Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Nine

(1,741 posts)
Tue Apr 29, 2014, 11:07 AM Apr 2014

Donald Sterling incident from years ago. (Has this already been posted?)

I don't follow sports much and had never heard of Donald Sterling before the recent story about his racist comments. I looked him up on Wikipedia a few days ago. One thing I wanted to find out was if it was true he was married and not separated from his wife, since it seemed like the media was oddly blase about this when referencing his "girlfriend."

Anyway, there was this tidbit under "Personal Life,"

In 1999, (Donald's son) Scott Sterling at the age of 19 was arrested for shooting his childhood friend, Philip Scheid, with a shotgun at his father's Beverly Hills mansion.[34] Philip said that it was during an argument with Scott whereby he was shot in the legs from behind as he ran away. According to Los Angeles Times Magazine, their argument was reportedly over Saved by the Bell: The New Class actress Lindsey McKeon.[35] Scott said that he fired his gun in self-defense after Scheid approached him with a knife.[36] Ultimately, no charges were filed. The county district attorney's office refused to file criminal charges due to issues involving the victims' credibility.[37]


The part about fighting over a Saved by the Bell actress nearly made me laugh out loud. I thought maybe they were just discussing whether this random celebrity was "hot," or something. I didn't realize that they both actually had gone out with her.

Scott died of a drug overdose last year, and I'm old-fashioned enough to not like to speak ill of the dead, besides the fact that Scott's actions wouldn't necessarily be a reflection on his father.

But reading about the case a little more, it certainly seems like Donald pulled strings to get his son out of trouble. At least according to this following account. Has anyone else heard about this?

http://articles.latimes.com/2000/dec/17/magazine/tm-4889/5

The police transcript quotes Shelly Sterling expressing fears about possible danger from Scheid, and perhaps his friends. As the conversation drew out, Donald Sterling, Scott's father, came on the line. On the tape, which The Times has heard, Sterling indicated he thought it was unfair for his son to submit to further interviewing. Then he added, "And I, you know, am very close to the police chief in Beverly Hills . . . . So I'm very close to the Police Department, and I want to cooperate as much as possible."

Sterling tried to engage Hopkins on the merits of the case. The detective was evasive, but deferential.

"Yeah, you know, and I'm so close to the Police Department," Sterling said.

"Yeah," Hopkins said.

"One day you will meet me in the course of things," Sterling said. "I'm so active in the community."

"Oh, I'm sure I will," Hopkins replied.

"You know Baca [Lee Baca, sheriff of Los Angeles County]?" Sterling asks. "I went with Baca to dinner the other night, and I'm close to Parks [Los Angeles Police Chief Bernard Parks]. I'm just very involved with the Police Department."

Sterling continued: "I wish that you'd give me a little advice. One day in life you're gonna be passing through, and you may need a lawyer to give you good, honest advice."

"Yeah, well . . . ." Hopkins responded.

"And I'm that lawyer," Sterling said. "Donald Sterling, on the corner of Wilshire and Beverly Drive."

Hopkins hemmed and hawed and tried to change the subject, but Sterling returned to it. "But the bottom line, I'm asking you, officer, and please put my name somewhere in your wallet. Sometime in the course of your career, you will want to call me. You know what I'm saying? And your name again is spelled . . . may I put your name down?"

The comments inflamed the Police Department. In a memo to prosecutors, Sgt. Douglas wrote, "We are requesting that your office give special attention to the attached transcript of the telephone call between Det. Mike Hopkins and Shelly and Donald Sterling . . . . There are a number of statements by Donald Sterling that amount to an outrageous attempt at intimidation and influence peddling."


You know, I had been wondering whether Donald Sterling was suffering some sort of dementia that would cause him to make his recent statements. But it seems he's just always been a sleazebag. And it certainly seems like justice was not done back in 1999/2000 regarding the shooting by his son. At least if the LA Times story is accurate.


7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Donald Sterling incident from years ago. (Has this already been posted?) (Original Post) Nine Apr 2014 OP
He's no better and no worse than most people w. wealth. Smarmie Doofus Apr 2014 #1
well, then jollyreaper2112 Apr 2014 #3
I honestly disagree. AverageJoe90 Apr 2014 #5
I don't know much about how the Roosevelt and Buffett fortunes were amassed.... Smarmie Doofus Apr 2014 #7
laws are for the poors jollyreaper2112 Apr 2014 #2
K&R for Sterling family values nt alp227 Apr 2014 #4
Not just a Saved By The Bell actress. KamaAina Apr 2014 #6
 

Smarmie Doofus

(14,498 posts)
1. He's no better and no worse than most people w. wealth.
Tue Apr 29, 2014, 11:18 AM
Apr 2014

Wealth buys power. Sterling habitually ( it would seem) exercised his power in the way depicted above. Crude, blatant; w/o pretense of higher purpose.
( Unlike Bill Gates or the Walmart family.)

We ALL want power. It's a bit of a paradox. We're in fact, paradoxical and contradictory in this way. Some of us want to amass it and keep it to ourselves. Some of us want to share it. Most of us want to do a bit of both.

Sterling's on the "keep it to myself" end of the spectrum. Most people w. great wealth are also. The crude , unpolished and somewhat stupid Sterling is just more obvious about it.







jollyreaper2112

(1,941 posts)
3. well, then
Tue Apr 29, 2014, 11:23 AM
Apr 2014

Sounds like they're all monsters. We'll be a just society when we no longer tolerate such obscene concentrations of wealth and power. Humans are not meant to wield such power. It warps the mind.

 

AverageJoe90

(10,745 posts)
5. I honestly disagree.
Tue Apr 29, 2014, 12:59 PM
Apr 2014

Sure, quite a few wealthy people are assholes thru and thru.....in fact, Sterling goes beyond most! But not *all* of them are bad, though; in fact, you've got exceptions like JFK and FDR.....both of them privileged and both of them rather decent people. Warren Buffett doesn't seem all that bad, either.

 

Smarmie Doofus

(14,498 posts)
7. I don't know much about how the Roosevelt and Buffett fortunes were amassed....
Wed Apr 30, 2014, 07:13 AM
Apr 2014

... but the life of Joseph P. Kennedy Sr. would be exhibit #1 for the prosecution, seems to me.

A twisted, driven, warped individual..... in most respects.

The next generation of Kennedy's were just acting out a script from Joe Kennedy's head. That's what the offspring of the American nouveau riche were expected to do. Meaning "public service".

jollyreaper2112

(1,941 posts)
2. laws are for the poors
Tue Apr 29, 2014, 11:21 AM
Apr 2014

Only the poor can break the law. The rich are far, far above it. Man, I would love to see him burn. Never gonna happen. Untouchable.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Donald Sterling incident ...