Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

Taconic Murderess Diane Schuler smoked pot daily and was a heavy drinker - NY Times

According to a report in the NY Times, wrong-way Schuler used marijuana regularly "to relieve stress" and in place of other medications. She was also a heavy drinker, both facts attributed to Joan Schuler, the killer's sister-in-law (and mother of three of the victims) admitted this in a statement given to the Westchester District Attorney.

"Joan Schuler said that the deceased smoked marijuana virtually every single day of her life,"� Mr. Anolik said. "She thought that that was much better than every other medicine; she considered it a type of medicine to keep her calm."�

He also said that Joan Schuler told the police that her sister-in-law drank heavily on a regular basis. "She confirmed the fact that she liked the liquor,"� Mr. Anolik said. "She was a hard drinker."�

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 177December 10, 2009 8:53 PM

Interesting. If true and the husband was aware of this then he was partially to blame for allowing the children to ride with her. I knew he was lying when asked how that 1 liter bottle of vodka got in the van and he said he had no idea.

The sister in law's story seems a lot closer to the truth than the husbands.

by Anonymousreply 1November 8, 2009 3:50 PM

Wow, the SIL knew about this and still let her drive her children home. I gave the SIL and brother of the three dead girls the benefit of the doubt they would never do such a thing.

by Anonymousreply 2November 8, 2009 3:59 PM

I hope this stupid whore is having her just deserts in hell.

by Anonymousreply 3November 8, 2009 4:02 PM

There are no deserts in hell, just lakes of fire and brimstone.

by Anonymousreply 4November 8, 2009 4:05 PM

Are there desserts, though? I think that's what the dumbass at r3 meant.

by Anonymousreply 5November 8, 2009 4:09 PM

R2, this is a different SIL. She's the sister of Diane Schuler's husband. The SIL who let her drive her three kids is married to Diane Schuler's brother.

by Anonymousreply 6November 8, 2009 4:11 PM

The whole family probably drank til they stank. It's very typical of working class people in Suffolk County on Long island. I grew up there. They get paid way more than they are worth, they have health benefits, homes, jobs and plenty of toys and all they do is piss and moan about how rough they have it ("They make me pay taxes! They're letting all the Mexicans in! The blacks are welfarites! The Jews have taken over everything! Did I mention taxes? Poor me!")

And they drink all weekend long, but don't think they have an alcohol problem. They just "like to party."

Glad I got out of there.

by Anonymousreply 7November 8, 2009 4:12 PM

Ummm R5 you are the dumbass, the correct spelling is JUST DESERTS you stupid cow.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 8November 8, 2009 4:13 PM

R4 and R5 are illiterate fools.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 9November 8, 2009 4:14 PM

Thanks, R6, I should have coffee before I post.

by Anonymousreply 10November 8, 2009 4:16 PM

Daily pot use and heavy drinking is a totally fucked up combination.

Still, I'm betting the ultimate culprit was the heavy drinking.

She had a bottle of vodka in the car, people. Why would you keep booze in the car with you if you weren't planning on imbibing at some point along the journey?

They stopped at McDonald's and she got some kind of juice drink, which she then proceeded to spike liberally with the vodka.

How many of us have done this?

by Anonymousreply 11November 8, 2009 4:19 PM

[quote]Taconic Murderess Diane Schuler smoked pot daily and was a heavy drinker

THIS should have been the NYT headline. The woman is a murderess and should be called one.

by Anonymousreply 12November 8, 2009 4:21 PM

The Bastardis' wrongful death lawsuit has just been made.

by Anonymousreply 13November 8, 2009 6:50 PM

I love how Datalounge is so anti-Christianity, except when we're talking about notorious murderers, and suddenly everyone believes in hellfire and eternal damnation.

by Anonymousreply 14November 8, 2009 7:07 PM

Well, R14, there ARE plenty of Christian freaks like you who troll here.

by Anonymousreply 15November 8, 2009 7:21 PM

I'm not Christian at all, r15. I don't believe in God or in Jesus as the son of God or in any of that shit. But I also reject the idea of hell, as any intelligent person does.

by Anonymousreply 16November 8, 2009 7:25 PM

Then take it as a figure of speech, dumbass.

by Anonymousreply 17November 8, 2009 7:37 PM

How many of you never smoke weed to relax? How many of you never drink?

You're all such Puritans when you speak of others. It's sad that you can't understand that it only takes one mistake for you to be just like this woman.

She killed those people, and she shouldn't have been driving, but I will guarantee you if she had been a he, DL wouldn't give a shit.

by Anonymousreply 18November 8, 2009 7:42 PM

Yes, I think people were just being descriptive, not asserting a religious belief!

by Anonymousreply 19November 8, 2009 7:42 PM

The sister-in-law wouldn't have a SINGLE REASON to lie, would she? Or maybe just embellish the truth?

Certainly, she would never be thinking of the deep pockets of the insurance company if there is not only an accident, but criminal negligence.

by Anonymousreply 20November 8, 2009 7:44 PM

Everyone knows now that you don't drink and drive. And she didn't have just one drink.

by Anonymousreply 21November 8, 2009 7:45 PM

r18 - "How many of you never smoke weed to relax? How many of you never drink?"

