• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

DePetro's Downfall was tonight:

S

sammy10002

I caught that Billy Barty lookin' John DePetro on Scarborough Country and co-panelist Curtis Sliwa pointed out that the whole premise of DePetro's now-infamous statement was not only insensitive, but flawed because it wasn't some rogue street thug who pounced upon this victim, it was allegedly the bouncer from the bar she had been sitting in. So, John's assertion that being out alone intoxicated at 4AM is "inviting" this makes even less sense.

The sad thing is that DePetro is likely creating quite the little press kit for himself with all these clips and clippings.

Truly sad indeed.
 
"Yeah Baby!,Yeah!....

...."Billy Barty"....GENIUS! SeeYa :)
 
> I caught that Billy Barty lookin' John DePetro on
> Scarborough Country and co-panelist Curtis Sliwa pointed out
> that the whole premise of DePetro's now-infamous statement
> was not only insensitive, but flawed because it wasn't some
> rogue street thug who pounced upon this victim, it was
> allegedly the bouncer from the bar she had been sitting in.
> So, John's assertion that being out alone intoxicated at 4AM
> is "inviting" this makes even less sense.

So the victim's drinking should be totally ignored?

> The sad thing is that DePetro is likely creating quite the
> little press kit for himself with all these clips and
> clippings.
>
> Truly sad indeed.

No worse that the TV asking "Could your child's toys him him? Tune in at 11!"
 
>
> So the victim's drinking should be totally ignored?
>


No. You're right. She was drinking, so she deserved what happened.

Brilliant.

Let's not forget that the bouncer/chief suspect, would have been a triple lifer under a 3-strikes criteria in states that have a 3-strikes law. Sounds like an accident waiting to happen, but she deserved it anyway, right?
>
> No worse that the TV asking "Could your child's toys him
> him? Tune in at 11!"
>

Him him?

Huh?
 
> >
> > So the victim's drinking should be totally ignored?
> >
>
>
> No. You're right. She was drinking, so she deserved what
> happened.
>
> Brilliant.

What is wrong with you people?!? HE NEVER FRIGGIN' SAID THAT!!!!! NO ONE HERE HAS SAID THAT!!!! DEPETRO NEVER SAID THAT!!!!!

Why don't you get it? There is another point of view and you can learn from it. And it's not that she deserved this in any way.

Again, I'm no fan of Depetro. He's a lousy host with a horrible set of pipes and an even worse small-market Quahog accent. But, this is ridiculous!
 
No DePetro : A Fellini Character

DePetro would make a great Fellini character. Wasn't he in Sytiricon or La Dolce Vita?

> ...."Billy Barty"....GENIUS! SeeYa :)
>
 
>
> What is wrong with you people?!? HE NEVER FRIGGIN' SAID
> THAT!!!!! NO ONE HERE HAS SAID THAT!!!! DEPETRO NEVER
> SAID THAT!!!!!
>
> Why don't you get it? There is another point of view and
> you can learn from it. And it's not that she deserved this
> in any way.
>
> Again, I'm no fan of Depetro. He's a lousy host with a
> horrible set of pipes and an even worse small-market Quahog
> accent. But, this is ridiculous!
>


I was not referring to the radio broadcast anymnore, I was addressing the things he said in the myriad of interviews which he has been less than shy about participating in.

By the way, he admittedly used the wortd "inviting" when discussing the incident---which IS absurd considering that the likely perpetrator at this point was an EMPLOYEE of the bar---not some rogue street thug.

Don't YOU get it?
 
Re: One last try to introduce "logic" here

> I was not referring to the radio broadcast anymnore, I was
> addressing the things he said in the myriad of interviews
> which he has been less than shy about participating in.
>
> By the way, he admittedly used the wortd "inviting" when
> discussing the incident---which IS absurd considering that
> the likely perpetrator at this point was an EMPLOYEE of the
> bar---not some rogue street thug.
>
> Don't YOU get it?
>
I GET IT just fine. "Inviting" in that context means that you are placing yourself in a circumstance that dramatically increases the odds of "something" happening. It does not imply that this was done consciously.

One thing I do not get is the argument that, because the crime allegedly involved an employee, then everyone's argument about this is invalid. What utter nonsense?

Do you honestly think that, if Ms. St. Guillen's friends were with her at the Falls Bar, this would still have happened? Of course not. It DOES NOT MATTER whether it was the bouncer, manager or a drueling stranger in the street. She put herself in a vulnerable position and a predator took advantage of it. The semantics DO NOT MATTER and its not reasonable to base an argument around them.

And, a question that I posed in a different thread: Would you approve of your wife/girlfriend/daughter barhopping alone around NYC at 4 am? Would you be worried?

If the answers are "no" and "yes", then you have an inkling of the larger concept of "risk" which seems to escape you at the moment.

Again, I am no Depetro apologist. This is a guy who pronounces the word career the same as "Korea". He sounds like cr@p. But, this time he has a valid point and is being unfairly lampooned.
 
Re: One last try to introduce "logic" here

> > I was not referring to the radio broadcast anymnore, I was
>
> > addressing the things he said in the myriad of interviews
> > which he has been less than shy about participating in.
> >
> > By the way, he admittedly used the wortd "inviting" when
> > discussing the incident---which IS absurd considering that
>
> > the likely perpetrator at this point was an EMPLOYEE of
> the
> > bar---not some rogue street thug.
> >
> > Don't YOU get it?
> >
> I GET IT just fine. "Inviting" in that context means that
> you are placing yourself in a circumstance that dramatically
> increases the odds of "something" happening. It does not
> imply that this was done consciously.
>
> One thing I do not get is the argument that, because the
> crime allegedly involved an employee, then everyone's
> argument about this is invalid. What utter nonsense?
>
> Do you honestly think that, if Ms. St. Guillen's friends
> were with her at the Falls Bar, this would still have
> happened? Of course not. It DOES NOT MATTER whether it was
> the bouncer, manager or a drueling stranger in the street.
> She put herself in a vulnerable position and a predator took
> advantage of it. The semantics DO NOT MATTER and its not
> reasonable to base an argument around them.
>
> And, a question that I posed in a different thread: Would
> you approve of your wife/girlfriend/daughter barhopping
> alone around NYC at 4 am? Would you be worried?
>
> If the answers are "no" and "yes", then you have an inkling
> of the larger concept of "risk" which seems to escape you at
> the moment.
>
> Again, I am no Depetro apologist. This is a guy who
> pronounces the word career the same as "Korea". He sounds
> like cr@p. But, this time he has a valid point and is being
> unfairly lampooned.
>

Define for us, if you will, the difference between "inviting" and "asking".

To say she was inviting this is tantamount to saying she was asking for it.

Parse words all you want. The message was quite clear. None of the last minute back-peddling by Billy Barty, er.. I mean DePetro will not change that.
 
Depetro at Entercom Boston

It's funny how the staff at WEEI brought up the situation as a socalled talk show host from our sister station. His only pub lately is the dan yorke/katrina incident and this. He has become irrelevant even trying to get pub.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom