Ravens Quarterback McNair Arrested

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Another one...

--------------------------------------------------------------
Ravens Quarterback McNair Arrested (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/10/AR2007051000843.html)
Associated Press
Thursday, May 10, 2007; 11:20 AM

NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- Baltimore Ravens quarterback Steve McNair was arrested early Thursday and charged with being the owner of a vehicle operated by a drunken driver.

The former Tennessee Titans player was a passenger in his silver pickup truck, police said.

Police said a copy of the arrest report wouldn't be available until later in the day but confirmed McNair was arrested and booked into jail about 3 a.m.

McNair was arrested under a misdemeanor statute that charges the owner if an intoxicated person is allowed to drive a vehicle. Under the law, it doesn't matter if McNair was drinking, only if the driver was impaired, police said.

The driver, whose identity wasn't immediately available, was stopped because the truck was speeding, police said.

"We are aware of the situation, but we're getting most of our information from the media," Ravens spokesman Chad Steele said Thursday. "We've not spoken with Steve, so we're not sure at this time if we will have a statement."

McNair declined to comment when he was released from custody. He was accompanied by a friend, nightclub owner Robert "Big Daddy" Gaddy.

McNair was arrested in downtown Nashville in May 2003 and charged with DUI and illegal gun possession. After a year of legal wrangling, a judge dismissed those charges, ruling police didn't have sufficient reason to pull over McNair in the first place.

[Master___Pain]

Get a ****ing cab!!! Sheesh.

[NaptownChief]

That is a pretty pathetic law. I don't blame McNair in the slightest for this unless the driver was completely wasted and he knew that when giving the guy his keys. I commend him for not driving if he had been drinking too much. If a buddy says I'm in good shape and definitely not over the limit and you let him drive that is silly to be put on the hook if he was wrong. Again a simple case of the person who was in the wrong should be taking full responsibility.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

That is a pretty pathetic law. I don't blame McNair in the slightest for this unless the driver was completely wasted and he knew that when giving the guy his keys. I commend him for not driving if he had been drinking too much. If a buddy says I'm in good shape and definitely not over the limit and you let him drive that is silly to be put on the hook if he was wrong. Again a simple case of the person who was in the wrong should be taking full responsibility.I'm guessing they both were intoxicated (confirmed McNair was arrested and booked into jail about 3 a.m). Pretty simple to me, you call a cab, limo, etc...

McNair declined to comment when he was released from custody. He was accompanied by a friend, nightclub owner Robert "Big Daddy" Gaddy

[Garcia Bronco]

I guess the Ravens will have a suspended QB come this fall...right? What a POS scumbag drunk.

[Man-Goblin]

Meh, at least he wasn't driving, I guess...

[ZONA]

Yeeea ahaaaa ahhha ahha

Hopefully the league will suspend him for half the season. One less team to worry about.

Maybe we should look into this further. Maybe there is a way we can plot some schemes in which to get other players arrested and in trouble. I'm sure we could get Manning, Brady and LT in trouble some how.

[Master___Pain]

I guess the Ravens will have a suspended QB come this fall...right? What a POS scumbag drunk.

Sarcasm duly noted.

[ludo21]

your a freaking MIILIONAIRE!!!!

get cab, call a limo..

idiots!

[Merlin]

That is a pretty pathetic law. I don't blame McNair in the slightest for this unless the driver was completely wasted and he knew that when giving the guy his keys.
There is very good legal reasons for this. He is lending his property, which is potential lethal, to an individual with diminished capacity. You are responsible for ensuring that your property is not lent to someone who can place him or herself as well as others in harms way. If his friend had hit someone, McNair would have been liable in a lawsuit.

[Beantown Bronco]

Maybe there is a way we can plot some schemes in which to get other players arrested and in trouble. I'm sure we could get Manning, Brady and LT in trouble some how.

Rumor has it Goodell is planning to suspend Brady for one season for fathering a baby out of wedlock....

[Master___Pain]

There is very good legal reasons for this. He is lending his property, which is potential lethal, to an individual with diminished capacity. You are responsible for ensuring that your property is not lent to someone who can place him or herself as well as others in harms way. If his friend had hit someone, McNair would have been liable in a lawsuit.