We aren't talking about NEVER drinking or NEVER smoking pot. This bitch did it DAILY. AND she got behind the wheel of a car. AND she put 4 kids in the car and drove while being totally fucked up. AND even after stopping to get her bearings and call for help she got BACK in the car with four kids and CONTINUED to drive intoxicated. AND even if she had no regard for her own life and the life of the children she was responsible for, she drove headfirst into a car and snuffed out the lives of three more people.

That's a little different than smoking an occasional joint or having a social drink. And if you can't make the distinction, maybe you ought to go take a ride on the Taconic.

by Anonymousreply 22November 8, 2009 10:20 PM

Well, I'm in the minority, but I NEVER drink and NEVER smoke pot. And NEVER have.

What gets me about this case isn't just the actions of Diane Schuler, but the fact that, until now, everybody in her family INSISTED she did not drink at all. Even when they admitted she smoked pot, they all claimed she was a near tea-totaler. Yet if her SIL knew the truth, other families must have known as well.

by Anonymousreply 23November 8, 2009 10:30 PM

This is going to blow the civil case wide open.

by Anonymousreply 24November 10, 2009 12:42 PM

R20, Joan Schuler is not the mother of the 3 little girls who died in the crash. They were the children of Diane's brother, Warren Hance.

by Anonymousreply 25November 10, 2009 1:10 PM

"They get paid way more than they are worth, they have health benefits, homes, jobs and plenty of toys and all they do is piss and moan about how rough they have it"

R7, I couldn't agree more about working class Long Islanders. It has infuriated me my entire life. Some of the most classless people I have ever run across.

by Anonymousreply 26November 10, 2009 1:18 PM

Can we still call her Wrongway Vodkavan Momfrau?

by Anonymousreply 27November 10, 2009 1:30 PM

r27 - I prefer to call her a serial killer since she is responsible for the deaths of 7 people at her hands.

by Anonymousreply 28November 10, 2009 3:10 PM

Murdering a number of people at one location in a short period of time is referred to as a "spree killing," R28.

by Anonymousreply 29November 10, 2009 5:57 PM

Murdering a number of people at one location in a short period of time is referred to as a hobby.

by Anonymousreply 30November 10, 2009 6:07 PM

They said last night she was seen puking out of the vehicle right before the crash. Must have been fucked up royally.

by Anonymousreply 31November 10, 2009 6:22 PM

Hmmm, you don't puke from pot. Pot reduces nausea. Guess that would confirm she was using the stuffin the empty vodka bottle.

by Anonymousreply 32November 10, 2009 6:27 PM

I think if this had happened at three a.m. with only the tanked housechick and maybe her husband in the car with her, we would still be angered by the loss of life of the victims of the other car, but it would have been just another tale of a tanked suburanite drunk driver, a typical Long Island scenario. This cow started boozing bright and early in the morning before a long road trip home with a motley of kids in the car. Its a shame she's dead, it really is. She got off easy.

by Anonymousreply 33November 10, 2009 6:29 PM

What stood out to me was that this wrongway woman didn't even finish community college, yet had a job as an executive at Cablevision. Who was she fucking?

by Anonymousreply 34November 10, 2009 6:40 PM

r34 - I can't imagine that it takes much talent to be the Manager of the Accounting Department at a cable company, which was her title -- so calling her an executive, as many of the news articles did, was a bit of an exaggeration. Before that, she was a nanny. Bet the parents of the kids she used to nanny for are glad she went into accounting!

by Anonymousreply 35November 10, 2009 7:04 PM

If she'd just been smoking pot, she'd probably be alive. Booze is the killer here. I say this as a big boozebag myself.

by Anonymousreply 36November 10, 2009 7:08 PM

I wonder how many outraged college graduates on this thread have difficulty distinguishing between voluntary manslaughter and murder?

Negligent homicide, yes. Murder? No.

by Anonymousreply 37November 10, 2009 7:15 PM

R7 knows the LI crowd all too well. Take a look at them going - waddling - toward an LIRR station. The majority are common, fat and crude.

by Anonymousreply 38November 10, 2009 7:23 PM

Right, R36. Because pot doesn't slow down reaction time.

by Anonymousreply 39November 10, 2009 7:25 PM

r37 - The woman took voluntarily ingested massive amounts of pot and alcohol and placed four children in a car and began to drive. She plled over to stop, indicating she KNEW there was a serious problem, and then put the kids back in the car and started driving AGAIN.

She made deliberate choices. Do you think the children in the car with her weren't screaming for her to slow down or pull over when they saw her driving down the wrong way of a highway for nearly two miles? She made no attempt to slow down or to pull over -- again a deliberate choice.

