kitbradley said:

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/10/entertainment/bruce-springsteen-dui/index.html Oh hell no! [Edited 2/10/21 20:02pm]

Turns out the blood alcohol level was .02.

Springsteen blew 0.02 - quarter of legal limit, source says

AD

0:17

New Jersey rock icon Bruce Springsteen’s blood-alcohol content was 0.02 - just a quarter of New Jersey’s legal limit - when he was arrested on Sandy Hook in November and charged with driving while intoxicated, a source familiar with the case told the Asbury Park Press.

The legal threshold indicating intoxication for driving purposes in New Jersey is .08, which calls into question why Springsteen was even charged with driving while intoxicated, the source said.

Springsteen, 71, a native of Freehold who lives in Colts Neck, was arrested Nov. 14 at Gateway National Recreation Area on Sandy Hook, a federal park, and issued citations for driving while intoxicated, reckless driving and consuming alcohol in a closed area, according to the National Park Service.

The charges were first reported Wednesday by Hollywood gossip news site TMZ.

Because the arrest took place on federal land, the case will be heard in federal court and will be handled by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Newark.

Matthew Reilly, spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, said he had no details about the November traffic stop. He said the tickets are not public documents.

Daphne Yun, spokeswoman for the National Park Service, said Springsteen was cooperative throughout the arrest.

Springsteen is due to appear before Judge Anthony Mautone via videoconference in what’s known as enclave court, which is like a federal version of municipal court.

Those courts handle “all local charges of offenses that occur on federal land within what is otherwise state jurisdiction,’’’ Reilly said.

Read more: https://www.app.com/story...712582002/

Why'd they do that? Strange.

onlyforaminute said:

Shocking but I believe it's not his first time getting arrested. Somewhere in his book, he was arrested when he was much younger. I'm a big, big fan of his but jeez Bruce....why the hell you go and do a commercial knowing you had this hanging over your head? And where were your managers to say "no, don't do it"?

phunkdaddy said:

onlyforaminute said:

Why'd they do that? Strange.

More than likely because he spoke out against 45

I doubt that. They probably didn't even know who he was when they stopped him, like most cases. I'm sure the cops didn't say "hey look, it's Bruce Springsteen, let's stop him and test him for a DUI because he spoke out against 45"

Its been said the officer did not realize it was him? Not that it should matter, but how are you a New Jersey Officer and resident and not know him? Either way his level was not even close so who knows

Milty2 said:

Shocking but I believe it's not his first time getting arrested. Somewhere in his book, he was arrested when he was much younger. I'm a big, big fan of his but jeez Bruce....why the hell you go and do a commercial knowing you had this hanging over your head? And where were your managers to say "no, don't do it"?

I hope for him, his managers aren't always there to say what he should do or don't.

nextedition said:

Milty2 said:

Shocking but I believe it's not his first time getting arrested. Somewhere in his book, he was arrested when he was much younger. I'm a big, big fan of his but jeez Bruce....why the hell you go and do a commercial knowing you had this hanging over your head? And where were your managers to say "no, don't do it"?

I hope for him, his managers aren't always there to say what he should do or don't.

No manager can tell an artist what to do or not do, but in my experience, having a manager that can see those potholes up ahead is something you can't put a price on. One of their functions is to advise but who knows. Maybe they thought this was a good idea.

Something is off about that pic posted.

Where is his neck? Why does his head look so big, and his body so little?

@PennyPurple, you're right, it looks like they stuck his head on top of a body that it doesn't belong to.

looby said:

@PennyPurple, you're right, it looks like they stuck his head on top of a body that it doesn't belong to.

I didn't see that until Penny pointed it out.

Milty2 said:

No manager can tell an artist what to do or not do

I guess you've never heard of Colonel Tom Parker

MickyDolenz said:

Milty2 said:

No manager can tell an artist what to do or not do

I guess you've never heard of Colonel Tom Parker

Yes I have heard of Col Tom Parker. I dont profess to know much about him except for the fact that he did help Elvis become one of the biggest music stars in the world. Is that because he told Elvis what to do? I have no idea. Maybe. But like I said before, a good manager will be in a partnership at times with an artist. That's why they are "managers". Their input is important. Not every artist is Prince post-1996 who just handles his or her own affairs.

And this also speaks to the type of artist. Should an artist seek counsel from their manager? A smart one would because artists aren't always aware of the wider world and that's because they are busy doing "art".

