Use the form at the right to log in for more options.
P R O C E E D I N G S
(10:05 a.m.)
JUDGE MORRIS: We'll hear argument first this morning in case 06-85, Hancock Family versus Mike Shannon's Steaks and Seafood, Et al.
ORAL ARGUMENT OF KEITH KANTACK, ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER MR. DEAN HANCOCK AND FAMILY: Thank you, Your Honor, and may it please the Court.
You probably find the idea of taking advantage of the Court in order to gain financially from the death of a loved one despicable, and I agree with you. However, I assure you that is not what this case is about. This case is about responsibility. This case is about the people who, ultimately, had the power to prevent this horrible tragedy. This case is about finding the real reasons why former St. Louis Cardinals pitcher Josh Hancock is under a mound instead of on top of one.
At first look, the man with double the legal limit of alcohol in his blood, marijuana in his car, a cell phone on his ear, speeding down the road as his seat belt hung slack beside him as he smashed into a stationary flat-bed tow truck would appear to be responsible for his own death, but looks can be deceiving. As we recount the timeline and the circumstances of this case, you will see that not only was Mr. Hancock not responsible for his death, he was in fact the victim.
First of all, we have to look at the bartender at Mike Shannon's Steaks and Seafood where Mr. Hancock was drinking prior to the accident. Is it not in fact the responsibility of an alcohol merchant to know that his customer may need to stay sober enough to drive to the strip clubs? How could Mr. Hancock, who was admittedly intoxicated, be expected to make the correct decisions for himself? When a young bartender making five-dollars an hour is unwilling to physically restrain a drunken professional athlete, does he not then assume responsibility for all actions of that professional athlete? I assert that he does.
Exhibit A: Not bright enough.
Mike Shannon, former Major League player and owner of the restaurant, and his daughter, Patricia Shannon Van Matre, are keenly aware Mr. Hancock's proclivity for both drunken driving and drunken dialing. Wasn't it their responsibility to make sure Mr. Hancock hollered at his booty-call before he left the bar? How is one man supposed to simultaneously talk on a phone, hit the pipe, and drive at 70 miles per hour? This man only had two hands. You have to light the pipe while holding the phone in-between your chin and shoulder, then use one leg to steer and the other to accelerate. Even a highly trained professional athlete, like Josh Hancock, could not be expected achieve this feat, and he was a World Series Champion.
And that is to say nothing of careless man whose car broke down on the road that night, Justin Tolar. If this man, who is probably a Cubs fan, had checked his fluids, Mr. Hancock would still be playing professional baseball. But he didn't check his fluids. The man had the nerve to breakdown on the same road a professional athlete in the midst of a bender that rivaled those of the late Darrell Porter, would later take.
And what about the tow truck driver, Jacob Edward Hargrove, who came to the aid our careless motorist? He claimed that if he would've remembered that the Cardinals were in town, he might have moved the vehicle from the road. But claiming ignorance is no defense. It's not as if this is the first time Josh Hancock was drunk driving after a ballgame. Or for that matter, the first accident he was in that week. The responsible citizens of St. Louis have learned the hard way to drive quickly home after games because as the saying goes, "if the bullets don't hit you, the Redbirds will."
The Cardinals organization deserves to shoulder some of the blame for this tragic event as well. Does anyone think that allowing professional athletes to drink alcohol after a game is a good idea? Doesn't the team have a responsibility to baby-sit the players? Just because the vast majority is able to act like grown-ups doesn't absolve them. The team has the responsibility to make certain the minority, however small, doesn't do something idiotic. After all, these players have been coddled since grade school. They can't just be expected to take care of themselves as adults.
Major League Baseball also shares some of the blame. They have a lot of money and since they didn't spend any of it to prevent this tragedy, they should have to give it to Mr. Hancock's family.
Terry Rennerson, Mr. Hancock's best friend in junior high school, gave Josh his first beer when the two boys were in the woods during Spring Break in 1990. Had it not been for that introduction, it is possible that Josh would not have developed a taste for the sauce.
Mr. Young, Josh's high school driving instructor, was also negligent. His failure to teach Josh how to operate a vehicle while intoxicated certainly contributed to his death. The omission of any mandatory coursework or instruction in regards to drunken driving was also a factor, which is why we think that the Mississippi School Board should be held responsible.
Let's not forget about the Ford Motor Company's failure to put a warning on their vehicle that makes clear the dangers of drunk driving, or for driving into parked tow trucks. Would it kill them to put a Breathalyzer in their vehicles as standard equipment? It killed Josh Hancock. I assert that Ford did not make a reasonable effort to protect its customers from driving drunk into stationary tow trucks.
The General Motors Corporation, makers of the tow truck involved in the accident, should also compensate Mr. Hancock's family. They made no effort to design the rear of their tow trucks to cushion the impact of oncoming drunken drivers. They had to know this was a possibility when they sent their death traps out on the road.
Finally, the estate of Sir Isaac Newton should also be forced to compensate Mr. Hancock's family, as it was Sir Newton who created the laws of motion that defined the actions of the vehicles involved in the crash the led to Mr. Hancock's death.
The facts and circumstances leading to Josh Hancock's death have caused great pain and suffering to the plaintiffs, Josh's family. And since Josh loved his family and would never purposely cause them pain and suffering, we must conclude that other people are responsible for that pain and suffering, and those people should pay Josh's family.
Exhibit B: Josh's hero, a real partier.
We are not specifying the dollar amounts at this time. It is our hope that the bad public relations from the trial will force settlements from the people and company's named, and we don't want to undercut our windfall by stating numbers that may be smaller than the litigants are willing to pay. Thank you.
JUDGE MORRIS: Thank you, counsel. The case is submitted.
(Whereupon, at 11:04 a.m., the case in the above entitled matter was submitted.)
Posts: 1476 Rank: 17 Joined:
12/7/2006
Location:
savannah, GA
Posted: 5/29/2007 2:41:25 PM
i just saw this guy on the news the other day, they were showing some of his career highlites. i figured he was going to be the next to do a segment for "outside the lines" after that so i turned it off. did he really smoke out?
Use the form at the right to log in for more options.