Finally, by driving headfirst into others after making her deliberate choices she exceded the boundaries of negligence. You can call it what you want, but it's murder nonetheless.

by Anonymousreply 40November 10, 2009 7:27 PM

oh man, I feel sick. They have the police report posted in the Westchester paper. Page 6 is about how the families were notified. I had to stop reading, god, what a fucking tragic waste.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 41November 10, 2009 7:50 PM

"A motorist who passed Schuler on the New York State Thruway ... described her driving as 'more aggressive than out of control' and her face 'appeared to be concentrated on driving with both hands on the wheel.'"

"Another group of travelers said they tried honking and gesturing at Schuler to get her attention, but 'she was staring straight ahead and showed no awareness that she was headed in the wrong direction,' the report said."

This makes it sound like she was suicidal and deliberately trying to get them all killed.

by Anonymousreply 42November 10, 2009 7:57 PM

Thank you r40. R37 IS CLEARLY INSANE.

by Anonymousreply 43November 10, 2009 8:02 PM

There's an anti-pot troll on this board exploding with Nancy Reaganism.

There's nothing wrong with smoking pot every day. Don't make that out to be the monster here.

The problem is the woman drove while wasted on (legal) vodka. Kids or not, she shouldn't have done that.

It's a shame other people paid for her recklessness with their lives, but I don't see how a kid dying is more tragic than an innocent adult (like the ones she crashed into) dying.

by Anonymousreply 44November 10, 2009 9:13 PM

none of the kids except the boy who survived were wearing seatbelts.

The men in the front seat of the other car were but they died on impact.

by Anonymousreply 45November 10, 2009 9:49 PM

r44 - There is absolutely something wrong with doing pot -- or any other controlled substance -- on a daily basis.

Marijuana is classified as a psychoactive drug which is a chemical substance that acts primarily upon the central nervous system where it alters brain function, resulting in changes in perception, mood, consciousness and behavior.

Aside from a subjective change in perception, the most common short-term physical and neurological effects include increased heart rate, lowered blood pressure, impairment of psychomotor coordination, concentration, and short-term episodic and working memory.

Is it healthy to keep raising and lowering your blood pressure on a daily basis? To play with the rate your heart beats? To risk sustained loss of memory and impairment of motor skills?

Even if it was the liquor that caused her to drive recklessly, it's a little naive to think that years of marijuana use (including massive amounts over the weekend preceding the crash to as late as 15 minutes before the accident) didn't have any effect on this woman's judgement.

by Anonymousreply 46November 10, 2009 9:55 PM

How would I assemble a Wrongway Vodkavan Momfrau costume?

by Anonymousreply 47November 10, 2009 10:00 PM

The witnesses description make it sound like she was in an alcoholic blackout.

by Anonymousreply 48November 10, 2009 10:03 PM

The other victims' families are pushing for a grand jury investigation. The DA said the case died with Diane Shuler, but apparently if there are enough people who knew she was a drunk, then her husband must've known and he'd have to bear some of the responsibility. The victims' families have already filed a civil suit against him, he should settle it, give them everything he has, and move somewhere else with his surving child and try to start over.

by Anonymousreply 49November 10, 2009 10:12 PM

Read item 56 on page 12 of the police report.

It sounds like she was having some sort of acid freak-out.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 50November 10, 2009 10:21 PM

[quote]There is absolutely something wrong with doing pot -- or any other controlled substance -- on a daily basis.

Wrong in what way? Morally wrong?

[quote]Marijuana is classified as a psychoactive drug which is a chemical substance that acts primarily upon the central nervous system where it alters brain function, resulting in changes in perception, mood, consciousness and behavior.

So is alcohol. But marijuana affects reflexes and reaction time much less than booze, and is not chemically addictive. Often, its alteration of perception, mood, and consciousness is a good thing. For many physical and psychological conditions, it improves a person's well-being.

[quote]Is it healthy to keep raising and lowering your blood pressure on a daily basis? To play with the rate your heart beats? To risk sustained loss of memory and impairment of motor skills?

Is it healthy to chug sugared drinks and snarf down cake and pop a Xanax when you feel stressed? That fucks with your heart rate, blood pressure, and brain functioning too.

But I don't care if you raise your blood pressure (or the rest) by your own choice, whether by bong hits or cupcakes. Your body, your choice.

What I dislike is the implication that pot smoking turns you into a careless, crazy wreck. Insinuating an alcoholic woman's negligent homicide was caused by pot smoking reeks of Anslinger and Reagan.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 51November 10, 2009 10:37 PM

[quote]Often, its alteration of perception, mood, and consciousness is a good thing.

So altered perception and consciousness when operating a motor vehicle are good things?

by Anonymousreply 52November 10, 2009 11:37 PM

Sometimes, R52, when (as you argue all over DL) pot smoking makes one more paranoid.

Drunks think rules don't apply, and drive recklessly.

Pot smokers get caught up in details and end up driving more slowly and cautiously.

If you're going to argue that pot makes one a careless monster, you can't also argue it makes one a paranoid recluse.

by Anonymousreply 53November 10, 2009 11:52 PM

Diane Hance was a drunk and a stoner for years, so is her husband. They dated for quite a while before they married, and their habits were well known. For any in their families to claim they were unaware of her habits is horseshit, everyone knew, it was a standing joke, and she made no secret of it. When she married Danny and moved to West Babylon, everyone thought, how fitting, a low class town for a low rent drunk. No one thought she be stupid enough to load the car with kids, but its no surprise that she was tanked.

by Anonymousreply 54November 11, 2009 3:36 AM

r44 -- I'm not talking about morality; just health. Excessive use of ANYTHING, be it drugs, alcohol, nicotine or food is bad for you. Too much food= obesity; too much nicotine=lung cancer; too much alcohol=chirosis of the liver, etc. It has nothing to do with morality.

Next you say, in reference to marijuana use, "Often, its alteration of perception, mood, and consciousness is a good thing". Really? Was an alteration in perception that allowed her to think it was ok to put 4 kids back in a car and drive the wrong direction down a highway a "good" thing. You'll have to explain that one to me.

Next you say "But I don't care if you raise your blood pressure (or the rest) by your own choice, whether by bong hits or cupcakes. Your body, your choice." WRONG! The minute you get into a car with four other passengers and drive on a public highway, your "right" to decide that you have the right to drive stoned or drunk ends. "Your body, your choice" might apply to abortion; it has no bearing here.

You say, "What I dislike is the implication that pot smoking turns you into a careless, crazy wreck. Insinuating an alcoholic woman's negligent homicide was caused by pot smoking reeks of Anslinger and Reagan." The level of pot in her system was off the charts, and the toxicology shows she was smoking it 15 minutes prior to the crash. In other words, while she was already stopped on the side of the road, bent over nauseus by eye-witness accounts, she STILL thought it was ok to light up one more joint for the road before getting back in the car. If you truly believe that that wasn't negligent I can only think that years of pt-smoking has seriously damaged YOUR perception.

by Anonymousreply 55November 11, 2009 4:36 AM

r50 - It sounds like the pot she was smoking may have been laced with PCP or something.

by Anonymousreply 56November 11, 2009 4:36 AM

In one of the witness statements linked earlier Schuler is described as driving very aggressively but accurately, not weaving all over the place as one would typically see with a drunk driver. R56 may be right that she was on something else besides booze and weed, although that combo was evidently enough to fuck her up.

The whole thing is weird. The McDonalds employees who interacted with Schuler the day of the accident described her as acting sober and normal. Maybe she was having some sort of drug-fueled psychotic episode that didn't manifest itself until it was too late to intervene.

by Anonymousreply 57November 11, 2009 4:58 AM

I don't think she started drinking till after the McDonald's stop. Monticello (the town where the McD's was) is about an hour from the crash site. She probably bought an orange juice, dumped half and filled the rest of the cup with vodka. Drinking that much in such a short period of time will fuck you up completely. She could barely speak once she called her brother.

In college, I had alcohol poisoning from a screwdriver a friend made for me. We had no idea how to mix drinks or how much alcohol to add. I drank about 6 ounces of vodka in one drink and was unconscious within an hour.

by Anonymousreply 58November 11, 2009 2:28 PM

[quote] She probably bought an orange juice, dumped half and filled the rest of the cup with vodka. Drinking that much in such a short period of time will fuck you up completely. She could barely speak once she called her brother.

What you stated may very well be true but she most likely had a fairly high BAC at that point (McDonalds). The body cannot process 10 drinks in just 1 hour. You sure will be fucked up 1 hour after taking 10 drinks but a lot of them will still not be in your blood stream. She had a BAC of .19 (10 drinks) with some alcohol still in her stomach. I think (at least for men) it takes 1 hour to get a drink in your system and 1 hour to get it out of your system. Think it takes almost 2 hours for women to get it out of their system.

by Anonymousreply 59November 11, 2009 2:43 PM

I love pot and would never drive after smoking a joint. Your perception of things like distance etc get very altered, so no, it's not just prudes saying that driving after smoking pot is wrong.

Oh and this bitch had a death wish. She committed suicide and dragged along her nieces, her daughter and 3 innocent men. Suicidal fat white thread whore.

by Anonymousreply 60November 11, 2009 5:38 PM

The moderation troll has to understand that moderation is not what this frau was accused of.

by Anonymousreply 61November 11, 2009 7:03 PM

Oh I don't know. She only killed 7 people when there were hundreds of people traveling the Taconic. I think that was moderation!

by Anonymousreply 62November 11, 2009 7:05 PM

I wonder how her family is coping. We never heard from her parents. Her husband and her brother and the other sister in law obviously knew she was a boozer. How guilty do they feel about their part in this tragedy? Do they think it was OK to lie about her habitual drinking and pot smoking just so that they would be spared any legal consequences? Rotten people, if you ask me.

by Anonymousreply 63November 11, 2009 7:15 PM

"How many of you never smoke weed to relax?"

I do smoke pot to relax in my home. I can't even answer the PHONE when I'm stoned let alone drive a van.

by Anonymousreply 64November 11, 2009 7:35 PM

>>> Do they think it was OK to lie about her habitual drinking and pot smoking just so that they would be spared any legal consequences?

Obviously, yes. They did think so.

The husband's sister probably never liked the wife in the first place. The husband must be very pissed at his sister.

Here's the thing... I'm sure both she and the husband were boozehounds, but what made her go so far overboard on that trip? She'd made the trip before. She'd no doubt made the trip with a buzz on and a screwdriver in a commuter coffee cup. Why on this trip did she get sooo fucking drunk that she was puking along the side of the road?

Those poor kids. You will never convince me that the niece who got on the phone to her father at the Tarrytown sign didn't tell her father that Aunt Diane was drunk, please come get us right away.

And that bitch tossed the cellphone out the window.

by Anonymousreply 65November 11, 2009 7:51 PM

It's funny how all the pot smokers are all "It was the alcohol! No way was it pot. Pot makes you a better person!"

Hahahahaha. It was the alcohol and the pot.

by Anonymousreply 66November 11, 2009 8:14 PM

I still contend that her marriage broke up that weekend. The kids must've been driving her crazy, she knew the bottle of absolute was in the car. "One drink, just to take the edge off," she thought. One became 10 and now they're all dead.

Hell, I drink and smoke pot and I know my reasoning and judgment no longer exist when I do. Which is why I would never even consider having one drink and driving. One drink often turns into many and by then my judgment is so warped that I probably would think I'm ok to drive. The worst trouble I face are drunken inappropriate comments and Facebook posts.

by Anonymousreply 67November 11, 2009 8:29 PM

The key to understanding what happened isn't in the question "Did she smoke pot and drink?" It's in the question "WHY did she smoke pot and drink?" Once you know that, all the pieces will fit into place.

In classic police jargon, she had the means (the pot, alcohol and car), the opportunity (2 hours alone in a car with 4 kids) -- now what you need is the motive.

by Anonymousreply 68November 11, 2009 8:35 PM

Again, Diane's been a boozer for many years, so is Danny. Danny was born and raised in West Babylon and his partying exploits are legendary. Right now, he's scrambling to avoid any punitive damages and liability. The Hances (Warren and Jackie) can't publicly admit they knew Diane was a drunk, because it shows culpable conduct on their part, that they knowingly put the care and control of their children with someone who had known substance abuse issues, and believe me, they knew, they just never thought she'd go on a bender with the kids in the car.

by Anonymousreply 69November 11, 2009 8:40 PM

At first the husband admitted that she smoked pot and drank (though he said occasionally) but he changed his story mighty quickly when the possibility of charges against him were brought up. I bet he was high as a kite too that day. He belongs with his wife.

by Anonymousreply 70November 11, 2009 8:47 PM

She was definitely pissed about something. It takes some kind of rage to get that wasted behind the wheel of a car; and for her to do it while the car was filled with kids, including her own... wow. Just wow.

So far as anyone knows, she didn't have a bunch of traffic tickets showing a history of being an erratic driver. She got smashed and trashed that day, and maybe she was on a murder/suicide mission like someone said, to get back at her husband for something.

by Anonymousreply 71November 11, 2009 8:50 PM

R44, you're an idiot. Doing pot every day is dangerous if you're operating anything large enough to kill people. I knew a woman who was on her way to work one morning, stopped at a red light and was hit from behind by a guy doing 100 mph. He was high on pot and pot only. No other drugs were found in his system. He lived. He smoked weed every day.

Don't be telling people lies about illegal drugs. If you want to smoke it, fine. But stop spreading lies.

by Anonymousreply 72November 11, 2009 9:02 PM

I'm a daily pot smoker and no tee-totaler when it comes to booze, but anyone decrying the outright revulsion this story causes as "Nancy Reagan hysteria" is a moron or possibly a troll. I would never get behind the wheel while stoned, and the amount of alcohol she injested would probably make me pass out. The gall of this woman to do just that, AND with kids in the car, is just sickening. She's a monster.

by Anonymousreply 73November 11, 2009 9:04 PM

I also think that there had to be a motive for her to get so wasted on that day. As far as women alcoholics go, they tend to hide their drinking by drinking wine or frou-frou drinks, like margaritas. I'm not saying that women can't or don't down a fifth of vodka but the fact that she puked twice may suggest that she was unused to drinking that much or that kind of liquor. I've known alcoholics and few of them ever got to the point where they were puking. Of course, their tolerance was extremely high.

Did she really get a juice at McDonald's? Her drinking so much while driving during the day seems like it was unusual behavior for her. I'm betting the husband broke up with her.

by Anonymousreply 74November 11, 2009 10:28 PM

I've heard very little about the boy who survived and wonder if he remembers anything about that horrible day. It's probably best if he doesn't. It's hard to imagine what those poor kids went through in that final hour.

by Anonymousreply 75November 12, 2009 4:22 PM

"You're all such Puritans when you speak of others. It's sad that you can't understand that it only takes one mistake for you to be just like this woman."

It would take a lot more than ONE mistake to be like THIS woman. Obviously she was addicted to both alcohol and marijuana for years. Her whole fucking life was one long mistake.

by Anonymousreply 76November 12, 2009 5:32 PM

All these queens yammering about how it's perfectly fine to smoke pot everyday don't know shit. I've known some potheads in my time and they're definitely not well-adjusted, healthy people. In fact their dependence on the stuff is an indication of how fucked up they are.

by Anonymousreply 77November 12, 2009 5:34 PM

Here's an eyewitness account of the accident from the Diane Shuler page on the People You'll See in Hell website.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 78November 12, 2009 5:49 PM

This incident should be filed under the "Mysteries that will never be solved" thread. We'll never know what happened in that van during the 2 1/2 hours from the campsite to the crash site. It seems to me that she would have to be literally guzzling alcohol to get that drunk that fast. One glass of wine will last me about an hour. Maybe it was just a coincidental timing of alcohol, marijuana and something else not discovered yet occuring at the same time. One thing not mentioned was if she had any food in her stomach. That might have had an effect on how the alcohol affected her. Alcohol affects me differently depending on my general mood, what I've eaten, and I swear, sometimes it's just my bodies chemistry at any given time. I've been to parties where I've literally just gotten a good buzz from massive amounts of alchohol and another night I can drink two glasses of wine and get shitfaced. I think there are a lot of factors that played into this that we will never know about.

by Anonymousreply 79November 12, 2009 6:34 PM

Bodies = body's

by Anonymousreply 80November 12, 2009 6:48 PM

r79 - No matter what your experience is with alcohol the fact is that Diane Schuler had a .19 BAC at the time of her death and had alcohol in her stomach. There is no mystery to that. Doesn't matter what your experience is with it or if she drank out of a McDonald's cup, or if she still had alcohol in her bloodstream from the night before when she left the camp etc. She had a BAC of .19 at time of death. Get it?

by Anonymousreply 81November 12, 2009 6:48 PM

Okay, I just read that she attempted to buy Tylenol or Advil at a convenience store. Did she buy some or not? That and alcohol can have strange effects too. Alcohol and Tylenol together is a major no-no.

by Anonymousreply 82November 12, 2009 7:06 PM

maybe she had a wicked hangover from the night before, 5 screaming kids in the car weren't helping. She couldn't get advil or tylenol so had a bit of the hair o' the dog.

by Anonymousreply 83November 12, 2009 7:11 PM

It's becoming clearer her brother knew about her drinking and drugging.

by Anonymousreply 84November 12, 2009 7:23 PM

Just that fact that she and the four dead girls were not wearing seat belts indicates she was a fucking wanker. You NEVER let kids sit in a car unbelted. And I don't even think I would know how to start my car without putting on my seat belt first.

by Anonymousreply 85November 12, 2009 7:47 PM

I don't know about that r84. When the toxicology report first came out he and his wife were stunned and said they'd never let their kids in the car with her if they knew. They may have known she was a hard-core partier and liked the booze and pot but not while driving.

Her husband also worked from 4 - 12. She could have easily developed a drinking problem that he wouldn't have known about. Put the kids to bed at 8, pound vodka till 11, asleep when husband got home. However, the coroner said there were no internal signs of alcoholism/chronic alcohol abuse.

by Anonymousreply 86November 12, 2009 7:49 PM

r85, the kids were wearing seatbelts. The police reports only check off the little boy wearing a seatbelt, but in subsequent pages of the report responding officers said all kids were belted and two were in carseats. The front seat victims in the SUV were wearing seatbelts, Daniel Luongo was in the back seat and wasn't wearing a seatbelt. They all died on impact.

Diane Schuler did not die on impact. She got out of the car completely engulfed in flames and missing a leg. A coworker's husband was on the scene.

by Anonymousreply 87November 12, 2009 8:01 PM

R86- Have you not read this thread? Her sister in law knew about her hardcore drinking and pot use, what are the chances that her husband and brother didn't?

Nobody in their right mind would think a mom would drive with children while under the influence. However, evidence was there that she had some risky habits that could possibly lead to disaster.

by Anonymousreply 88November 12, 2009 8:04 PM

r88, have you not been following the case? The SIL who knew is a different sister in law, not the dead girl's mother. The sister in law in the NY Times article is Joan Shuler related to Danny Schuler, the dead woman's husband. The dead girl's mother is Jackie Hance, married to Diane Schuler's brother Warren Hance.

Jackie and Warren contend they had no idea she was a drunk/druggie and never would have let her drive their kids if they knew.

by Anonymousreply 89November 12, 2009 8:37 PM

>>> Diane Schuler did not die on impact. She got out of the car completely engulfed in flames and missing a leg

Your coworker's husband is higher than Diane Schuler ever was. The van was upside down. Her cervical spine was avulsed, there was a total atlanto-occipital dislocation with spinal cord transection. She wasn't going anywhere, dear. Atlanto-occipital dislocation is internal decapitation; her skull was not attached to her spinal coloum and her spinal cord was transected.

Aside from that fact, she also has a tear in her pericardial sac and her aorta was completely transectionally torn. You won't be able to hoist yourself too far as you are bleeding out within seconds. Both of her shin bones were broken, the right one in two separate places. A little difficult to stand with both tibias broken (her left foot and left femur were also broken).

Both of her legs were still attached to her body, though they were both mangled.

Why do people like you make shit up? Is your life that boring?

by Anonymousreply 90November 12, 2009 8:49 PM

The booze was to steel her nerves for what she was about to do, with malice aforethought.

by Anonymousreply 91November 12, 2009 8:51 PM

[quote]Diane Schuler did not die on impact. She got out of the car completely engulfed in flames and missing a leg.

If that is true, and I believe it is, I hope that there was a 3 second window of consciousness when this woman realized what she did.

by Anonymousreply 92November 12, 2009 8:53 PM

Let's do a family tree.

Diane Hance, sister of Warren Hance.

Diane Hance marries Daniel Schuler, who has a sister names Joan Schuler.

Diane Hance Schuler has two children with Daniel Schuler.

Her brother, Warren Hance, marries and has 3 daughters with his wife.

Diane Hance Schuler's children and Warren Hance's children were in the car accident.

Joan Schuler, sister of Daniel Schuler and who is no blood relation to either Diane Hance Schuler or Warren Hance, did not have any children in the car that was in the accident.

Joan Schuler - she who lost no children and is the sister of Diane Hance Schuler's husband - is the one who said Diane Hance Schuler smoked pot every day and was a heavy drinker.

by Anonymousreply 93November 12, 2009 8:55 PM

The autopsy said she was 63 inches tall and weighed 204 lbs. That can't be right.

by Anonymousreply 94November 12, 2009 8:56 PM

My mother is 62 inches and weighs 200 lbs and she is massively obese. Photos of Diane Schuler don't show her to be more than chunky. She couldn't be 63" and 204 lbs.

by Anonymousreply 95November 12, 2009 9:00 PM

R89 - Yes, I have been following the case from the beginning and I am well aware that it's a different SIL. My original point stands. You are looking at it as black and white instead of using logic. If Diane's SIL from her husband's side of the family was aware of her drinking, what are the chances that the husband and brother didn't know? Not very high.

What kind of statement do you think her brother and SIL were going to make? 'Yes, we knowingly knew Diane was a lush, but let her drive with our 3 children.' Come on. I don't believe they thought she was would ever drive drunk with kids in her car, but I think they knew she was a heavy drinker.

by Anonymousreply 96November 12, 2009 9:05 PM

Why would you believe something so ridiculous was true? Even ignoring the med student upthread showing off, how does someone leave a totalled vehicle with only one leg and while engulfed in flames?

by Anonymousreply 97November 12, 2009 9:06 PM

r90, I'm not making anything up, but apparently my co-worker and/or her husband are. The Monday following the accident it was all about her, and his eyewitness account of seeing the accident and all the dead bodies. She said he was having nightmares about Diane Schuler's legless firey body for weeks.

by Anonymousreply 98November 12, 2009 9:08 PM

>> If that is true, and I believe it is,

It isn't. Read the autopsy. She could not have gotten out of any car on her own, let alone an upside down vehicle. She couldn't even have stood up and lifted her head off her chest.

She was, at the very least, paralysed from the neck down if she survived the impact.

Her spinal cord had a high tear and her skull was no longer connected to her spine. She would have needed both hands to hold her skull up (because her head would have been lolling back and forth due to not being attached to her inner neck), and believe me, she had no ability to use her arms due to the spinal cord injury, not to mention the injuries to her arms.

If she wasn't dead on impact, with all of her various spinal, skull, bone, blood vessel and tissue injuries, she wouldn't have been conscious for more than a few seconds and she certainly would not have been able to get out of an overturned minivan. Someone pulled her out.

by Anonymousreply 99November 12, 2009 9:11 PM

They all died on impact except the little boy and one of the girls who later died at the hospital.

by Anonymousreply 100November 12, 2009 9:15 PM

I believe she died of a stroke brought about by her diabetic tooth abscess and her sore leg.

by Anonymousreply 101November 12, 2009 9:19 PM

I once had a coworker tell me that her sister-in-law pulled into a gas station late at night to get gas and the guy at the gas station refused to let her use her credit card to pay for the gas, saying she had to come out of the car and come inside the gas station because of a credit card problem. Then, when she got out of the car and came inside, he locked the door of the gas station and told her he'd seen a man lying on the floor of her back seat, clutching a knife! He called the police, who arrested the backseat guy.

Can you imagine, intoned this coworker, what would have happened if the guy had not done that? Her sister would have been murdered! The gas station guy was a hero!

I was about 18 at the time and believed her, since she was about 30. I'd never heard the story before.

