Tom Palermo-custom frame builder RIP

[LJohnny]

Indictment:

http://wtop.com/baltimore/2015/02/ba...ged-fatal-dui/

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . on church official's prior knowledge of her drinking habits.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/mar...203-story.html

BBD

[slidey]

Originally Posted by BumbleBeeDave

. . . on church official's prior knowledge of her drinking habits.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/mar...203-story.html

BBD

Did the "Before" pic creep anyone else out?!

[abalone]

Originally Posted by BumbleBeeDave

. . . on church official's prior knowledge of her drinking habits.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/mar...203-story.html

BBD

Wow. Don't know what to think really. It appears that not only did the church know about this lady's past DUI, but they also had great suspicions of her drunken behavior as evidenced by this episode at church consecration dinner where they suspected this lady of being drunk.

The church knew all this and yet, they did NOTHING about it? Not even talked to the lady about it? And now the lady has her first reported statement being that the accident and death of Tom Palermo has served as a major wake-up call to change her life?!?!?! If the church would have acted sooner, who knows if this lady wouldn't have had a major wake-up call before killing Tom or before driving around drunk? I would say that the church may have some responsibility for this accident no mater how limited or involved it is.

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . going to:

A) Get sued and settle because airing all this in court would be reputational suicide.

Or . . .

B) Reach out to Palermo's family and try to settle without a suit even being filed.

BBD

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . to see if there's anything new.

According to the articles posted, Cook's arraignment was supposed to be March 5.

February 4: cook given additional charges related to DUI, texting while driving, and leaving the scene . . . https://www.baltimorebrew.com/2015/0...n-new-charges/

February 10: High church officials call for examination of the church's policies on alcohol. Story also reveals Cook has been forbidden from advertising herself publicly as a member of the clergy. I don't think that means defrocked, but close to it . . . https://www.baltimorebrew.com/2015/0...es-to-alcohol/

February 12: Bishop could have stopped her ordination, but did not do so, apparently because it would have created "an uproar" . . . https://www.baltimorebrew.com/2015/0...sed-an-uproar/

February 12: Church is investigating whether Cook lied in order to advance her appointment as bishop. Gee, ya' think? . . . http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/mar...212-story.html

AND . . . to be fair to the Church, here's a story from their official news service. They seem to be making a real effort to report fairly, and the comments section is also educational in it's openness . . . http://episcopaldigitalnetwork.com/e...-heather-cook/

BBD

[goonster]

Story from this weekend's Philadelphia Inquirer.

[Climb01742]

Originally Posted by goonster

Story from this weekend's Philadelphia Inquirer.

Very good article. The photos are heartbreaking. Thank you for sharing.

[Shortsocks]

Originally Posted by Climb01742

Very good article. The photos are heartbreaking. Thank you for sharing.

Yes, this I'd definitely a great article, depressing as hell. The first picture really got to me.

[josephr]

Originally Posted by BumbleBeeDave

. . . to see if there's anything new.

According to the articles posted, Cook's arraignment was supposed to be March 5.


AND . . . to be fair to the Church, here's a story from their official news service. They seem to be making a real effort to report fairly, and the comments section is also educational in it's openness . . . http://episcopaldigitalnetwork.com/e...-heather-cook/

BBD

There's nothing on the Baltimore Sun's website about it as of 5 minutes ago...

The note from the Church is a little disconcerting to me --- what I read into that is that Heather Cook hasn't taken any professional responsibility for her actions in that she's not going to relinquish her role...however,can't say I would give up my paycheck.
Joe

[kevinvc]

Originally Posted by goonster

Story from this weekend's Philadelphia Inquirer.

This is a very moving article that really paints this whole sordid story in a very human light. I appreciate the writer taking the time to lay out so much of his life story and really humanize him instead of just being another cycling statistic.

However, something about the tone of the article really rubbed me the wrong way. The many reiterations about how cycling is such a dangerous activity, all presented as an irrefutable fact, bothers me. This attitude is the prevailing one and I think it hurts cycling and, if anything, makes the activity more dangerous. Yes, it is good to emphasize the dangers associated with driving under the influence or while distracted, But continually presenting riding a bike in this manner seems like it could have a couple of effects on folks:
1) It discourages people from becoming new or more frequent riders. This is too bad since increasing the number of people on bikes seems to have a direct correlation with cycling safety.

2) It can have a perverse opposite effect in absolving the driver of a portion of the responsibility. The message is that being on a bike on a public road is dangerous in and of itself; the circumstances are responsible for collisions, not strictly driver error.

3) It reinforces the belief held by many that bikes simply don't belong on public roads. This is an extension of the previous point taken to a "logical" next step, supposedly to help protect both cyclists and motorists as well from becoming victims in a collision that is simply outside of their control.

I don't mean to be a total downer and pretty much everything I've read (outside of the comments sections) has called out the bishop for her behavior. But there is an element of sensationalism and an implication that she's only mostly at fault, but not completely, that I find not just insulting, but downright harmful.

[shovelhd]

That first picture. The morons in the comments. Quite the contrast.

[SamIAm]

Originally Posted by josephr

There's nothing on the Baltimore Sun's website about it as of 5 minutes ago...

The note from the Church is a little disconcerting to me --- what I read into that is that Heather Cook hasn't taken any professional responsibility for her actions in that she's not going to relinquish her role...however,can't say I would give up my paycheck.
Joe

Its frustrating to me that it would seem to be her decision at this point. Can't she just be summarily fired?

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . they would have a set of governance rules where an investigation must be completed and some sort of vote taken before she can be dismissed or defrocked. Forbidding her from representing herself as clergy until that investigation is completed may be the most they can do.

I confess to being ignorant of the organization of the Episcopal church. Do they even have the equivalent of a Pope who can "fire" clergy? Not sure . . .

BBD

[josephr]

From Jonathan Pitts, reporter from the Baltimore Sun:

The arraignment was originally scheduled to happen this month, but it has been postponed. It’s now slated to take place Thursday, April 2, at 9:30 AM in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City.

Thanks for reading…

Jonathan