covfefe Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:22 PM (#5418464)
So if the other two deaths had no families (let's assume no children, too) -- would there be anyone with a wrongful death claim?

Not saying it makes things any less sad for parents/siblings/etc... just curious.
   52. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:22 PM (#5418465)
You seem to be upset that Fernandez's memory and legacy are sullied.


I'm not upset at all. I was sad to see a very talented, joyful baseball player die too young. Otherwise, it has no bearing on my life whatsoever. The only thing I'm picking nits about here is you prancing about all holier-than-thou with your moral Puratinism yammering on about the dangers of drugs and boating, or whatever it is you and the Cultist are preening self-righteously about today.
   53. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:23 PM (#5418466)
Uh huh.
   54. Eddo Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:27 PM (#5418470)
whatever it is you and the Cultist are preening self-righteously about today.

I've only seen Cultist preening. Ray (and to a lesser extent, Misirlou) are just saying that they had previously been criticized for openly speculating that Fernandez was drunk. (Ray is also explaining how wrongful death suits work, but I don't see any moral judgement there, just descriptions of the current reality.)
   55. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:28 PM (#5418471)
Honest to Pete, Ray Ray. Truth be told, my initial sadness over the loss of the talent is fading into "at least the Marlins are worse." I don't care that they were drunk or blowing lines. I don't care that they were going fast. I don't think anyone deserves "wrongful death" money awarded to them for the outcome of the crash. People who do care about these things are morons.
   56. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:33 PM (#5418477)
Ray (and to a lesser extent, Misirlou) are just saying that they had previously been criticized for openly speculating that Fernandez was drunk.


I still don't know why his being drunk matters. I mean, morally. To the lawyers chasing the water ambulances, sure. Commissions are big on these sorts of cases, yeah?
   57. PreservedFish Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:34 PM (#5418478)
I don't think Ray was preening in this thread. Certainly nothing like CC and SBB.
   58. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:38 PM (#5418483)
I don't think anyone deserves "wrongful death" money awarded to them for the outcome of the crash.
"Awarded" makes it sound as if it's some kind of prize. Wrongful death is a tort. If I punch you, you deserve some money in compensation. If I crash my car into yours, you deserve some money in compensation. And if I kill you, you deserve some money in compensation (which will of course go to your estate, not you).
   59. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:39 PM (#5418484)
If they had been driving a Hummer 100 mph and t-boned a family of four, those survivors would have had a moral case for "wrongful death" findings. That is not this.
   60. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:41 PM (#5418486)
If I punch you, you deserve some money in compensation. If I crash my car into yours, you deserve some money in compensation. And if I kill you, you deserve some money in compensation (which will of course go to your estate, not you).


Of course this is how the lawyers think. It's still wrong. If you punch me, I will beat your ass. If you crash my car, you owe me medical and a new car. If you kill me, my family can probably take care of what they need out of it, but I will be dead and not personally deserve anything ever again. YOu continue to misuse "deserve."
   61. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:42 PM (#5418487)
If they had been driving a Hummer 100 mph and t-boned a family of four, those survivors would have had a moral case for "wrongful death" findings. That is not this.


Who besides you is talking about morality?
   62. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:45 PM (#5418489)
Who besides you is talking about morality?


Interesting people? (CC, and one assumes SBB (he's plonked, so I can't say for sure) think they are, but they're generally idiot-trolls about everything. Ray tries to, but quickly loses his depth.)
   63. Eddo Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:47 PM (#5418492)
I still don't know why his being drunk matters. I mean, morally.

So far only Cargo Cultist has done anything resembling moralizing (and his reaction was really more just being a dick than anything else).

EDIT: Coke to Misirlou.
   64. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:52 PM (#5418498)
I still don't know why his being drunk matters. I mean, morally.

Because he was grossly nrgligent.

If you're sober and driving a normal speed (either in a car or boat) and crash and kill someone, that's an accident. You didn't do anything wrong.

If you're many times the legal limit for alcohol, coked up to boot, and driving your vehicle past its maximum safe speed, you are acting with gross disregard for human life. It's not an accident if something happens. You are very much to blame if anyone gets hurt or killed.
   65. Mike A Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:55 PM (#5418500)
There is definitely a sentiment that drinking while driving a boat is not as bad as drinking while driving a car, and that's probably not true.

I'd say that's certainly not true at night. Driving a boat at night is dangerous completely sober. It's easy to get disoriented.

