"Pre lived his life drunk"?
You are obviously some 17 year old moron who will do less with 80 years of life than Pre did with 25 years, to make such an idiotic statement.
"Pre lived his life drunk"?
You are obviously some 17 year old moron who will do less with 80 years of life than Pre did with 25 years, to make such an idiotic statement.
70's/80's were more fun wrote:
nobody with any common sense is disputing that Pre was legally drunk at the time of the fatal accident. What nobody is sure of, is whether that alone was the only resaon he died, or whether the 2nd car theory or distracted driver theory enter into it somehow.
The problem with theories is that they tend to be smokescreens to draw attention away from the obvious. Pre was a known serial drunk driver. He worked at a bar, and when he wasn't working he drank at the bar. It was only a matter of time before he would kill someone. Unfortunately for him, that someone was Steve Roland Prefontaine.
what is your point in starting this thread?? you clearly have your own opinions made up... wikipedia was a fine source since it quotes the same information as in tom jordan's book... if anyone should can the attitude it is you...
M.A.A.D. wrote:
70's/80's were more fun wrote:nobody with any common sense is disputing that Pre was legally drunk at the time of the fatal accident. What nobody is sure of, is whether that alone was the only resaon he died, or whether the 2nd car theory or distracted driver theory enter into it somehow.
The problem with theories is that they tend to be smokescreens to draw attention away from the obvious. Pre was a known serial drunk driver. He worked at a bar, and when he wasn't working he drank at the bar. It was only a matter of time before he would kill someone. Unfortunately for him, that someone was Steve Roland Prefontaine.
hrunner wrote:
what is your point in starting this thread?? you clearly have your own opinions made up... wikipedia was a fine source since it quotes the same information as in tom jordan's book... if anyone should can the attitude it is you...
I want to know if there was evidence that he was drunk the night he was killed.
If it's (0.16% BA )in Tom Jordan's book then it's probably true, since Tom Jordan has been exploiting Pre for 30 years. If he wanted to hide anything Pre's BA level would be it.
moron detector wrote:
"Pre lived his life drunk"?
You are obviously some 17 year old moron who will do less with 80 years of life than Pre did with 25 years, to make such an idiotic statement.
Pre was a total drunk. And his drinking not only cost him in the olympics but it cost him his life. Get over the obsession!
Face facts wrote:
Pre was a total drunk. And his drinking not only cost him in the olympics but it cost him his life. Get over the obsession!
It's a cautionary tale. If you drink then don't drive. The loss of your license is the lesser of your worries.
I'd rather die than lose my license. That's why when I'm driving home shitto I make sure the petal is to the metal and no seatbelt. I want to make sure I smash myself to bits when I crash. And if nobody wants to get hurt then stay off the f***ing sidewalk.
I think I know now, why the more intelligent, serious running enthusiasts go to dyestat or the track and field news boards....too many young, immature "myspace" types on this board, coming across as the young, immature baffoons that they are.........ps. to MAADD.....I am NOT disputing that any 'drinking and driving' is 'ok'....it's not.
This post was removed.
Regardless of the cause, the end result was the same: http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=5917
Shorter, Hollister, and Moore are the ones who've always flown the "other vehicle" theory and/or "he must have veered into the wall because of an animal on the road" theory.
Pre was their buddy. It's understandable how they would want to skew the events of that night. But revising history isn't the way to do it. In fact, it's reprehensible. Pre was drunk. Cause of death was suffocation. Get over it.
in that case, his blood alcohol content was higher than 0.16...much higher
26mi235 wrote:
Kenny Moore (or Frank Shorter, probably KM) was just dropped off by Pre and strongly contends that Pre was not drunk. He indicates that it appears that something caused Pre to swerve hard to avoid a collision and that the tire marks and the geometry of the road are very consistent with thi hypothesis. Go see writings by Kenny Moore (his new book?), who is a very reputable writer and someone that I would trust more than some unknown internet commenter. How would the mortician measure his BA, which would have been later and might have changed differently that some assumption that the mortician made (note that my "knowledge" of the mortician angle is draw only from this thread)?
Is there any evidence of any car? Any at all. Shorter and the others were not there so they would not know.
It is a plausible explanation (not saying it is true just that is plausible) and Pre might have died in such a case even without the reported BAC.
Maybe Pre was reaching for a CD and lost control ;)
Drunk drivers don't only put themselves in danger, but everyone else on the road as well.
Someone I know was killed by a drunk driver.
If you want to kill yourself, fine. Just do it without endangering other people.
If you have ever visited the crash site, you will notice that the road is EXTREMELY narrow. Also, I do not know how fast Pre was driving but, he would of had a stop sign 100 yards or less away to stop. So if another car was coming at him around the bend, he could of easily been forced over to swerve out of the way. But, the other thing in my mind was that even if there was no other car around, he would have had to have run right through the stop sign to turn left down the hill or right up the hill.
hadbfasdfn wrote:
Although his blood alcohol content was 0.16
How did they get him to breathe into the breathalyzer if he was already dead? Heimlich manuever?
Dr. Heimlich wrote:
How did they get him to breathe into the breathalyzer if he was already dead? Heimlich manuever?
Is Dyestat's server down again?
Why does it have to be a car? Are there no deer, possums, or raccoons in the area?
blood sample
gorney wrote:
Shorter, Hollister, and Moore are the ones who've always flown the "other vehicle" theory and/or "he must have veered into the wall because of an animal on the road" theory.
Pre was their buddy. It's understandable how they would want to skew the events of that night. But revising history isn't the way to do it. In fact, it's reprehensible. Pre was drunk. Cause of death was suffocation. Get over it.
You're full of BS. There has been more than one Register Guard article (usually on the anniversary of the accident) that have discussed the second car theory. And, in fact, there was a story in the early 90s in which they actually identified two potential cars. One was a sheriff's son's car, which was an oncoming car, and the other was another MG, which was racing Pre.
People actually heard more than one car on the road at the time.
I've never heard the animal theory.
And as far as his blood alcohol content, we'll never know exactly what it was at the time of his death. If a mortician takes it, then it's after death, and BA content actually increases substantially (again, something I've read from a reliable source).