Randy Cassingham's Blog

Posted by Lisa, Arizona on May 13, 2007:

Has anyone thought about the fact that this man may not be an alcoholic? That he started out the day just having a good time and got carried away? Also, perhaps he enjoys dressing like that, however unusual we think it may be or maybe it was just going to be a joke.

I'll admit that driving while intoxicated, especially in an area where children are playing is wrong and needs to be punished. As for the charge of public indecency, I have seen men wearing speedo's, man thongs and 'banana hammocks' in public and they don't get arrested. Public beaches, pools and water parks are very public and I have certainly seen less than what he is wearing on men twice his size. If a woman were wearing that out in public she wouldn't be arrested for public indecency. He'd probably get away wearing that if it were halloween. Is it our place to judge someone because they have a different lifestyle than we do? I am not gay or lesbian or a cross dresser but I do not judge people for the things that they do, no matter how strange I may think they are.

By the way, I was pulled over for dui once many years ago. I am not an alcoholic, was just at a Thanksgiving dinner party with lots of friends as had a few to many. I went to the classes, not AA, and did my prescribed community hours and paid a large fine, just because I had a little to much fun one day.

---

Is it possible he's not an alcoholic? Sure. But based on what I've read, I'd guess the chances are very, very high. -rc

Posted by Richard - Melbourne, Australia on May 13, 2007:

Shame he didn't make it to the contest - he may well have won it.

Usually guys dressing in women's clothing consists of a shapeless flowing floral number and high heels - this guy went the bikini, I think he even shaved for it. Hats off for bravey.

PS Whose Bud bottle is that on the desk ?!?!

---

Good catch! (And I'm so, so sorry you can recognize Bud bottles.) The source story does note that "Police found an open, half-empty 40-ounce bottle of Budweiser in Cole's truck" -- which is the origin of the open container violation. -rc

Posted by Cyndi, Montana on May 13, 2007:

I talked to a local police officer who had special training in DUI. He told me that every time a person is caught driving drunk s/he has escaped detection 80 to 100 times before. So if Mr. Fireman was caught this once that means he has been driving drunk at LEAST 90 other times without being caught. Scary thought. Throw the book at him.

And I agree, attempted murder is not too strong. I've seen the results of DUI "accidents".

This is why I feel so: A woman I know is permanently crippled from having an engine land in her lap. The other driver had 19 DUI convictions. This was his 20th, but he still kept his license. Did probation, paid his fines, still drives drunk. When he kills someone... what then?

Another woman I know of is now blind in one eye and missing three fingers on one hand. The other driver denies hitting her, but can't explain how his driver side front wheel assembly was laying by the woman's car while his truck was about a mile away with only three wheels. Aliens was his best guess.

His trial will be next year, but I doubt anything will happen to him. Good ol' boys. Wink, wink. Nudge, nudge. Damn right it's attempted murder.

---

Experienced cops will tell you drunk drivers are caught an average of once for every 80-100 times they drive drunk. That doesn't mean that they necessarily have driven 100 times drunk when they're caught once. But it's still a frightening statistic. -rc

Posted by Deborah, New Zealand on May 13, 2007:

A lot of gay men like to advertise their availability to attract casual sex - I don't think he was "humiliated" at all - just given free publicity - he's probably getting a lot of extra sex as a result.

Posted by Nevada on May 13, 2007:

Drunk driving? Sure. Open container? Sure. That should cover the legal aspect. But no jail time for wierdness. The jails are already overflowing with people convicted of victimless "crimes."

Posted by Sarah, Michigan on May 13, 2007:

This man certainly deserves to be sentenced to jail. Public humiliation doesn't hold him accountable for the law he broke, drinking and driving.

The drinking laws are stiff to protect lives, not egos.

Posted by Ann Wheeling, Il on May 14, 2007:

He was drunk & he was driving - around children. He should be booked with the maximum sentence for doing so in Ohio.

What he was wearing at the time should be irrelevant.

Posted by Rich, Virginia on May 14, 2007:

The suspect claims that he was on his way to a gay bar to publicly expose himself in the same fashion as the photo depicts him. He was also driving around like this in a public place. I would completely disagree that he has been exposed to 'public humiliation' merely because these pictures have been distributed to more people.

Humiliation would require that his actions were exposed to an audience when he had an expectation of privacy. As he was dressed this way publicly, and stated that he was on his way to publicly flaunt his mode of dress, he has given up any expectation of privacy.

That he was drunk when he made these statements does not absolve him of responsibility for these actions or statements any more than the fact he was drunk would have absolved him from running someone over with his vehicle.

It has long been argued that alcohol does not turn you into a different person, but instead merely magnifies the ass that you are. The guy has a problem, all right, but not because of the way he's dressed. Drunk driving kills people. This man needs help with that problem, and it should be delivered by the justice system.

After all, is there evidence that this man only dresses this way when drunk?

Posted by Jennifer- Southaven, MS on May 14, 2007:

I have to agree with everyone who has said that his clothing is not the issue, & the photos being sent out publicly is not that humiliating. If he had made it to the contest, there's the possibility the pictures would've been taken at the bar & put out by a friend, or even just someone else in attendance. Nowdays if you do something stupid in front of anyone with a camera, you're lucky to NOT have it posted everywhere.

As for punishment for his drunk driving stunt, I have an idea. Send him to my nanny's house. I have an aunt that is a parapalegic from a drunk driver that hit her nearly 15 years ago. My nanny takes care of her almost solely, & I'm sure she'd love to have some help from a strapping fella like that (my aunt's dead weight is no picnic to lift, no matter how small she is)! He should see what actions like his can do to a family. If more drunk drivers had to face what their actions could/did cause, I believe there would be less of them crawling behind the wheel.

---

I like that idea. It's one of the best punishments suggested yet. -rc

Posted by Richard, Houston on May 14, 2007:

Why do people continue to do such boneheaded things like this? What you do on your own time in the privacy of your home is one thing, when you take it to the streets or park as it were that's another matter. Being a former police officer I have seen most everything, however this one is not something I have seen. Blowing a .174 BAL is another matter, this person needs help.

As far as his fashion statement, well let's just say planning is everything, and he forgot to plan. Seriouly, obviously the man had no clue to what he was doing and whom it might harm. That is a shame. It just goes to show that drinking and driving do not mix, never have, never will. What a buffoon!

---

Why do people continue to do stupid things? Because they're incapable of learning from others' mistakes. They think they can control it, unlike everyone else. Or they don't bother to think in the first place.

I've always said that I've never had a shortage of material for True. And I never expect to.... -rc