Seems to me it's like lending someone your firearm

[NaptownChief]

There is very good legal reasons for this. He is lending his property, which is potential lethal, to an individual with diminished capacity. You are responsible for ensuring that your property is not lent to someone who can place him or herself as well as others in harms way. If his friend had hit someone, McNair would have been liable in a lawsuit.


I understand that and my point noted that fact...if he knew the guy was blitzed is one thing but if a reasonable prudent human being would have looked at the guy and believed he was ok then there should be a limit to his responsibility. You can't expect him to have a blood lab on hand and draw some blood before handing him the keys. You are responsible for taking reasonable precautions but you can't be all knowing.

[Flex Gunmetal]

Sarcasm duly noted.

+1

[Garcia Bronco]

There is very good legal reasons for this. He is lending his property, which is potential lethal, to an individual with diminished capacity. You are responsible for ensuring that your property is not lent to someone who can place him or herself as well as others in harms way. If his friend had hit someone, McNair would have been liable in a lawsuit.

So it's okay for McNair to lend out his property for illegal purposes, but if Vick does it he has a problem with it. Thanks Merlin.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

So it's okay for McNair to lend out his property for illegal purposes, but if Vick does it he has a problem with it. Thanks Merlin.What is this suppose to mean?

[Flex Gunmetal]

So it's okay for McNair to lend out his property for illegal purposes, but if Vick does it he has a problem with it. Thanks Merlin.

What's possible is he felt that he wasn't in a condition in which he felt confident driving, so he gave his keys to someone who claimed they weren't drunk. I've done it a number of times with people I trust. It's also possible he doesn't cruise around with an operating breathalyzer.

[NaptownChief]

What is this suppose to mean?


He is bitter because he now stands completely alone in his manlove for Ron Mexico.

[Jason in LA]

At first this sounded like a BS law, but really think about it, it's a sound law.

McNair is drunk and he doesn't want to get a DUI. So he gives his boy, who is drunk, the keys and tells him to drive. McNail will let him get the DUI.

If McNair lent him the car and the guy went out and got drunk without McNair's knowledge, then McNair is in the clear. But what he did in this case, that's just not the right thing to do.

[Garcia Bronco]

What's possible is he felt that he wasn't in a condition in which he felt confident driving, so he gave his keys to someone who claimed they weren't drunk. I've done it a number of times with people I trust. It's also possible he doesn't cruise around with an operating breathalyzer.

POssible...but it's still no excuse and this is his second offense.

[Flex Gunmetal]

At first this sounded like a BS law, but really think about it, it's a sound law.

McNair is drunk and he doesn't want to get a DUI. So he gives his boy, who is drunk, the keys and tells him to drive. McNail will let him get the DUI.

If McNair lent him the car and the guy went out and got drunk without McNair's knowledge, then McNair is in the clear. But what he did in this case, that's just not the right thing to do.

yeah, it's a case of intentions. He was most likely just been trying to do the responsible thing. I'm assuming that was the situation based on the fact he is a milllionaire and it would probably be easier to get a limo/cab than set his boy up for a DUI.

[Beantown Bronco]

At first this sounded like a BS law, but really think about it, it's a sound law.

McNair is drunk and he doesn't want to get a DUI. So he gives his boy, who is drunk, the keys and tells him to drive. McNail will let him get the DUI.

If McNair lent him the car and the guy went out and got drunk without McNair's knowledge, then McNair is in the clear. But what he did in this case, that's just not the right thing to do.

What if McNair simply claimed that he handed over the keys to his sober friend, then fell asleep in the passenger seat and that is when the driver decided to start drinking and driving? This is far from a sound law. What is the burden of proof for determining who knew what and when?

[Tredici]

Two drunks deciding which one isn't drunk enough to drive is a dimished capacity dilemma.

But, this law seems to be trying to take away the "he did it too!" defense. Now does that seem fair?

[Flex Gunmetal]

POssible...but it's still no excuse and this is his second offense.

So you think this was an intentional crime? I think it's a perfectly good excuse. In my opinion it's kind of clear cut that he was trying to be responsible by not driving.

[Master___Pain]

What is this suppose to mean?

I think it was intended to :stirstir:

[Malcontent]

A scrub TV commercial lawfirm will blast this outta court quicker than you can say...implied consent.

