Hancock’s father sues everybody
May 24th, 2007The father of St. Louis Cardinals pitcher Josh Hancock is suing everybody even remotely involved in the accident that took his son’s life last month — Mike Shannon’s restaurant, the driver of the tow truck that Hancock slammed into and the driver of the stalled car that the tow truck had stopped to help.
Dean Hancock said in a statement that the “facts and circumstances” of Josh’s death “have caused great pain to all of Josh’s family.” As administrator of his son’s estate, Dean Hancock said he has an obligation to represent the family on all issues, “including any legal actions necessary against those who contributed to the untimely and unnecessary death.”
Are you kidding me? Are you kidding me? Look, I’m terribly sorry for Dean Hancock’s loss, and I can’t even begin to understand the grief he must feel. Nobody should have to endure that.
But the person at fault in Josh Hancock’s death was Josh Hancock — and nobody else. He’s the one who got plastered. He’s the one who foolishly got behind the wheel of a car. He’s the one who was speeding, talking on his cell phone and not wearing his seat belt.
For Hancock’s dad to try to ruin the lives of so many innocent people is horribly wrong — and it ought to be criminally wrong. Let’s hope a judge has enough sense to throw this thing out of court fast, because irresponsibility evidently runs in the family.
UPDATE: For a more in-depth look at my thoughts on this, see my column in Baptist Press Sports.
Preach on, brother. Preach on…
What a freaking joke. The sad reality is that even if it is thrown out by a judge (and it darn well ought to be), those being sued will have to spend a ton of time and money defending themselves. Hopefully Hancock’s estate will be held responsible for covering their legal costs.
I don’t want to be guilty of judging someone unfairly here, but I wonder who it was that taught Josh how to drink?
Could it have been Dean perhaps?
Anger, rage even, is common when walking through intense grief. Having an 18 year old son myself, I can think of little worse than losing him. Should I experience such loss, I imagine despite the comfort my faith in Christ provides I would still spend some time at a very angry stage.
When I was 18 my mother passed from cancer and I vividly recall feeling such anger (among other things). It was so unfair, unjust and un-anything-else-I-could-think-of. Immediately I became intimately familiar with the following uncomfortable concept: I am in control of nothing.
Fortunately, I’ve learned (and continue to learn) that having no control is a good thing because my Lord and Savior holds me in the palm of His hand. He’s in control - and in my weakness He is strong, may God be praised.
Mr. Hancock’s reaction is as understandable and predictable as it is sad and frustrating. It’s also very symptomatic of a nation in need of Christ. Upon realizing we lack control the blame-game quickly ensues.
If we can make our tragedies someone else’s fault then perhaps we’re not nearly so out of control. The longer we can avoid looking honestly into our own reflection, the longer we can avoid admitting our own frailty, our own foolish pride and our own sin.
I’m ashamed our justice system even allows these lawsuits on the docket. I’m even more ashamed at how little time I spend on my knees praying for change.
Lisa that’s some wisdom right there. Great stuff.
I hope someone alerts Mr. Hancock to how foolish this endeavor is and he comes to his senses.
I was listening to Chicago sports radio today on this issue. Ugh. What a broken world we live in.
Lisa makes a good point; I think what we’re seeing is a grieving father that’s trying to channel his emotions. I just wish he had chosen instead to use this opportunity to speak out against the travesty that is drunk driving. If Mr. Hancock had spoken, people would have listened. Unfortunately, I think his window of opportunity has passed.
Being the highly intelligent and open-minded liberal that I am, I would like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that we don’t know all the facts yet. We can’t blame Josh for his ‘alleged’ drinking and driving fast without a belt and yapping on his cell. Someone may have held him down and poured bubbly down his throat. Someone may have switched or spiked his drinks when he was out ‘allegedly’ purchasing the pot that was ‘allegedly’ found in his vehicle. Maybe he was getting counseling on his cell when he ‘allegedly’ wrecked. I will not judge his actions. This could happen to anyone that drinks a little too much and then drives fast and distracted. It has been said numerous times on this blog, but I say it again: instead of throwing stones at Josh and his family, we should embrace them, pray for them, and not waste this blog space with negative vibes. Thanks in advance for your cooperation.
Lisa, your post really hit home with me, on many levels. Thank you.
As for this lawsuit, once again, I’m left wondering: Does everything in life have a monetary value? Does anyone ever take responsibility for his or her own actions?
Great thought, Lisa.
Jeremy, it’s good to know that you haven’t changed, my friend.
Lisa is so very right. In America, too many parents are “enjoying” a cool one while their children look on. Noone finds the time to say “Son,(or daughter) what I am doing is wrong. As I stated when called to serve on a jury, if you are going to drink, do it in your own home after you are finished driving for the day. We personally had a great friend, a deputy sheriff, which was killed by a drunk driver and we saw the family destroyed by a drunk driver’s action. Not everyone killed when someone drinks and drives is the drunk person. Josh was responsible for his actions. Sure the bar served him but he accepted, as the governor of New Jersey said on the news today, He was responsible for not wearing a seat belt and speeding. Many a driver gets stranded and welcomes a tow truck stopping. Instead of suing everyone hoping to gain monetary value, the father of our friend joined Mothers against Drunk Driving. He worked very hard to point out to everyone that his loss was because someone chose to drink and drive. How much more we need to look to Christ as our hope and courage in loss, and to reach out to others and try our best to keep someone else from suffering the same tragidy. I’ve seen my sister lose a son, our best friends lost their only son, therefore it has been all around but suing does not bring the lost one back.
“The lawsuit claimed Tolar was negligent in allowing his vehicle to reach the point where it stalled on the highway, and for failing to move it out of the way of oncoming traffic. A police report said the car became stalled when it spun out after being cut off by another vehicle.
Police said Hargrove noticed the stalled vehicle and stopped to help. The report said he told officers he was there five to seven minutes before his truck was hit by Hancock’s SUV. But Kantack said the tow truck may have been there up to 15 minutes, yet failed to get the stalled vehicle out of the way.
“Were the police contacted?” Kantack asked. “Why weren’t flares put out? Why was the tow truck there for an exorbitant amount of time?”
My first thought on reading this section was how many sober people passed the scene in that alleged 15 minutes, saw the flashing wrecker lights and got into the other lane? On a busy highway like I-64 there must have been at least a hundred. You get used to encountering situations like that in big cities, and act accordingly. Unless you are impaired by drugs and alcohol. The family of Josh Hancock should be thankful they don’t have to live with knowing their son took more lives with him.
That’s the problem with today’s world - no one is able to accept the fact that consequences experienced in something like this is no one’s fault but the one that did the drinking. Period.
Watch out, Tim he made read this blog and add you to the list!
Sad. I can’t imagine what he’s going through, but you’d think that some people around him would help put him see the futility of this suit.
This tragedy gets more tragic. This latest development gives new meaning to the word absurd. We must preach the Gospel with more fervency than ever; this fallen world remains desperately in need of Jesus Christ.
Having lost a son at 21 to being over served at a sport bar in Ca. I hope Dean Hancock can do some real damage to those responsible. My son even picked up two friends that let him knowingly drive drunk. Yes, the world needs Jesus Christ but I don’t think he would bless the people who over sell liquor. It is unfortunate that people drink and drive, it is also irresponsible of the ones that profit.
I hope Dean Hancock can do some real damage to those responsible.
Brenda, what do you mean by that?
j razz
I further developed my thoughts on this matter in my column for Baptist Press Sports.
I hope he can change laws, I hope he wins his hearts desire and if it hits them in the pocketbook to defend themselves, so be it. There are no innocent people in that bar.
Brenda,
I’m so sorry for your loss. I can’t imagine how hard that must be.
I’d like to ask you a question. Let’s say someone decides to live on a strict diet of McDonald’s, and ends up dying from heart-related problems after a few weeks. Would it be OK for that person’s family to sue McDonald’s — because McDonald’s should have known better than to serve fat people?
If not, then how is that any different from Hancock’s dad suing a bar because Josh Hancock couldn’t control himself?
Perhaps even more difficult than owning up to our own responsibilities is being honest about who’s responsible when those we deeply love and respect make poor choices resulting in dire consequences.
I have a friend who, during a rebellious time in life, got drunk, was taken advantage of, became pregnant and had an abortion. I was taken aback as she spoke about her experiences. She firmly believes that thought intoxicated she did not deserve to be raped. She knows that her rapist belongs in jail.
However, she takes full responsibility for her poor decisions - essentially equating them to playing in traffic - something bad was bound to happen. In the end, she grieves that the only truly innocent person involved was killed - her unborn child. She wrestles with that, despite having reconciled with Christ.
I marvel at her courage, her honesty and her testimony. She’s had to deal with the trauma of being raped. But she’s also faced her role in those events with a naked honesty that few of us have ever approached in our own lives.
As a survivor myself, I’m in no way suggesting that every victim plays a role in his/her abuse. This particular story just seemed relevant to the situation being discussed.
Ya know Tim, if McDonald’s served enough hamburgers at one time to kill your suppose person then I would say they held some responsiblity. Someone under the influence might not have good judgement but the person behind the bar and the server should be able to count. I wonder how many other accidents came out of that same bar. And Lisa, I agree with your friend, she did not deserve to be raped. There will always be people who take advantage and it is absolutely true we should never let our guard down. I hope your friend knows that God loves her and forgives.
I am in no way trying to offend or anger anyone, but to me, the idea of trying to punish those who allegedly over-serve alcohol is a fruitless cause and a direct denial of any personal responsibility. Suing Mike Shannon’s for over-serving alcohol is like suing the ammo store for selling too many bullets to the kid that shot up Virginia Tech.
Fact of the matter is, we live in a cruel world that will offer any and every form of evil that we want to get our hands on. I agree whole-heartedly that it’s wrong for anyone to distribute drugs, alcohol, and any other vice you want to name, but there’s a personal accountability that comes along with choosing to partake of those things. In Josh Hancock’s case or similar cases, I don’t think there are any innocent parties. Ultimately, I think those that make a living of offering worldly indulgences like alcohol will have a price to pay in the end. However, I think it’s ridiculous that the families of “victims” can attempt to cast an air of innocence on the deceased by accusing everyone else for the mistakes of their dead loved ones.
If I were to go to a bar, drink myself silly, then die in a crash on my way home, I would expect my parents to tell others that I died because of the choices that I made; no one else was to blame. I can imagine that it would be embarrassing or shameful for a parent to have to admit that their child died as a direct result of a foolish mistake. But that’s exactly what happened. You can shift the blame all you want, but the fact of the matter is that a young man is dead because of what he chose to do that night.
To me, it doesn’t matter that vendors are distributing alcohol and encouraging reckless behavior. Just because we have access to things like alcohol doesn’t make us innocent if we choose to partake of them. I am accountable for my own actions, regardless of what evils others may present to me.
Just because I can do something doesn’t mean I should.
So anybody who serves alcohol is supposed to know every patron’s level of tolerance, as well as keep count of their alcohol intake? I highly doubt that they were “force-feeding” Hancock alcohol.
To Brenda:
I want to apologize if my words in any way minimized your suffering and struggle. I can’t even begin to fathom the pain losing my son would cause. It gives me new perspective, yet again, on the agonizing sacrifice God willingly endured - watching His only Son die - to save a wretched soul like me.
Onto my thoughts:
The issues raised in this discussion cut right to an essential problem in our current cultural climate - personal responsibility has become an endangered character trait. As Christians we are called to a higher level of accountability. In fact, scripture is quite clear on the matter: “Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.” (Galatians 6:7-8 NIV)
My husband tended bar for a short time in a past life. I asked his opinion regarding this situation. His bar was very small and located in a rural community. He served maybe five people at a time and most of them were regulars. As such he got to know their habits and limits. He would cut patrons off when necessary and did his best to keep them from driving. Even so, getting them to give up their keys was nearly impossible some of the time despite his best efforts.
On occasion out of town patrons stopped in for a drink. My husband had no way of knowing each person’s limits. For example: When did they last eat? How much did they eat? Did they have a drink with their meal somewhere else before arriving? What’s their body mass? What’s their individual alcohol tolerance? Have they been regular drinkers for years?
If he hadn’t worked a small, rural bar, my husband indicated it would be very difficult to keep track of everyone’s alcohol intake. Some clubs serve several hundred customers at one time with only 3 or 4 bartenders. Sometimes the person ordering the drink is doing so for someone else.
Determining legal liability regarding the over-serving alcohol will never be a black-and-white issue. It can only be determined on a case-by-case basis with much wisdom and restraint. Any attempt to over-legislate the issue may create a new layer of victims – bartenders unfairly sued for millions.
Thank you Lisa, and in no way was I angry at any thoughts you stated. I also have thought of Jesus dying on the cross but my thoughts were with Mary, a mortal, watching her son suffer.