Driving a boat at night drunk is crazy. Driving a boat at night at top speed while drunk is a death wish.
   66. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: March 16, 2017 at 03:55 PM (#5418501)
Because he was grossly nrgligent.


No one on that boat was coerced into that party.
   67. Eddo Posted: March 16, 2017 at 04:00 PM (#5418506)
No one on that boat was coerced into that party.

You seem to be doing the most ridiculous moralizing, now. So because they, too, were drunk and willingly got on the boat, then it's their fault they died?

If someone is drunk and gets murdered by someone else in a bar, is that their fault, too? Or if one drunk person rapes another, is that not a crime?
   68. Fernigal McGunnigle Posted: March 16, 2017 at 04:04 PM (#5418508)
Assuming that the toxicology reports suggest that everyone on the boat was equally drunk and/or high, I think that the overall blame can be spread fairly evenly. In that case I think that the just thing to do would be to pool the combined estates of the deceased and distribute them equally among the families, maybe doling out more or less to account for the number of dependents and their needs. In this case that obviously means a big transfer of wealth from Fernandez's estate to the other two estates, but that's just an accident of circumstances and not something that I think should change the basic arrangement. And yes, I know that this isn't how the legal system works.
   69. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 16, 2017 at 04:13 PM (#5418512)
You seem to be upset that Fernandez's memory and legacy are sullied. And they are.

Why wouldn't and why shouldn't they be? The only reason it's even an issue is because he could throw a baseball fast -- i.e., pure unadulturated fanboyism.

And I don't care for fanboys here demanding that that be done so that they can continue to live in whatever 15 year old fanboy world they are living in. The real world is out there.

Bingo.
   70. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: March 16, 2017 at 04:14 PM (#5418513)
So because they, too, were drunk and willingly got on the boat, then it's their fault they died?


More or less, yes.
   71. SoSH U at work Posted: March 16, 2017 at 04:14 PM (#5418514)
If someone is drunk and gets murdered by someone else in a bar, is that their fault, too?


That's not a fair comparison. Getting murdered is not a foreseeable consequence of drinking in a bar.

The two other people on the boat regardless their levels of inebriation, knew that Fernandez was acting recklessly by piloting a boat drunk/high at high speeds. Presumably, they could have taken steps to stop him. Like I said above, how you want to parcel the blame is a matter of opinion, but their level of culpability is a hell of a lot higher than if Fernandez had killed two people in a different boat.
   72. SoSH U at work Posted: March 16, 2017 at 04:16 PM (#5418516)
Or if one drunk person rapes another, is that not a crime?


At the risk of sending this conversation completely off the rails*, I find the law regarding inebriation and consent to be quite fascinating. If two drunk people have sex, are they both guilty of rape?

* Let's face it, that's its destiny.
   73. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 16, 2017 at 04:19 PM (#5418518)
Interesting people?

Um, dude, the three major times you've windbagged about morality include the following:

1. Slaves in the antebellum south had no moral right to freedom, but only to whatever crumbs positivist law gave them.
2. Kin of people killed in self-defense have the moral right to kill the person who killed in self-defense.
3. Driving a boat drunk and UTI of blow, and thereby negligently/recklessly killing two other people, is of no moral weight.

I guess you can call that kind of dizzy eccentricity, "interesting," but it's "interesting" only in the way that people pounding Larouche pamphlets on street corners, or rapidly doing Rubik's cubes in rubber rooms are.
   74. Covfefe Posted: March 16, 2017 at 04:20 PM (#5418519)
Why wouldn't and why shouldn't they be? The only reason it's even an issue is because he could throw a baseball fast -- i.e., pure unadulturated fanboyism.


Ahhhh...

I see -- you're looking for Ihatebaseballthinkfactory.org.
   75. Eddo Posted: March 16, 2017 at 04:22 PM (#5418520)
That's not a fair comparison. Getting murdered is not a foreseeable consequence of drinking in a bar.

The two other people on the boat regardless their levels of inebriation, knew that Fernandez was acting recklessly by piloting a boat drunk/high at high speeds. Presumably, they could have taken steps to stop him. Like I said above, how you want to parcel the blame is a matter of opinion, but their level of culpability is a hell of a lot higher than if Fernandez had killed two people in a different boat.

Yeah, that's a fair interpretation. It's far from Rickey's, though.

And I will note that I sometimes share your fascination with the consent laws in the same way.
   76. PreservedFish Posted: March 16, 2017 at 04:26 PM (#5418522)
If two drunk people have sex, are they both guilty of rape?


Is having sex with a drunk person (when you're sober) definitely always rape?
   77. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 16, 2017 at 04:26 PM (#5418524)
Ahhhh...

I see -- you're looking for Ihatebaseballthinkfactory.org.


It's quite possible to both like baseball (or any other sport) and not be a fanboy.

Most baseball players, particularly in this era, are maladjusted, single-minded cads. I see no reason that should matter to enjoyment of the activity, any more than the personal lives of movie stars should matter to our critical appreciation of film.

Even the somewhat laudable things Jose Fernandez did off the field are the kind of things done by people on a routine basis and deserve no great kudos. The zenith of this kind of nonsense was, perhaps, when Tiger Woods's father died and golf commentators and others made it into some great thing that he was able to "overcome" it after like six weeks off, as if millions of people don't have parents die and then get themselves back to work effectively far quicker than six weeks.
   78. Covfefe Posted: March 16, 2017 at 04:31 PM (#5418528)
Most baseball players, particularly in this era, are maladjusted, single-minded cads. I see no reason that should matter to enjoyment of the activity, any more than the personal lives of movie stars should matter to our critical appreciation of film.


If one is of the mind that baseball players are maladjusted, single-minded cads -- not entirely sure I see why this era is any different than previous eras... even setting aside the sins of the Ansons, the Cobbs, etc -- even the Mantles and the Ruths were hardly NOT maladjusted, single-minded cads.
   79. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: March 16, 2017 at 04:32 PM (#5418530)
71 basically repeats my argument for 51.
   80. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 16, 2017 at 04:34 PM (#5418531)
If one is of the mind that baseball players are maladjusted, single-minded cads -- not entirely sure I see why this era is any different than previous eras.

The difference in eras is that athletes are now pampered and steered to athletics-uber-alles at earlier ages than previous eras. The singlemindedness has become even more pronounced.

Moreover, the paying public -- regardless of any hypocrisies to the contrary -- wants their athletes to be maladjusted, single-minded cads.(*) And, in major league sporting entertainment as elsewhere, eventually the customers get what they want.

(*) There's no serious constituency whatever for athletes to be modest and respectful and diligent. See, e.g., Mike Trout and the San Antonio Spurs.
   81. PreservedFish Posted: March 16, 2017 at 04:40 PM (#5418534)
This thread ####### sucks.
   82. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 04:52 PM (#5418540)
To me, MLB is a business and a sports league, and I watch to see people who are the best in the world at playing baseball compete against each other. I enjoy following the careers of players and understanding the game (how runs are scored and prevented) and comparing players to themselves, to each other, to past eras, etc.

I stop following once the players step outside of the white lines.

I don't care what they do off the field -- including in the clubhouse and whether they are eating chicken wings or have a barcalounger -- what their political views are, who they're sleeping with, whether they're gay or straight, whether they are born again. I used to lionize players when I was 15; I don't anymore. Certainly by adulthood people shouldn't be worshipping baseball players.

And yet, that's what the media does ad nausem -- cover these players off the field, or present them as heroes or villains. "Justin Verlander is dating Kate Upton." "Matt Harvey is dating this model." "Derek Jeter is the bestest bestest who ever bested." "ARod is a terrible person because he used steroids." "Oh, look at what Player X had to overcome in his life to get to this point." "So and so has such great character!!" And so much of it is BS. The tv cameras obsessively cut to Player X's wife, tell us about his family, the announcers tell us cute little stories about what "Derek" told them in the clubhouse. I. Do. Not. Care.

This is the NBC-Olympicsization coverage of sports. I detest it and tune it all out. (It's why I don't watch the Olympics. I do not care about the backstories of the athletes, and while I'd be happy to watch the athletes perform and compete I can't stomach sitting through the irrelevant fluff.) I simply don't care what any of these people do off the field, what lives they live or don't live, what they believe in or don't believe in, what they overcame or didn't overcome, what their sexual orientation is. I follow the game like I would follow a DMB league, and that's probably why I enjoy playing DMB.

So when it comes time to say "Jose Fernandez is at fault for recklessly driving his boat while inebriated and killing two people plus himself," I acknowledge the fact and don't have any hero worship to stand in my way. These are not great people just because they are great players.
   83. Tin Angel Posted: March 16, 2017 at 05:11 PM (#5418545)
I stop following once the players step outside of the white lines.