[Merlin]

What is the burden of proof for determining who knew what and when?
I have not read the law for that state, but the measure quite frequently is the reasonable person (i.e. some fictional entity that meets the standards of reasonableness).

[Merlin]

A scrub TV commercial lawfirm will blast this outta court quicker than you can say...implied consent.
Could you please clarify/elaborate?

[Flex Gunmetal]

A scrub TV commercial lawfirm will blast this outta court quicker than you can say...implied consent.

Indeed. I have never heard of passenger being charged with this in identical situations. I highly doubt this will stick. Maybe the arresting officer wanted to make headlines?

[Garcia Bronco]

He is bitter because he now stands completely alone in his manlove for Ron Mexico.

No...you just have a double standard. You hate on Vick...you need to hate on McNair.

[Garcia Bronco]

So you think this was an intentional crime? I think it's a perfectly good excuse. In my opinion it's kind of clear cut that he was trying to be responsible by not driving.

By handing his keys to another drunk? I do think it was intentional. I don't think he met a friend out that late and didn't know his friend had been drinking. He and his companion has put the public at harm with his actions and I hope he get the full treatment.

[BigPlayShay]

Stupid law to serve him with DUI if he is not the driver. Public Intoxication would make more sense.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

A scrub TV commercial lawfirm will blast this outta court quicker than you can say...implied consent.Why, do you know something about state statute that the police don't?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Stupid law to serve him with DUI if he is not the driver. Public Intoxication would make more sense.Don't people know how to read?

[Flex Gunmetal]

By handing his keys to another drunk? I do think it was intentional. I don't think he met a friend out that late and didn't know his friend had been drinking. He and his companion has put the public at harm with his actions and I hope he get the full treatment.

There are too many details to pass such judgement in my opinion. Who knows, maybe he called his buddy to pick him up and he had been drinking. He could have had 3 beers that night and just passed the legal limit, which may had been difficult for McNair to detect. We don't even know what his BAC was.

[Flex Gunmetal]

Don't people know how to read?

LOL

[Los Broncos]

Mix in a cab once and a while. If more players get arrtested we wont have anyone to play.

[BigPlayShay]

Don't people know how to read?

Ease up D!ckface, I didn't read your original post. I was going off of what the headline on nearly every sports information site insinuates.

Never the less, I like the law and what he was charged with being the owner of a vehicle operated by a drunken driver.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Ease up D!ckface, I didn't read your original post. I was going off of what the headline on nearly every sports information site insinuates.

Never the less, I like the law and what he was charged with being the owner of a vehicle operated by a drunken driver.No sh*t?

[BigPlayShay]

No sh*t?

Yeah, no ****. I hope your feelings aren't hurt ;D .

[Jason in LA]

What if McNair simply claimed that he handed over the keys to his sober friend, then fell asleep in the passenger seat and that is when the driver decided to start drinking and driving? This is far from a sound law. What is the burden of proof for determining who knew what and when?

That's a good point. In theory, it's a sound law. It's just trying to prove it. Sounds like McNair has a lot of wiggle room to get out of it. He could say that he did not know that his boy was drunk, so he thought it was safe for him to drive home. That may be true. I'm sure it happens a lot that the guy who seems the most sober ends up driving home.

If the DA can prove that McNair knew his boy was drunk, then McNair should be charged. But if the DA can't prove that, then McNair should walk.

[Atwater His Ass]

At first this sounded like a BS law, but really think about it, it's a sound law.

McNair is drunk and he doesn't want to get a DUI. So he gives his boy, who is drunk, the keys and tells him to drive. McNail will let him get the DUI.

If McNair lent him the car and the guy went out and got drunk without McNair's knowledge, then McNair is in the clear. But what he did in this case, that's just not the right thing to do.

As read in the article, the law does not make an exception as to wether or not McNair lent him the car and was or was not present.

Seems McNair is still liable wether he is there or not if it is his car that is being driven.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

That's a good point. In theory, it's a sound law. It's just trying to prove it. Sounds like McNair has a lot of wiggle room to get out of it. He could say that he did not know that his boy was drunk, so he thought it was safe for him to drive home. That may be true. I'm sure it happens a lot that the guy who seems the most sober ends up driving home.

