Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I can see him addressing it in his column. What I can't see is how he used his column to do a rendition of the events. That needs to be saved for his day in court.
What really bothered me was his continuous mentions of how much food he ate. I could see through that and I'm sure many others knew what he was trying to equate. Tons of food absorbing alcohol.
Ironically for me, the night before reading his column, the Cajun and I had dinner at Kona Grill. C. had a margarita with his sushi and shrimp. A highly iced down one at that. Who drove home? Me. The one who drank a Coke with dinner. It's a no brainer.
I'm not crucifying him, but he opened himself up to the posts in this thread by printing his blow-by-blow in the paper. All he had to do was state that he was arrested, he will go to court, and shoo the elephant out of the room.
Is this a private blog, for about three of you to rant????? Some really questionable comments in here, with apparently, some kind of agenda. The guy's a newspaper columnist - of COURSE he's gonna use his column to explain his side. Who has time to type so much in here?
and Why of course? You work at a gas station you get free gas? HEB free food, so you work at a newspaper, free commentary? I don't think so. He has the time to put his agenda in the public's eye, and on the public's street. I pay for the newspaper I read, and I pay city taxes for the streets he's driving on, and for the police officer that stopped him, for the DA that will prosecute him, (maybe) He is a public figure, minor one, but still. To gratuitously use this manner of self deprecation, about his health and the physical tests, puhhhhleasssssse! The SA EN should can his A$$ until he is cleared of all charges, especially if he has a previous case, albeit 23 years ago. His choice to put it in the paper, the first notice was just news, small blurb about a reporter got arrested on DWI charges. He could have let that go until court date. HE CHOSE NOT TO>
You continue to insist that Guerra was "drunk" when he was pulled over, without any evidence to support that fact. And I'm sorry, but the fact that he's a writer that you happen to dislike doesn't count as "evidence" of his guilt in this matter. And your "training" as a clairvoyant nurse to accurately gauge his alcohol intake doesn't count, either (although that's quite an impressive skill-set).
Being arrested doesn't equate to guilt. And drinking wine with dinner doesn't neccessarily mean he was "drunk".
Maybe his BAL was over the legal limit. Maybe he was "drunk". Maybe he was disrespectful to the arresting officer. The point is that YOU DON'T KNOW!!!!!! Don't you believe it's important to know the facts of a matter before developing an opinion?
As long as you continue to insist that he's guilty ("drunk"), I'm going to continue to point out that you're making an uninformed, ignorant, factless claim supported not by facts or evidence, but by your personal distaste for Guerra.
True, but the converse is also true! You are defending him, but you have no evidence to prove that he wasn’t any of those things that he’s been accused of doing. I know the premise for our judicial system is “innocent until proven guilty,” but people do not get arrested without some evidence that they broke the law! Pot, meet kettle!
And I see his article as more than his side of the story, I see it for what he really intended it to be…propaganda to convince a potential jury pool of his innocence. And the simple fact that the arresting officer is not given the equal opportunity to give his side of the story (most likely because he is not allowed to) makes it stink even more. The condescending nature in which that article was written would lead me to believe this guy is guilty. He goes too far out of his way to point out facts concerning his innocence, but if two people shared a bottle of wine evenly and then one got behind the wheel of a car, that person is either intoxicated or at least impaired.
I am 100% for the police taking everyone who drinks and drives off the road. I can guarantee you that the simple smell of intoxicants wasn’t cause for his arrest, and defend his situation all he wants, he was treated no differently than any other criminal who drinks and drives.
And, regardless of why he was pulled over (the computer error listing the car as stolen), it does not negate the fact that he was breaking another law. Had there been a dead body in the car and he was covered in blood, do you think the police should have let him go then? No.
I have no predetermined opinion of this guy as I have never read any of his work before this one article. But based on it I am free to make my own assumption that he is an arrogant cuss and most likely guilty of what he has been charged. I hope the police car involved had a video camera in it and if so, the local news outlets show it on every channel. And with a prior conviction for his second offense that he gets the maximum penalty allowed by law: up to a $4,000 fine, 30 days to 1 year in jail, and driver’s license suspension of between 180 days to 2 years!
True, but the converse is also true! You are defending him, but you have no evidence to prove that he wasn’t any of those things that he’s been accused of doing. I know the premise for our judicial system is “innocent until proven guilty,” but people do not get arrested without some evidence that they broke the law! Pot, meet kettle!
And I see his article as more than his side of the story, I see it for what he really intended it to be…propaganda to convince a potential jury pool of his innocence. And the simple fact that the arresting officer is not given the equal opportunity to give his side of the story (most likely because he is not allowed to) makes it stink even more. The condescending nature in which that article was written would lead me to believe this guy is guilty. He goes too far out of his way to point out facts concerning his innocence, but if two people shared a bottle of wine evenly and then one got behind the wheel of a car, that person is either intoxicated or at least impaired.
I am 100% for the police taking everyone who drinks and drives off the road. I can guarantee you that the simple smell of intoxicants wasn’t cause for his arrest, and defend his situation all he wants, he was treated no differently than any other criminal who drinks and drives.
And, regardless of why he was pulled over (the computer error listing the car as stolen), it does not negate the fact that he was breaking another law. Had there been a dead body in the car and he was covered in blood, do you think the police should have let him go then? No.
I have no predetermined opinion of this guy as I have never read any of his work before this one article. But based on it I am free to make my own assumption that he is an arrogant cuss and most likely guilty of what he has been charged. I hope the police car involved had a video camera in it and if so, the local news outlets show it on every channel. And with a prior conviction for his second offense that he gets the maximum penalty allowed by law: up to a $4,000 fine, 30 days to 1 year in jail, and driver’s license suspension of between 180 days to 2 years!
Cheers! M2
Amazing, and quite sad. The bizarre and twisted logic on display here reflects poorly on this board (and San Antonio). I think that statements like "people do not get arrested without some evidence that they broke the law!" really speak for themselves. That sort of idea, aside from being wildly incorrect, is disgusting.
First, it seems that to the overwhelming majority of posters on this thread, "intelligence" is the same as "arrogance". I'm not sure you can explain the hatred and venom toward Mr. Guerra any other way. I'm just grateful that the lynch-mob posters here have no authority in our legal system.
Second, the "converse" is not true. BEING ARRESTED FOR A CRIME DOES NOT EQUATE TO GUILT. Why is that so difficult to understand? And I'm not "defending" the guy. Hell, maybe he was drunk, and maybe he'll be convicted of this charge.
But the indisputable fact is that, right now, NO ONE KNOWS!!!!!!! I'm not professing his innocence. I am defending him from being slandered on this board, and being judged by the psuedo-facist strain of logic that demands that a person accused of a crime "prove" that they're "not guilty".
Face it: people like you who are rendering judgement without knowing all the facts, and that's counter the the American idea of (at the risk of sounding cliche) liberty and justice.
Last, the fact that you're "100% for the police taking everyone who drinks and drives off the road" is (thankfully) your opinion, and not the law. And even if you believe "the condescending nature in which that article was written would lead me to believe this guy is guilty", (thankfully) that's not enough to convict someone of a crime.
Amazing, and quite sad. The bizarre and twisted logic on display here reflects poorly on this board (and San Antonio). I think that statements like "people do not get arrested without some evidence that they broke the law!" really speak for themselves. That sort of idea, aside from being wildly incorrect, is disgusting.
First, it seems that to the overwhelming majority of posters on this thread, "intelligence" is the same as "arrogance". I'm not sure you can explain the hatred and venom toward Mr. Guerra any other way. I'm just grateful that the lynch-mob posters here have no authority in our legal system.
Second, the "converse" is not true. BEING ARRESTED FOR A CRIME DOES NOT EQUATE TO GUILT. Why is that so difficult to understand? And I'm not "defending" the guy. Hell, maybe he was drunk, and maybe he'll be convicted of this charge.
But the indisputable fact is that, right now, NO ONE KNOWS!!!!!!! I'm not professing his innocence. I am defending him from being slandered on this board, and being judged by the psuedo-facist strain of logic that demands that a person accused of a crime "prove" that they're "not guilty".
Face it: people like you who are rendering judgement without knowing all the facts, and that's counter the the American idea of (at the risk of sounding cliche) liberty and justice.
Last, the fact that you're "100% for the police taking everyone who drinks and drives off the road" is (thankfully) your opinion, and not the law. And even if you believe "the condescending nature in which that article was written would lead me to believe this guy is guilty", (thankfully) that's not enough to convict someone of a crime.
Funny, I get the same feeling about your posts. You seem to be the only one who feels that way (and it is just your opinion, inasmuch as you like to act like you are right and everyone else is wrong).
For one, I never said being arrested meant automatically that someone was guilty; but even you should understand that an arrest only occurs when there is evidence that a crime has been committed. Yes, a person has the right to a trail; but you are acting like the police just arrested him for being a journalist. He was arrested because he was suspected of breaking the law, something you can't avoid no matter how much you love the guy.
Secondly, the majority of people are expressing their opinion based on the arrogant article this piece of work published. They have every right to make their own assessment based on the words he wrote. That is not arrogance, that is called a Constitutional right. And I seem to also notice that you have no problems slandering people by saying they are using bizarre and twisted logic based on what they right on this forum. So you can judge others, but no one can judge your or Guerra? Now you know where the elitist opinion originates from!
And please don't lecture me on the American idea of liberty and justice, as I spent nearly a quarter of a century in uniform defending those ideals, as well as your freedom of speech. But my sacrifices don’t mean I have to accept whatever hogwash emits itself from your keyboard.
Lastly, I am appalled that anyone would condone any drinking and driving; but perhaps you are just proving your ignorance on the huge problem that it is in this town. I just hope you or anyone you care for is the victim of a drunk driver, as I am sure your opinion would change if you had to experience it firsthand.
And, just to make sure you are clear on where I stand, I will leave it to a jury of Guerra’s peers to determine his guilt or innocence of the charges that have been filed against him; but I have every right in the world to believe he is an arrogant cuss simply from the one article I read. The only positive thing to come from all of this is that I now know better not to pollute my mind with any of his (or your) drivel again!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
