Your Son is a Statistic, Not a Martyr!

I will start off by saying that suing the restaurant is not as dumb as it seems. Generally if someone is involved in an alcohol related accident resulting in damage or death to people or property (not including the driver), then the place where alcohol was last consumed (whether a public establishment or private home) can be held partially liable for damages to the victims, and in some cases can be charged criminally not just sued in a civil court. Having worked in restaurants that serve alcohol, part of the training and policies are a maximum of 3 drinks per customer (or 2 in some places). Based on the early facts of the case, this restaurant (along with the owner, manager on duty, and possibly server/bartender) will likely be found as negligent due to the fact that they continued to serve alcohol past the point of noticeable intoxication (and yes, twice the legal limit is definitely noticeable). I don't necessarily agree with this precedent but it is what it is.

As an aside, this is the first case I have heard where the only victim was the intoxicated driver (of legal drinking age) but whose estate is also the complainant. This fact alone throws a monkey wrench into a normally expected open and shut case where the establishment (and managers/employees) are found liable for damages.

I would not have felt the need to write anything if this case was only against the establishment. When the owner of the tow truck and the stalled vehicle were also named as defendants, I was thoroughly disgusted with the father and attorney attempting to turn the deceased into a martyr.

As someone who had a DUI a few years ago (no lives or property were affected and who has served his debt to society) I can tell you that for most people who are either arrested for DUI for the first time or involved in an alcohol related accident for the first time...in all likelihood it was not the first time the driver has driven under the influence (and usually not 2ND or 3rd either). Just as former pitcher Hancock did a few weeks ago, and just as I did a few years ago, a bad choice was made while sober...to drink and then drive. This decision is made when you first get in the car while sober - so to his father; you can not start deflecting blame from your dead son to others.

Some questions I would pose directly to Hancock's father if given the opportunity....

Was your son of legal drinking age, and of reasonable competency prior to that fateful night?

That readily handy bag of weed in your son's vehicle containing just over 8 grams was not a standard quarter bag, it tells me he actually had at least a half ounce when purchased. People who smoke weed generally will smoke it when drunk to "balance themselves out". My question - there was nobody else in the vehicle, so who smoked just over an eighth of weed from that bag???

Are you going to name the drug dealer, and the drug dealers union in your lawsuit?

Is it safe to speed during the day?

How about at night?

Is it safe to talk on the cell phone while driving during the day?

How about at night?

Is it safe to get drunk, smoke weed, speed, and talk on the cell phone all while driving during the day?

How about at night?

Did your son have a choice to do all of the above?

I made my bed and lied in it several years ago. Your son made his bed a few weeks ago. It's time to let him lie in it (permanently as it is). Just be glad he didn't hurt or kill anyone else, or his estate would be the one defending lawsuits.

Take some responsibility where your son did not.