Uh, how many times have you posted in this thread and the previous one? You sure have a funny way of not following what's going on...by posting repeatedly about it on the internet and getting into numerous arguments.
   84. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 05:20 PM (#5418547)
Uh, how many times have you posted in this thread and the previous one? You sure have a funny way of not following what's going on...by posting repeatedly about it on the internet and getting into numerous arguments.


What a brilliant gotcha!
   85. PreservedFish Posted: March 16, 2017 at 05:21 PM (#5418548)
I don't see any hero worship here. I see, on the one hand, mature adults that are capable of acknowledging Fernandez's stupidity and his crime while also seeing the situation as complex and tragic - and, on the other hand, a few people that seem to always need to distinguish themselves by making a spectacle of their supposed toughness. And that includes Sam, coming from the opposite side of the spectrum of CC/SBB/RDP.
   86. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 05:31 PM (#5418552)
I don't see any hero worship here.


And yet it's here.
   87. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 05:32 PM (#5418553)
#82, I would subscribe to a lot of that, but what's happening outside the lines often has a bearing on what happens on the field. The most obvious examples are injuries sustained off the field (truck washing, etc.), substance abuse issues, and conduct that results in suspension, but there are less direct examples that can affect a player's physical and mental state. I have no use for John Kruk's psychological speculation about how a player's off-field issues might be affecting his game, but I don't mind the announcers telling me the facts about what's happening off the off-field.

"What they had to overcome" is also interesting to me. Knowing that Tim Duncan grew up a swimmer in the USVI and didn't start playing basketball until 9th grade gives me that much more respect for his accomplishments, and also helps explain why he entered college as an unpolished player. I would also think that if you're interested in comparing players across eras, you'd want to consider the training, nutrition, equipment and medical care available to them throughout their lives.
   88. PreservedFish Posted: March 16, 2017 at 05:36 PM (#5418554)
And yet it's here.


Show me. Where?
   89. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 16, 2017 at 05:38 PM (#5418555)
I see, on the one hand, mature adults that are capable of acknowledging Fernandez's stupidity and his crime while also seeing the situation as complex and tragic

What's complex about it? No one would even be giving it a second thought if the boat driver wasn't a guy who could throw a baseball fast. If it was a surgeon or a lawyer driving the boat that intoxicated and that ridiculously the local people might see it in the paper and think, "What an ####### he was for doing that," and move on to finish their bowl of Corn Flakes or Count Chocula. The accident doesn't take on some extra superduper gravity just because the boat driver could throw a baseball fast.

And of course it's tragic -- three young lives were lost. No one has remotely suggested otherwise. The pushback is against all the people who think Fernandez's life was somehow more inherently worthwhile than the two people his recklessness killed.
   90. Covfefe Posted: March 16, 2017 at 05:41 PM (#5418556)
Maybe we just need an OTP- be an ass monthly thread?
   91. PreservedFish Posted: March 16, 2017 at 05:50 PM (#5418561)
edit. Nevermind. Not a good use of my time.
   92. Covfefe Posted: March 16, 2017 at 05:52 PM (#5418562)
And of course it's tragic -- three young lives were lost. No one has remotely suggested otherwise. The pushback is against all the people who think Fernandez's life was somehow more inherently worthwhile than the two people his recklessness killed.


WTF has said anything approaching that?

There are multiple people dying right now, at this very moment. There are probably multiple dying right now in ways and for reasons far worse than a drunken boating accident. Is there some special place on the internet where you go to mourn them so that your preening is anything more than that?

It's hardly defective or some sort of character flaw to 'notice' and be... IDK, disappointed is even too strong a word - when someone who provides leisure entertainment you enjoy passes in an untimely way, even when that untimely passing is ultimately of his own making.

Gimme a break... no one here is starting a Go Fund Me for a Jose Fernandez memorial statue... and no one here is feeding any sort of hero worship by remarking on the fact Jose Fernandez was good at baseball and it's a shame we don't get to watch him throw a baseball really well anymore.

Is there ANY topic where you don't have this weird need to stake out a good seat in the "How can I most piss off the most people in an iconoclastic preening sort of way?"

   93. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: March 16, 2017 at 06:01 PM (#5418565)
Hah! Told ya so.


What a troll, piss off.

Assuming that the toxicology reports suggest that everyone on the boat was equally drunk and/or high, I think that the overall blame can be spread fairly evenly.


Wait, what? That's not right unless all 3 of them were driving the boat at the same time. Just because you are drunk or high or both doesn't make you responsible for the accident if you weren't driving the vehicle. Unless you reached over and grabbed the wheel or something equally dumb.