If the DA can prove that McNair knew his boy was drunk, then McNair should be charged. But if the DA can't prove that, then McNair should walk.The fact that McNair allowed his friend to break the law (speeding) with his vehicle shows either he didn't care and/or was intoxicated or was kidnapped. I wonder which one?

[Atwater His Ass]

No...you just have a double standard. You hate on Vick...you need to hate on McNair.

You're really stupid if you can't the difference in these two cases. Really.

[Jason in LA]

Mix in a cab once and a while. If more players get arrtested we wont have anyone to play.

That's like saying if any more people get arrested we won't have we won't have anybody walking the streets, seeing that the arrest rate for the general public is higher than the NFL's rate of arrests. ;D

[Flex Gunmetal]

As read in the article, the law does not make an exception as to wether or not McNair lent him the car and was or was not present.

Seems McNair is still liable wether he is there or not if it is his car that is being driven.

Yes, he is liable so in turn gets charged, however the charge won't stick.

[Garcia Bronco]

There are too many details to pass such judgement in my opinion. Who knows, maybe he called his buddy to pick him up and he had been drinking. He could have had 3 beers that night and just passed the legal limit, which may had been difficult for McNair to detect. We don't even know what his BAC was.

Could be...but I think they were probably out together.

[Garcia Bronco]

You're really stupid if you can't the difference in these two cases. Really.

You shouldn't call people stupid. It's not very nice. Further more..I am not talking about where the cases are different..I am talking about where the cases are the same.

[Jason in LA]

As read in the article, the law does not make an exception as to wether or not McNair lent him the car and was or was not present.

Seems McNair is still liable wether he is there or not if it is his car that is being driven.


If the law does not make exceptions, then I have a problem with that. If McNair knew the guy was drunk and let him drive the car, then I'm with the law. But if he didn't know, then I have a problem with that. And I would really have a problem with a case of a guy lending his car to a friend, the friend goes out and gets drunk, and the owner being on the hook. I'd have to call BS on that one.

[Flex Gunmetal]

Could be...but I think they were probably out together.

Ya, I'm just playing the devil's advocate. Either way I in no way condone drunk driving.

[Jason in LA]

The fact that McNair allowed his friend to break the law (speeding) with his vehicle shows either he didn't care and/or was intoxicated or was kidnapped. I wonder which one?

Based on the infomation given, it sounds like McNair was in the wrong. But if there are reasonable exceptions to this law, he'll have some wiggle room. It is not far fetched for a person who had five drinks to allow a person who only had two drinks to be the driver. The thinking is that the guy with two drinks is good to drive. But what if he just hits the legal limit?

I guess people need to drive around with breathalyzer tests. There have been times where I had some drinks, waited a very long time, felt perfectly fine, and drove home without a single problem. But as I was driving I was hoping that I wouldn't be pulled over. I've never taken one of those tests and would have no clue what my blood alcohol level would be.

[Garcia Bronco]

Ya, I'm just playing the devil's advocate. Either way I in no way condone drunk driving.

I agree that regardless of what happened the charges won't stick.

[Atwater His Ass]

If the law does not make exceptions, then I have a problem with that. If McNair knew the guy was drunk and let him drive the car, then I'm with the law. But if he didn't know, then I have a problem with that. And I would really have a problem with a case of a guy lending his car to a friend, the friend goes out and gets drunk, and the owner being on the hook. I'd have to call BS on that one.

What about letting your drunk friend drive his own car home? How is that any different? Should it be illegal?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Based on the infomation given, it sounds like McNair was in the wrong. But if there are reasonable exceptions to this law, he'll have some wiggle room. It is not far fetched for a person who had five drinks to allow a person who only had two drinks to be the driver. The thinking is that the guy with two drinks is good to drive. But what if he just hits the legal limit?

I guess people need to drive around with breathalyzer tests. There have been times where I had some drinks, waited a very long time, felt perfectly fine, and drove home without a single problem. But as I was driving I was hoping that I wouldn't be pulled over. I've never taken one of those tests and would have no clue what my blood alcohol level would be.Or get hit by another vehicle and have to submit an accident report (hoping the officer doesn't spot you've been drinking).

I'm thinking with the new sheriff in town (Goodell) and if I'm making millions, I'm going to have a personal driver and or ride, especially after hanging out at nightclubs until 3 in the morning.

