Shoutbox

Refresh History
  • littlebit: Makes sense.
    July 16, 2017, 04:40:28 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Boards will stay open for a place people can find history information longer. I am not allowing anyone to sign up for now because of so many foreginers just wanting to promote their business..
    December 10, 2016, 05:10:27 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Not sure why didn't look, I may be shutting down these message boards..
    November 17, 2016, 12:42:43 AM
  • ~kathy~: rick why is the timestamp showing up a day in advance?
    September 13, 2016, 12:27:46 AM
  • Valor7: What I tried to say is that the actual money would not be there that quick. But a loan against that would work if they are willing to do that.
    August 08, 2016, 01:51:51 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Why so long before it comes online? 911 took out a loan or bond with the known guarantee payment and began building..
    August 08, 2016, 07:46:34 AM
  • Valor7: Actually no it is not, a dependable Revenue stream will not come on line until the 4th quarter of 2017 so 2018 budget will be up in the air, not quite sure what they will have. By 2019 budget all will be well.
    August 04, 2016, 09:27:17 PM
  • Valor7: You mean that tax that the Commissioners would not put on the ballot for so many years? Strange things happened when the citizens got a chance to vote on that issue.
    August 03, 2016, 06:43:06 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Back up is now available withe the new tax..
    August 03, 2016, 05:01:35 PM
  • Valor7: Thanks a lot Ladies!!
    July 29, 2016, 01:16:13 PM
  • littlebit: ((*(*&
    July 27, 2016, 03:47:52 PM
  • ~kathy~: lol
    July 15, 2016, 09:34:56 AM
  • Valor7: A guy could get killed around here while waiting for backup!
    July 13, 2016, 07:31:58 PM
  • Lepard LLC: You are not alone..
    July 13, 2016, 07:28:53 PM
  • Valor7: I just hate it when I talk to myself!!!!
    July 08, 2016, 12:54:09 PM
  • Valor7: I could have worded that better, we talked details, options, the pros and cons of each, in  order to arrive at the best ballot language to present to the voters. Hope that makes this clearer.
    April 15, 2016, 06:36:14 PM
  • Valor7: sorry about the typos still working with just one arm in action
    April 13, 2016, 01:10:42 PM
  • Valor7: Yes and no. We talked details and options until we were blue in the face but I never heardbring it over, it was always the time was not right for the issue to pass. Glad to see the time in now right and I for one shall vote yes on the ballot. I would urge all others to do the sameour county is busting at the seams crimewise and no matter how many bad guys we send off there always seems to someone to replace them. The Sheriff's Office needs the help.
    April 13, 2016, 01:08:35 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Is that true Valor? Did he ask you what you wanted?
    March 01, 2016, 04:55:37 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Gene Newkirk Rick I have waited for a Sheriff to bring it to me on what he wanted. I have pushed Mr long for a while to get it to me. He told me he was close to having or done. Now hopefully the people will get to decide on it. I spoke with Steve about this a few times.
    March 01, 2016, 04:54:54 AM
  • Kimberly: Wow- I have a new name..........
    February 23, 2016, 10:25:15 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Works on mine, improvements are being done here. I may kick back into her a lot and post but working on different technologies right now. Seeing how things interact.
    January 18, 2016, 09:01:20 AM
  • Valor7: Yes it is working. If you need a laugh the wife showed me how to correctly use the silly thing.
    January 04, 2016, 05:32:59 PM
  • Valor7: Think so, mine is trying to work but it is now user and password protected and I dont know mine
    December 17, 2015, 01:32:16 PM
  • "DJ": Is there still a working android app for the PCSD
    December 14, 2015, 08:14:53 PM

Author Topic: No Charges Against Restaurant that Served Hancock  (Read 944 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Eeyore

  • "Never leave your partner behind"
  • Administrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 10107
  • Karma: +2940215/-0
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
No Charges Against Restaurant that Served Hancock
« on: June 01, 2007, 06:27:48 PM »

Share/Bookmark

Fort Wood Hotel

Boards

Devils Elbow

Attractions

Sports

St. Robert

Waynesville

PC Daily

Dixon

Menu Guide

Fun Links

Homework

Crocker

Fort Wood

Swedeborg

Big Piney

Laquey

Classifieds

Restaurants

Richland

Fort  Hotels

http://www.ozarksfirst.com/content/fulltext/?cid=8004
No Charges Against Restaurant that Served Hancock

Friday, Jun 1, 2007 @08:31am


(St. Louis, MO) -- An investigation into the drunk driving death of St. Louis Cardinals' pitcher Josh Hancock finds no wrongdoing on the part of Mike Shannon's Restaurant.

The superintendent of the Missouri Division of Alcohol and Tobacco Control made that announcement Thursday afternoon.

Pete Lobdell says there is no credible evidence at this time showing the restaurant or any of its employees were at fault for serving alcohol to someone who was visibly intoxicated.

 "Our special investigation has found that there is no credible evidence that Mike Shannon's restaurant is at fault for serving an intoxicated person. We will not take any administrative action against the restaurant license. Although, I am saddened by this tragic event, I hope it will serve as a reminder to all Missourians of the dangers of drinking and driving."

Lobdell says Shannon's Restaurant and thousands more around Missouri, have been trained to recognize the signs of intoxication in customers.

"In the server training, we explain the law to them that here's how you recognize a person that is intoxicated: they're slurring their words, they're unsteady on their feet, they have a loss of motor skills and that they have a strong odor of alcohol on their breath. No one has come forward to state that Mr. Hancock was exhibiting those visible signs of intoxication. And in this particular case, Pat Shannon showed good faith by offering Mr. Hancock to call for a taxi."

Tests show Hancock's blood alcohol level was .175 when he was killed in the early hours of April 29. That's almost twice the legal limit in Missouri.

Hancock's family has filed suit in connection with the fatal accident.

Shannon's Restaurant and the restaurant manager were among the defendants named.

Lobdell says no action will be taken against the restaurant.

    "Hey, hey, hey, hey now.  Don't be mean.  We don't have to be mean. because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are."      - The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai across The Eighth Dimension

Offline Coyote

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7335
  • Karma: +1304173/-9201
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: No Charges Against Restaurant that Served Hancock
« Reply #1 on: June 01, 2007, 06:58:19 PM »
I did hear some customers state on the news and on the record that he was visibly intoxicated (staggering and slurring his speech) when he was at the bar and when he left and it sounds to me like there might have been a little bit of under the table palm greasing if you get my drift.  I've never really thought a bar should be held liable for what a person does on their own...however there is a law and if he wasn't showing those signs of intoxication, why did they offer him a cab?
....and that night as the moon crossed the mountain, one more Coyote was heard...

Offline tpgunbiz

  • B.M.F.
  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2455
  • Karma: +687862/-35
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: No Charges Against Restaurant that Served Hancock
« Reply #2 on: June 01, 2007, 08:56:49 PM »
I don't believe a bar or restaurant should be held responsible for a persons actions. Maybe this guy should have taken the cab he was offered and hed still be alive.
Biscuit

Offline hancock

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 381
  • Karma: +57318/-3
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: No Charges Against Restaurant that Served Hancock
« Reply #3 on: June 01, 2007, 11:38:24 PM »
I agree, he was a grown man and nobody was forcing drinks on him.  And I can't believe that his family is suing the tow truck driver and driver of the car the tow truck was helping.  The guy was drunk, speeding and talking on the phone and they are suing the people that he hit? 
An Army mom doesn't cry.........in front of her soldier