I assume most of us have been on a boat before. Has anyone mentioned how insanely fast 65mph is on a boat? It's just crazy time stuff. Any sort of wake or swell will send a boat flying at that speed. Do be doing that at night, in a harbour, whilst intoxicated is just really, really stupid.


   94. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: March 16, 2017 at 06:44 PM (#5418586)

It's hard to speculate about who "deserves" what based on what we know. Maybe his passengers were similarly incapacitated (the report says they were below the legal limit for alcohol, but one had cocaine in his system) and had no concern about the fact that Fernandez was piloting the boat while drunk and high. Or maybe they had their wits about them, and tried to convince him to stop, but he refused. Or neither of the above. This is why these cases go to court.
   95. Covfefe Posted: March 16, 2017 at 07:16 PM (#5418599)
Assuming that the toxicology reports suggest that everyone on the boat was equally drunk and/or high, I think that the overall blame can be spread fairly evenly.

Wait, what? That's not right unless all 3 of them were driving the boat at the same time. Just because you are drunk or high or both doesn't make you responsible for the accident if you weren't driving the vehicle. Unless you reached over and grabbed the wheel or something equally dumb.


Not to speak for SOSH, but I suspect the point was more like "Does that mean it was probably a crapshoot as to who ultimately ended up behind the wheel?"... and I think there is something to that.

Since it was Fernandez's boat - and he was driving - he's certainly at the top of the list... but having been young and stupid myself, yeah - I thank my stars none of my stupid young choices ended in tragedy - but my admittedly hazy memory of such stupid young situations is that it wasn't ever a matter of one especially stupid young person making a stupid decision. It tends to be a group decision of stupid and young + only one steering wheel.

As a public service to those who apparently think these threads can serve some sort public service - I suppose just let me say for any of the young and stupid who may be reading, and with a nod towards the analytics bent of this site, let me just say: Even if you don't roll the tragedy and/or criminal snake eyes - you'll still regret it. You only get so many good - or even not bad - rolls at life and it's really stupid to waste one on something like this. Whether it's you driving, riding with someone who is, or even just letting someone drive/operate/etc who is when you can stop it - it's the life equivalent of having your #2 hitter sac bunt after a leadoff single in the top of the first.
   96. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: March 16, 2017 at 07:48 PM (#5418610)
Not to speak for SOSH, but I suspect the point was more like "Does that mean it was probably a crapshoot as to who ultimately ended up behind the wheel?"... and I think there is something to that.


No, what I was saying (though I wasn't the person Hugh quoted above) is that if driving a boat at insanely high speeds while drunk is dangerous and stupid, which it is, then it's also dangerous and stupid to be a passenger in a boat driven at insanely high speeds piloted by a drunk (and whether they were drunk or sober is ultimately immaterial). I suppose it's possible that they had no agency in the whole series of events, but that strikes me as unlikely.

Does that absolve Fernandez of any responsibility?* Nope. But his passengers share some culpability in their demise.

* Blame, unlike effort, does not max out at 100 percent. Noting that the passengers had something of a hand in their deaths doesn't mitigate Fernandez's guilt.
   97. Covfefe Posted: March 16, 2017 at 08:03 PM (#5418613)
Fair enough...

I'm just saying that my recollections of such experiences where the inebriation is spread across the victims and victim/perp is that it's never been a matter of the passengers being coerced or dragged into the situation and more a matter of everybody universally agreeing "#### it, I don't want to wait for a cab"... or in a case like this "Open it up!"

Of course, we'll never know precisely how the fatal minutes went down... I'm just saying my very strong suspicion is that no one was saying "Please, Jose, slow down". Doesn't absolve him or his memory in any sense, of course... legally or morally... just saying that such stupidity never tended to be dictatorial or even majority rules in my experience, but rather unanimous assent.
   98. Mr2bits Posted: March 16, 2017 at 08:35 PM (#5418626)
FWIW Florida is a comparative negligence state, so to the extent that the estate could prove that the others knew he was intoxicated, thereby contributing to their own deaths, a jury could proportionally limit their recovery. Fernandez' girlfriend allegedly texted one of the deceased " "He's been drinking and is not in the best state of mind."

Hopefully they realize there are no winners in this conflict and settle out of court.
   99. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: March 16, 2017 at 08:38 PM (#5418629)
No, what I was saying (though I wasn't the person Hugh quoted above) is that if driving a boat at insanely high speeds while drunk is dangerous and stupid, which it is, then it's also dangerous and stupid to be a passenger in a boat driven at insanely high speeds piloted by a drunk (and whether they were drunk or sober is ultimately immaterial). I suppose it's possible that they had no agency in the whole series of events, but that strikes me as unlikely.