[Jason in LA]

I just looked for breathalyzer tests, and found a site selling them from $70-$100. It looks like a wise investment, and would probably stop a lot of DUIs from happening.

http://www.breathalyzer.net/index.html

[bendog]

what an idiot. He's had dui's before I think.

[broncocalijohn]

That is a pretty pathetic law. I don't blame McNair in the slightest for this unless the driver was completely wasted and he knew that when giving the guy his keys. I commend him for not driving if he had been drinking too much. If a buddy says I'm in good shape and definitely not over the limit and you let him drive that is silly to be put on the hook if he was wrong. Again a simple case of the person who was in the wrong should be taking full responsibility.

Come on. Why would you allow someone to drive your car unless you were more drunk than the driver or you let the buddy take the rap if they are pulled over. I think Cincy just found their new QB to take over for clean cut Palmer.

[Atwater His Ass]

I just looked for breathalyzer tests, and found a site selling them from $70-$100. It looks like a wise investment, and would probably stop a lot of DUIs from happening.

http://www.breathalyzer.net/index.html

They aren't very accurate and would only serve as guide. DUI lawyers will advise you to take the blow test in the field and not at the station because they are the least accurate and can be successfully brought to question and thrown out in court easier than any other BAC test.

IMO, speaking from DUI experience, if you are planning to have more than 2-3 drinks over 2-3 hours, just plan an alternate way to get home. If you think you need to take a quick breathalyzer to see if you are ok to drive home, you aren't.

[Garcia Bronco]

what an idiot. He's had dui's before I think.

In 03....but it was dismissed..saying that the Police didn't have cause to pull him over in the first place.

[Jay6Cutler]

all the guy had to say was (i dont fell comfrable driving) thats it. As a person that servered my country and have seen a hell of alot of war time. more then most nam vet it sickeds me seening peoples rights getting stomp on. its not why i served our great country. wheres the checks a balence systems at. steve Mcnair was being resposible because he didnt drive.

[bendog]

Unless, he didn't know the other guy had had more than two drinks in 3 hours, he's an absolute tool. He got picked up for dui and had a revolverin his car illegally. He's actually a decent guy, who helps the community. He's stupid cause he caught a break before, and may not have learned a damn thing. But, I guess there's a small possibility he didn't know the other guy had been drinking. He'll skate on this one too, prolly

[Garcia Bronco]

all the guy had to say was (i dont fell comfrable driving) thats it. As a person that servered my country and have seen a hell of alot of war time. more then most nam vet it sickeds me seening peoples rights getting stomp on. its not why i served our great country. wheres the checks a balence systems at. steve Mcnair was being resposible because he didnt drive.

All well and good...but the Driver he handed his keys too was drunk...that's not being responsible.

[Beantown Bronco]

All well and good...but the Driver he handed his keys too was drunk...that's not being responsible.

He could've been sober when McNair handed the keys over to him....you don't know.

[Paladin]

I would hope that the news reports to come will clarify a bit more on the circumstances and the facts of the law before all of the "Legal Aid Wannabees" hereon create a greater comedy than what we have already seen here. No one knows more than what was in the OP. Seems like that's a bit limited in information upon which to make a lot of judgments at this time.

[azbroncfan]

No...you just have a double standard. You hate on Vick...you need to hate on McNair.
Vick and the younger Vick are both POS menace to society types that would be slinging crack if it wasn't for football. The younger one could be doing that now. McNair wasn't driving and I didn't read the article and maybe it said, but what did the guy blow? Was he completely smashed or slighty intoxicated? McNair will be able to say he was too intoxicated to tell if his friend was but smart enough to know he shouldn't drive. He was at least smart enough to not get behind the wheel.

[Paladin]

Vick the Younger was released by teh Phins yesterday.....

Can Vick teh Older be far behind........?

They can probably get a licnese to operate a boarding kennel for dogs in ....

Oh, wait.....

[Garcia Bronco]

He could've been sober when McNair handed the keys over to him....you don't know.

No...we don't know, but at three in the morning? Come on beantown it's highly probable that they were both drinking together. You were all hip to smash Vick...you gotta be ready to smash McNair. He's a repeat offender in this regard.

[Atwater His Ass]

McNair will be able to say he was too intoxicated to tell if his friend was but smart enough to know he shouldn't drive. He was at least smart enough to not get behind the wheel.

