• Welcome to America's Finest Sports Forum and Podcast!

    afsportsforum.com is one of the largest online communities covering San Diego sports. We host a regular podcast during the major seasons. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

Foley Screams "Your Trying To End My Career"!!!!

Trumpet_Man

Well-Known Member
#1
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=nfl&id=2589634

Foley said officer who shot him was trying to end his career

Associated Press
National Football League News Wire

SAN DIEGO -- "You're trying to end my career, man,"
Chargers linebacker Steve Foley said after he was shot at least
three times by an off-duty police officer, according to a sheriff's
department report obtained Friday by The Associated Press.

The officer followed Foley's restored 1971 Oldsmobile Cutlass
Supreme about 30 miles on the freeway on suspicion that the driver
was drunk, the report said.

The shooting occurred when Foley got out of his car outside his
home in suburban Poway, the report said. The officer fired after
the 6-foot-4, 265-pound linebacker reached into his pants with his
right hand.

Foley, who is from Little Rock, said, "You shot me in the
knee,"
but continued approaching the off-duty Coronado police
officer, Aaron Mansker. The officer shot at least three more rounds
at Foley before the player "went down" and fell unconscious, the
report said.


CLICK ON LINK FOR WHOLE STORY
 

BFISA

Well-Known Member
#2
Trumpet_Man said:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=nfl&id=2589634

Foley said officer who shot him was trying to end his career

Associated Press
National Football League News Wire

SAN DIEGO -- "You're trying to end my career, man,"
Chargers linebacker Steve Foley said after he was shot at least
three times by an off-duty police officer, according to a sheriff's
department report obtained Friday by The Associated Press.

The officer followed Foley's restored 1971 Oldsmobile Cutlass
Supreme about 30 miles on the freeway on suspicion that the driver
was drunk, the report said.

The shooting occurred when Foley got out of his car outside his
home in suburban Poway, the report said. The officer fired after
the 6-foot-4, 265-pound linebacker reached into his pants with his
right hand.

Foley, who is from Little Rock, said, "You shot me in the
knee,"
but continued approaching the off-duty Coronado police
officer, Aaron Mansker. The officer shot at least three more rounds
at Foley before the player "went down" and fell unconscious, the
report said.


CLICK ON LINK FOR WHOLE STORY
Things are getting curiouser and curiouser. This has gotta be a leak from the "official" report...no way would Foley be talkin about this case now.
 

Trumpet_Man

Well-Known Member
#5
Chispa said:
Did anyone notice that the ACLU has requested the state to investigate - rather than local law enforcement?
No.

Did you find the police report on that site you mentioned ? The AP has a copy apparently according to ESPN
 

foober

BoltTalker
#6
Chispa said:
Did anyone notice that the ACLU has requested the state to investigate - rather than local law enforcement?
If thats true that should be for the best. The local police are going to do everything to to discredit foley becasue they are somewhat lible in this as well. So an outside investigation would definetly be best.
 

Shamrock

Well-Known Member
#9
I don't understand the apparent protection of the officer by the DA/Sheriff's office.

This is going to get real ugly. Foley needs to get the best and NASTIEST defense and civil attorneys available.
 
#10
Shamrock said:
I don't understand the apparent protection of the officer by the DA/Sheriff's office.

This is going to get real ugly. Foley needs to get the best and NASTIEST defense and civil attorneys available.
I think that the DA/Sherrif's office is trying to contain as many worms that are in the can fom getting out because already a lot of worms are out and scurrying about so I think it is damage control more than anything.

Foley needs to get the Best and most Vicious Defense Lawyer he can buy and get the best most ruthless take no prisoners Civil Lawyer that money can buy.
 

Trumpet_Man

Well-Known Member
#11
Shamrock said:
I don't understand the apparent protection of the officer by the DA/Sheriff's office.

This is going to get real ugly. Foley needs to get the best and NASTIEST defense and civil attorneys available.
I would use my amigos at Gray, Carey, Ware .....:yes:
 
#12
I think that the Police officer was a racist bigot who has no tolerence for someone from another race who is doing better than he is in life. They should be charging the police officer for reckless endangerment, if anything.
 

WonderSlug

Well-Known Member
#14
chargeaway said:
I think that the Police officer was a racist bigot who has no tolerence for someone from another race who is doing better than he is in life. They should be charging the police officer for reckless endangerment, if anything.
Well, the guy was obviously biased as it was mentioned that one of Mansker's family members (an uncle I think) was killed by a drunk driver. So he may have gone into some sort of psychological zone when he saw Foley's car weaving, trying a little too hard to make the 'collar' to assuage his own personal things with it.
 
#15
chargeaway said:
I think that the Police officer was a racist bigot who has no tolerence for someone from another race who is doing better than he is in life. They should be charging the police officer for reckless endangerment, if anything.
How about attempted murder? :icon_shrug:
 

Shamrock

Well-Known Member
#18
WonderSlug said:
Well, the guy was obviously biased as it was mentioned that one of Mansker's family members (an uncle I think) was killed by a drunk driver. So he may have gone into some sort of psychological zone when he saw Foley's car weaving, trying a little too hard to make the 'collar' to assuage his own personal things with it.
Maybe Mansker was having a violent Road 'roid Rage?
 