Does that absolve Fernandez of any responsibility?* Nope. But his passengers share some culpability in their demise.


Agree 100%. At some point you must take responsibility for your own actions and being a part of total stupidity has it's price sometimes.

The quote I referenced initially clearly stated that the poster thinks the responsibility should be shared equally because they were all drunk. I disagree with that as I see a distinction between driving the boat and "only" being a drunk passenger. The drunk passenger nonetheless, as you stated, must accept some of the blame for their own demise as going 65mph on a boat, at night with a totally wasted guy driving is just plain nuts.

I too had a misspent youth and count my lucky stars how many times my friends and I got lucky and didn't harm anyone else, and like Zonk, you look back and just think, "what an incredibly stupid f*cking thing to do."

It's just sad for all involved but I think it's a bit much when someone is going...SEE, I WAS RIGHT, THEY WERE DRUNK! It's just churlish and there's no place for it.
   100. Covfefe Posted: March 16, 2017 at 09:05 PM (#5418640)
I too had a misspent youth and count my lucky stars how many times my friends and I got lucky and didn't harm anyone else, and like Zonk, you look back and just think, "what an incredibly stupid f*cking thing to do."


Yeah - now being in my 40s, there's certainly no shortage of those words of advice that went in one ear and out the other... "turn the lights off when you leave the room"... "I'm not paying to air condition outside!"... "start contributing to that IRA immediately".... that became more prescient with age and experience... But that's honestly the biggest one I'd pass on. There's no shortage of stupid things to do with far lesser repercussions when you're young and these situations tend to be the sort that are really easiest to pass on/prevent. I never even got in a snake eyes situation, and I also have plenty of stupid and young situations that I would acknowledge as stupid, but I secretly or not-so-secretly treasure nonetheless. The ones that culminated in me/me as a passenger/me as someone who could have said 'gimme your keys' - nothing but regret even though tragedy didn't ensue.

I think a big part of why discussions that involve that such situations go to #### so easily is that it's something that feels so... just wasteful.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Infinite Yost (Voxter)
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 19 June 2017: Bipartisan baseball: Dems best GOP, give trophy to wounded Scalise
(770 - 9:39pm, Jun 22)
Last: Gonfalon Bubble

NewsblogOT - March 2017 NBA thread
(6912 - 9:38pm, Jun 22)
Last: No, TFTIO is the puppet

NewsblogMy OMNI has a second name, it's CHATTER, for June 22, 2017
(39 - 9:24pm, Jun 22)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogYour 2017 MLB local broadcaster rankings
(46 - 9:21pm, Jun 22)
Last: Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams)

NewsblogJarrod Dyson breaks up perfect game with bunt – and Justin Verlander isn’t mad
(27 - 9:17pm, Jun 22)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogRecounting the many ways baseball has changed in 20 years
(12 - 9:06pm, Jun 22)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogKyle Schwarber headed back to Triple-A Iowa
(28 - 9:05pm, Jun 22)
Last: Cargo Cultist

NewsblogOT Gaming: October 2015
(664 - 9:04pm, Jun 22)
Last: 6 - 4 - 3

NewsblogBeyond the Box Score: On the lack of interest in Albert Pujols’s 600 HR and Adrián Beltré’s pursuit of 3,000 hits
(44 - 8:13pm, Jun 22)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogNegro Leagues Baseball Museum receives $1 million gift from MLB, players union
(8 - 8:10pm, Jun 22)
Last: Moeball

NewsblogFreddie Freeman Might Play 3B for Braves After Recovering from Wrist Injury
(85 - 7:08pm, Jun 22)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogThe Mets Are Pissed At Yasiel Puig For Admiring His Homer
(49 - 6:33pm, Jun 22)
Last: Infinite Yost (Voxter)

NewsblogAt Long Last, Video Of One Of The Most Ridiculous And Unforgettable Plays In Nats History (WaPo)
(37 - 6:07pm, Jun 22)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogAthletics Designate Stephen Vogt
(10 - 6:05pm, Jun 22)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogOMNICHATTER looks like a young Burt Reynolds, for June 21, 2017
(49 - 5:28pm, Jun 22)
Last: I am going to be Frank

Page rendered in 0.7270 seconds
47 querie(s) executed