That wouldn't and shouldn't be an allowable defense. The fact is, a drunk person was operating the vechile. I applaud McNair for not driving, but allowing his friend to drive drunk isn't any better than if he was driving himself. They should both be held accountable for their actions. Either one could have easily decided to get a ride or cab instead.

[Atwater His Ass]

No...we don't know, but at three in the morning? Come on beantown it's highly probable that they were both drinking together. You were all hip to smash Vick...you gotta be ready to smash McNair. He's a repeat offender in this regard.

He was never convicted on his previous charges, so no, he's not a repeat offender.

[Garcia Bronco]

Vick and the younger Vick are both POS menace to society types that would be slinging crack if it wasn't for football. The younger one could be doing that now. McNair wasn't driving and I didn't read the article and maybe it said, but what did the guy blow? Was he completely smashed or slighty intoxicated? McNair will be able to say he was too intoxicated to tell if his friend was but smart enough to know he shouldn't drive. He was at least smart enough to not get behind the wheel.

McNair wasn't driving, but he did give over control of his property to someone that commited a crime. regardless...it's Tennessee law. McNair should draw the same kind of scrutiny because they could have killed human beings

We don't know all the facts...but when has that ever stopped a good flaming of an NFL player. Bottom line...McNair was drunk in the car with a driver of his that was drunk in violation of state law...ergo he's guilty and he's been caught drving drunk before. What if they wrapped the car around a tree and killed themselves...or worse...killed somone else? That's what can happen when impaired motorists take to the streets regardless of time-of-day.

[Garcia Bronco]

He was never convicted on his previous charges, so no, he's not a repeat offender.

Despite that fact that his lawyer was able to shirk probable cause...it does not change the fact that he was operating a vehicle while impaired.

[Swedish Extrovert]

Another one...

--------------------------------------------------------------
Ravens Quarterback McNair Arrested (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/10/AR2007051000843.html)
Associated Press
Thursday, May 10, 2007; 11:20 AM

NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- Baltimore Ravens quarterback Steve McNair was arrested early Thursday and charged with being the owner of a vehicle operated by a drunken driver.

The former Tennessee Titans player was a passenger in his silver pickup truck, police said.

Police said a copy of the arrest report wouldn't be available until later in the day but confirmed McNair was arrested and booked into jail about 3 a.m.

McNair was arrested under a misdemeanor statute that charges the owner if an intoxicated person is allowed to drive a vehicle. Under the law, it doesn't matter if McNair was drinking, only if the driver was impaired, police said.

The driver, whose identity wasn't immediately available, was stopped because the truck was speeding, police said.

"We are aware of the situation, but we're getting most of our information from the media," Ravens spokesman Chad Steele said Thursday. "We've not spoken with Steve, so we're not sure at this time if we will have a statement."

McNair declined to comment when he was released from custody. He was accompanied by a friend, nightclub owner Robert "Big Daddy" Gaddy.

McNair was arrested in downtown Nashville in May 2003 and charged with DUI and illegal gun possession. After a year of legal wrangling, a judge dismissed those charges, ruling police didn't have sufficient reason to pull over McNair in the first place.

I think it's something about the air in Baltimore... its just criminal. I lived there for a while, and believe me, its not just the Ravens ending up in jail.

[Garcia Bronco]

I think it's something about the air in Baltimore... its just criminal. I lived there for a while, and believe me, its not just the Ravens ending up in jail.

He was in Tennessee

[broncocalijohn]

He could've been sober when McNair handed the keys over to him....you don't know.


I heard he was sober when he handed the keys to him. It was right before he opened the door, he gave the keys to the sober friend. They proceeded to down a sixer while driving home. Truth be told as I heard it on the light rail around 16th street.

[Swedish Extrovert]

He was in Tennessee

Yeah but I figure having to live in Baltimore...

[Garcia Bronco]

I heard he was sober when he handed the keys to him. It was right before he opened the door, he gave the keys to the sober friend. They proceeded to down a sixer while driving home. Truth be told as I heard it on the light rail around 16th street.

I guess the was sober because the light rail is airtight confirmation

[TomServo]

this statute is on the books in most states but is rarely if ever used.
his notorirety prolly got him the ticket but his moeny will easily get him off.