HollywoodLeo

Well-Known Member
#21
Thumper said:
How about attempted murder? :icon_shrug:
driving with a 0.233 BAC is attempted murder IMO, to a lesser degree than shooting someone for drinking and driving, of course, but it's still putting people's lives at risk.

There should be a BAC level at which you're charged with something a hell of a lot more harsh than a misdimeanor if you're caught drinking and driving...and 0.233 should be well above that threshpoint.
 
#22
HollywoodLeo said:
driving with a 0.233 BAC is attempted murder IMO, to a lesser degree than shooting someone for drinking and driving, of course, but it's still putting people's lives at risk.

There should be a BAC level at which you're charged with something a hell of a lot more harsh than a misdimeanor if you're caught drinking and driving...and 0.233 should be well above that threshpoint.
Because our prisons aren't already overcrowded with enough real criminals...we should create some more laws so some guy who went on a weekend bender and did something stupid can spend a couple years in the slam?

Why not have the courts convict people of reckless endangerment for not wearing a seat belt or talking on a cell-phone, or have motorcycle riders charged with attempted suicide for not wearing a helmet?

People aren't perfect, bro, and the law has to account for that. Otherwise you end up living in a police state.
 

HollywoodLeo

Well-Known Member
#23
Thunderstruck said:
Because our prisons aren't already overcrowded with enough real criminals...we should create some more laws so some guy who went on a weekend bender and did something stupid can spend a couple years in the slam?
There's plenty of less deserving people in the prisons that could make room for malcontents who decide to put innocent people's lives at stake.

Thunderstruck said:
Why not have the courts convict people of reckless endangerment for not wearing a seat belt or talking on a cell-phone, or have motorcycle riders charged with attempted suicide for not wearing a helmet?
All but one of those are actions that are to be taken to help protect one's self from getting severly hurt in the event they're in an accident.

The odds of an accident actually occuring do not increase if I don't wear a seat belt or a motorcycle helmet on a motorcycle.... I only hurt myself even more should one happen.

Furthermore I'm risking my own life if I don't wear either, not other people's and their families'

Talking on a cell phone, while stupid (and I hate that as well, btw) isn't half as dangerous as driving with a 0.233 BAC

Thunderstruck said:
People aren't perfect, bro, and the law has to account for that. Otherwise you end up living in a police state.
**** that ****. That makes it sound like it's an accident. Being drunk is NOT an excuse. You CHOOSE to get drunk. You CHOOSE to not leave yourself any options to get home other than your own car, and therefore set yourself up for CHOOSING to drive drunk.
If I drink and drive in the Navy I lose rank, get stripped of half of my pay for two months, and i'm restricted to the ship for 2 months.

If I got caught driving with a 0.233 BAC I'd be getting off easy.

Of course people aren't perfect, but when we're talking about lives being at stake...which is exactly what we're talking about here....people should be held more accountable than a freakin slap on the wrist.

If someone hits someone while drunk and kills that person he/she gets charged with vehicular manslaugher. So, basically the person gets a slap on the wrist if they're lucky that their ill advised choice to drive drunk doesn't result in an accident?

And don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying anyone drinking and driving should get more than a misdemeanor. I understand that above the legal limit doesn't neccesarily equate to completely intoxicated... But there should be some limit to where if somebody's that impaired they should be held more accountable...and 0.233 IS "that impaired"
 
#24
HollywoodLeo said:
There's plenty of less deserving people in the prisons that could make room for malcontents who decide to put innocent people's lives at stake.



All but one of those are actions that are to be taken to help protect one's self from getting severly hurt in the event they're in an accident.

The odds of an accident actually occuring do not increase if I don't wear a seat belt or a motorcycle helmet on a motorcycle.... I only hurt myself even more should one happen.

Furthermore I'm risking my own life if I don't wear either, not other people's and their families'

Talking on a cell phone, while stupid (and I hate that as well, btw) isn't half as dangerous as driving with a 0.233 BAC



**** that ****. That makes it sound like it's an accident. Being drunk is NOT an excuse. You CHOOSE to get drunk. You CHOOSE to not leave yourself any options to get home other than your own car, and therefore set yourself up for CHOOSING to drive drunk.
If I drink and drive in the Navy I lose rank, get stripped of half of my pay for two months, and i'm restricted to the ship for 2 months.

If I got caught driving with a 0.233 BAC I'd be getting off easy.

Of course people aren't perfect, but when we're talking about lives being at stake...which is exactly what we're talking about here....people should be held more accountable than a freakin slap on the wrist.

If someone hits someone while drunk and kills that person he/she gets charged with vehicular manslaugher. So, basically the person gets a slap on the wrist if they're lucky that their ill advised choice to drive drunk doesn't result in an accident?