Milty2 said:

Yes I have heard of Col Tom Parker. I dont profess to know much about him except for the fact that he did help Elvis become one of the biggest music stars in the world. Is that because he told Elvis what to do? I have no idea. Maybe. But like I said before, a good manager will be in a partnership at times with an artist. That's why they are "managers". Their input is important. Not every artist is Prince post-1996 who just handles his or her own affairs.

And this also speaks to the type of artist. Should an artist seek counsel from their manager? A smart one would because artists aren't always aware of the wider world and that's because they are busy doing "art".

Pretty much. First of all Parker got 50% of all money Elvis made. Parker would not allow Elvis to record anything (even if Elvis wanted to) unless the songwriter would sign over half of his/her pusblishing to him/Elvis. Elvis himself didn't have anything to do with this and didn't really get involved much in business matters. A few like Jerry Reed got around it and Dolly Parton refused, so Elvis didn't get to record her song. Parker is also the reason for most of the movies Elvis made which Elvis did not like. Elvis wanted to be taken seriously as an actor, but the Colonel mostly had Elvis do low budget movies that made a lot of money. Parker didn't care about the "artistic merit" of the films. Parker made sure Elvis sung in most of them, even if it didn't have anything to do with the plot or the original script. So he could sell soundtrack albums. Parker was only about money, partly because he always had gambling debts. Parker liking to gamble is one reason he booked Elvis in Las Vegas. He also had Elvis constantly touring in the mid-1970s when Elvis was in bad health and should have been resting. When Elvis was filming the movie Change Of Habit, Mahalia Jackson visited the set. Barbara McNair, who was also in the movie, said that Mahalia asked Elvis if he would participate in a fundraiser. Barbara said that Elvis told Mahalia that he would check with the Colonel. After Mahalia left, Barbara said that Elvis told her that Parker would never allow it.

Technically not a manager, but Suge Knight is another who told his acts what to do. Sometimes using violent methods. The mafia was also involved in entertainment including record labels, record distribution, and some clubs/theaters that artists performed at, especially pre-1970s like the Rat Pack era singers.

MickyDolenz said:

Milty2 said:

Yes I have heard of Col Tom Parker. I dont profess to know much about him except for the fact that he did help Elvis become one of the biggest music stars in the world. Is that because he told Elvis what to do? I have no idea. Maybe. But like I said before, a good manager will be in a partnership at times with an artist. That's why they are "managers". Their input is important. Not every artist is Prince post-1996 who just handles his or her own affairs.

And this also speaks to the type of artist. Should an artist seek counsel from their manager? A smart one would because artists aren't always aware of the wider world and that's because they are busy doing "art".

Pretty much. First of all Parker got 50% of all money Elvis made. Parker would not allow Elvis to record anything (even if Elvis wanted to) unless the songwriter would sign over half of his/her pusblishing to him/Elvis. Elvis himself didn't have anything to do with this and didn't really get involved much in business matters. A few like Jerry Reed got around it and Dolly Parton refused, so Elvis didn't get to record her song. Parker is also the reason for most of the movies Elvis made which Elvis did not like. Elvis wanted to be taken seriously as an actor, but the Colonel mostly had Elvis do low budget movies that made a lot of money. Parker didn't care about the "artistic merit" of the films. Parker made sure Elvis sung in most of them, even if it didn't have anything to do with the plot or the original script. So he could sell soundtrack albums. Parker was only about money, partly because he always had gambling debts. Parker liking to gamble is one reason he booked Elvis in Las Vegas. He also had Elvis constantly touring in the mid-1970s when Elvis was in bad health and should have been resting. When Elvis was filming the movie Change Of Habit, Mahalia Jackson visited the set. Barbara McNair, who was also in the movie, said that Mahalia asked Elvis if he would participate in a fundraiser. Barbara said that Elvis told Mahalia that he would check with the Colonel. After Mahalia left, Barbara said that Elvis told her that Parker would never allow it.

Technically not a manager, but Suge Knight is another who told his acts what to do. Sometimes using violent methods. The mafia was also involved in entertainment including record labels, record distribution, and some clubs/theaters that artists performed at, especially pre-1970s like the Rat Pack era singers.

Ok well you know what? Those are examples possibly of bad managers. We all read these things about peopke we don't know or ever met. Who knows what is real or not real but this information has always circulated about Parker.

Like I said, a good manager (in my experience) is in a partnership with their artist - not a acting as a dictator to them. And so no, I don't broadbrush managers as if they are these evil-doers.