I hope that not holding our food manufacturers liable for controlling the purity of our food never comes about, after all they manufacture thousands and probably tens of thousands of cans and containers of food each day, how could they possiblely be responsible for each one, how could they possiblely be expected to inspect each one, how could they know. We as a nation get more excited over contaminated pet food than we get excited over a tragedy to mankind. Are any of you aware that young sexy women are hired to entice patrons to drink in bars, and that free drinks are giving in taste test. Sports bars are the worst since they have the tvs and games and excitement, people are there caught up in the moment. I don’t see a bartender as a victim and he should be insured as are most professional jobs. Is that a professional job?
But Brenda, we’re not talking about the liability of manufacturing, we’re talking about the liability of selling - or as Mr. Hancock has set forth, selling too much. And food is a basic necessity of life - alcohol is not. A more appropriate analogy for this situation would be the one mentioned above concerning fast food.
I also disagree with your statement, “We as a nation get more excited over contaminated pet food than we get excited over a tragedy to mankind.” The reason this may seem so is due to the magnitude. We as people have not experienced a food contamination like that of the pet food in years. However, the recent e-coli outbreak at a peanut butter facility in south GA was more concerning to those whom it affected, namely the southeast states.
When any of us stand before Almighty God to be judged, will He take in to account the amount of temptation we faced when we sinned?
Brenda, I think your post indicates exactly why a blanket legislation wouldn’t work. Each case needs to be examined on it’s merits. My hubby didn’t work in a sports bar. He worked in a tiny, little local tavern. There was one TV and no sexy girls. Yet he would be subject to the same legislation as the large sport’s club.
For example, many chronic drinkers can appear completely coherent, but are unsafe to get behind the wheel of a car. They also will drink elsewhere before even coming to the bar. Should my husband be held responsible if such a drinker (my hubby new several) came for one beer and then got behind the wheel and killed someone (even though they appeared completely fine)?
Perhaps, instead of a blanket legislation that affects every bartender, maybe every place that serves alcohol should be required to give a breathalyser test before patron’s leave. In reality, that may be the only way to truly determine who is legal and who’s a danger.
just an added thought as to bartenders being ‘professionals’ required to carry insurance - my hubby quite literally made minimum wage and his tips averaged out to approximately $2 an hour additional. If he had to pay liability insurance costs he wouldn’t have bothered with the job.
I know there are many others who make a really nice living at it, but not everyone is the same, to be sure.
Ok, so everyone has their own opinion and excuse, but remember “if” and I pray it doesn’t happen to you, remember your thoughts at this time, I was the same “must be someone who is always in trouble, they must be really wicked, Wow, we couldn’t know someone like that” does that sound familiar? A simple test at the door could determine blood alcohol level. And I can hear you say “but why would we do that and what civil liberties will that violate?”. You only go to taverns and bars to eat and drink and be merry so testing at the door shouldn’t be such a big deal and the driver and anyone else, even someone so clueless as to leave an automobile or truck on the road would be safe. I recently witnessed a horrific accident while driving (happened right in front of my eyes, a roll over, bounce into the air and more roll over) and all I can say is that the hand of God reached down and stopped my car before I rammed an automobile that stopped in the road (interstate). I heard the motor make an ERRR sound and stop.
I believe that Jesus died for our sins and we will only be judged on how we treated our fellow mankind, how we loved them as we love ourselves. God knows we are tempted and he allows the temptation, I believe, as a people, we will be awed in the presence of God and unable to utter a word in defense.
Another avenue is that it simply was his time to die and this was the chosen way inorder to bring light to this subject. Let that light shine!!
I think testing at the door would be a great idea, personally. Forget the drinker’s civil liberties, what about my civil liberties when I’m on the road? And, if a young person has made a mistake at the bar, or has been enticed to drink more than they should(we’ve all made mistakes, to be sure), then testing at the door might prevent some really tragic events that devastate so many lives. They have bouncers at the doors of clubs to keep certain people (including underage kids, presumably) out of the bar, why not include something to keep an over the limit person from driving?
Brenda, I will continue to pray for you as you deal with your horrible loss. As I’ve said before, I cannot fathom that pain. May God comfort you and hide you in the shadow of His wings.
Thanks Lisa, and pray for my friend Leslie whose daughter died when he shoe became lodged and she couldn’t stop at a stop sign and was hit broad side. We will understand someday or maybe it won’t even matter.
i have to say, Brenda, your posts sicken me.
my brother was killed by a drunk driver. my brother was sober, returning movies to a video store when the drunk crossed the center line and hit him head on. my brother was only 21
people who drink and drive know the risks and don’t care.
be responsible. better choices would have kept your son alive. my brother had no choice