And don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying anyone drinking and driving should get more than a misdemeanor. I understand that above the legal limit doesn't neccesarily equate to completely intoxicated... But there should be some limit to where if somebody's that impaired they should be held more accountable...and 0.233 IS "that impaired"
Suffice it to say we disagree. The punishment should fit the crime. Revoke the individual's license. Impound the vehicle. Make it impossible for that person to register a vehicle. Get the person off the road. Then force the individual to do a butt-load of community service and go through alcohol treatment before ever being able to drive a vehicle again, and do it starting with the first offense.

But putting a drunk driver in the same category as a person who has intent to kill or who is making a conscious decision to cause harm is stupid in my opinion. And that's what I was responding to...the "attempted murder" comparison.
 

HollywoodLeo

Well-Known Member
#25
Thunderstruck said:
Suffice it to say we disagree. The punishment should fit the crime. Revoke the individual's license. Impound the vehicle. Make it impossible for that person to register a vehicle. Get the person off the road. Then force the individual to do a butt-load of community service and go through alcohol treatment before ever being able to drive a vehicle again, and do it starting with the first offense.
I can agree with that

Thunderstruck said:
But putting a drunk driver in the same category as a person who has intent to kill or who is making a conscious decision to cause harm is stupid in my opinion. And that's what I was responding to...the "attempted murder" comparison.
I figured I spelled it out enough when I added the "lesser degree" caviat to it. I explained the viewpoint a lot better in the thread in the "other NFL" forum.

Perhaps "attempted murder" isn't really a fair term for it, (I was simply trying to make a point) but you're still putting people's lives at risk, which is my main argument.
 
#26
I might get red bombed for this but it goes like this maybe we all who are 21 and above need to be lincensed to Drink alcohol and if we violate the drinking laws then we get our licences suspended so that we can not drink for a period of time including for a certain period of time for the license to be held then after that time get them back with a big hefty fine like $1,000 for each violation to increase after five violations to $2,000 per fine and so on and so on.

That might curb Drinking and driving.
 

HollywoodLeo

Well-Known Member
#27
turbo_turtle said:
I might get red bombed for this but it goes like this maybe we all who are 21 and above need to be lincensed to Drink alcohol and if we violate the drinking laws then we get our licences suspended so that we can not drink for a period of time including for a certain period of time for the license to be held then after that time get them back with a big hefty fine like $1,000 for each violation to increase after five violations to $2,000 per fine and so on and so on.

That might curb Drinking and driving.
you get green bombed for that from me.
 

BFISA

Well-Known Member
#29
HollywoodLeo said:
There's plenty of less deserving people in the prisons that could make room for malcontents who decide to put innocent people's lives at stake.



All but one of those are actions that are to be taken to help protect one's self from getting severly hurt in the event they're in an accident.

The odds of an accident actually occuring do not increase if I don't wear a seat belt or a motorcycle helmet on a motorcycle.... I only hurt myself even more should one happen.

Furthermore I'm risking my own life if I don't wear either, not other people's and their families'

Talking on a cell phone, while stupid (and I hate that as well, btw) isn't half as dangerous as driving with a 0.233 BAC



**** that ****. That makes it sound like it's an accident. Being drunk is NOT an excuse. You CHOOSE to get drunk. You CHOOSE to not leave yourself any options to get home other than your own car, and therefore set yourself up for CHOOSING to drive drunk.
If I drink and drive in the Navy I lose rank, get stripped of half of my pay for two months, and i'm restricted to the ship for 2 months.

If I got caught driving with a 0.233 BAC I'd be getting off easy.

Of course people aren't perfect, but when we're talking about lives being at stake...which is exactly what we're talking about here....people should be held more accountable than a freakin slap on the wrist.

If someone hits someone while drunk and kills that person he/she gets charged with vehicular manslaugher. So, basically the person gets a slap on the wrist if they're lucky that their ill advised choice to drive drunk doesn't result in an accident?

And don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying anyone drinking and driving should get more than a misdemeanor. I understand that above the legal limit doesn't neccesarily equate to completely intoxicated... But there should be some limit to where if somebody's that impaired they should be held more accountable...and 0.233 IS "that impaired"
Thats right up there with "the pitcher's W/L record isn't a good indicator of how good a pitcher he/she is" dodge.
 
#30
Red bombs away for me about this one for sure.

The reason for the license to Drink Alcohol is the Foley incident.

Foley has in the past had problems Drinking Alcohol and the Law.

We license people to drive a car to see if they have the capability to drive so I think that we need people to be licensed to drink Alcohol to see if they have the capability to consume Alcohol responsibly.

If a person drives while drunk with the license to drink then it should be an automatic suspension of the drinking license for no less than 2 years then they can qualify again to see if they can get it back then pay a huge fine of no less than $5,000 to show that if you Drink and drive it is going to cost you literally an arm and a leg.
 

Top