I don't know why people make up or spread urban legends, but they do. They get some kind of satisfaction out of it. I guess she wanted to see if I would be gullible enough to believe her. I was. What did I know? I had no reason to believe some lying douche would tell me a load of bullshit for the hell of it. Or maybe she was mentally ill and had some kind of compulsion to inject drama into her life. I don't know. I read the story of The Man With a Knife in the Back of the Car in one of those "Vanishing Hitchhiker" urban legend books a few years later and felt like an idiot. But she was the bigger idiot for being such a BSer.

by Anonymousreply 102November 12, 2009 9:29 PM

I get it. You can't blame me for wishing 3 seconds of hell on this woman, though.

by Anonymousreply 103November 12, 2009 9:29 PM

It's plain and simple. Her brother, SIL & husband are trying to mitigate any further damages or lawsuits. They have lost their family and can't change that. Now they are lying through their teeth to avoid being held responsible civilly and in the court of public opinion. Diane's husband is a cop for christ sake. There is no way he didn't know she was an alcohol and pot user. It's possible he didn't realize she was impaired when she left but I don't believe he didn't know about her substance abuse.

by Anonymousreply 104November 12, 2009 9:33 PM

What about her brother? Has he disputed the charges of her drinking and drugging the way the husband did? The husband is the one who is in greater danger of being sued because he saw her that day. The brother was far away, hadn't seen her, but did the right thing by calling the police, so he can't be sued.

I'm sure he denied it at first, but you don't see him going on Larry King insisting his sister was little Miss Priss Housewife.

I wonder about the brother's wife. All 3 of her kids are dead, thanks to that bitch. I wonder if wrong way mom had been fighting with the family recently, and decided to get back at everyone. Nobody drinks that much and drives that way for so long -- they say she crossed the median at least 3 times, was tailgaiting, flashing her lights and driving aggressively, puking outside the car, etc. Sounds like she was trying to get completely blotto so it wouldn't hurt when she smashed up the car.

by Anonymousreply 105November 12, 2009 11:16 PM

Can the police interview the lone survivor, Diane Schuler's son Or is the father making sure he doesn't?

I saw an interview on GMA where the Schuler's lawyer said that the little boy is healing and home and playing like any other little kid. Seems to me then that he is well enough to talk to the cops.

by Anonymousreply 106November 13, 2009 5:37 PM

the police investigation is closed, r106. The next step is the civil case(s), which has already been filed against the estate of Diane Shuler.

by Anonymousreply 107November 13, 2009 5:43 PM

r107 - Are you yre it's closed? The linked article, from November 10th, provides infor from the police report. If that info is just coming to light now, wouldn't that indicate that the investigation is ongoing?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 108November 13, 2009 6:09 PM

[quote]Hance's wife, Jackie, could hear her three young girls crying in the background.

I feel so sorry for those kids. What a horrible way to go.

by Anonymousreply 109November 13, 2009 6:29 PM


when I hear things like that it just, ugh, it's like a punch in the gut. I feel so bad for those kids. If anything, I hope this case will open up a discussion on parents drinking like they are teenagers, and maybe make parents even more careful about letting their kids drive with a family member they suspect are drinking too much, people tend to be less judgdmental towards a family member about drinking than we otherwise would, and boy, did it cost the Hance family.

by Anonymousreply 110November 13, 2009 6:53 PM

If people were calling the police and reporting her why didn't the police attempt to pull her over? Does the Taconic not have state troopers stationed along doing radar or anything? Shit, you can't go down a highway in Texas without seeing DPS officers everywhere and if you are Mexican or look like a hippie watch out.

by Anonymousreply 111November 13, 2009 7:03 PM

For the kids to have cell-phoned for help, had the cell-phone taken away and left at the side of the road so they couldn't call anymore, and then told to get back in the car by this drunk is MURDER.

by Anonymousreply 112November 16, 2009 3:31 PM

At first I thought the posters suggesting it was murder/suicide were being overly dramatic. Now, I believe them. She was definitely drinking and drugging to "obliviate herself" as we used to say in my teen party days. She was fine at the restaurant and gas station. It was in the last hour that she was driving like a maniac, puking, etc. Nobody drinks and smokes that much that fast just to get a buzz on.

I'm sure Diane Schuler had driven drunk and high before, but never anything like that. She'd never even been ticketed, let alone gotten a DUI. She drank heavily and toked up because she wanted to smash that car up. And she meant to take those kids with her. She was getting back at her husband for something, and maybe her brother, too. I'll just bet she was having problems with her family. Maybe regarding her drinking and drugging. Think about it, NOBODY drives as fucked up as she was, turning around in the median repeatedly, tailgaiting, honking, driving the wrong way, scaring the shit out of kids. She was enraged and she was committing murder suicide. If her family had been an upstate family instead of a Long Island family, they'd have had a hunting rifle and she would have offed the kids one by one and then herself.

by Anonymousreply 113November 16, 2009 4:06 PM

To the person who asked about the boy and why they don't interview him - he suffered a concussion and was not conscious when he was found. He definitately has no memory of the accident. People who suffer a concussion and lose consciousness as a result of an accident have the memory of the accident wiped out, and usually have at least 20 minutes of time before the accident wiped out, too. Some people lose hours of time, some people can't remember anything at all from the day of the accident. It is not psychological shock, it is neurological trauma which causes this and that memory can never be recovered.

I'm sure there are Dataloungers here who suffered loss of consciousness in an accident due to head trauma who don't remember their accidents.

by Anonymousreply 114November 16, 2009 4:10 PM

What amazes me is that Datalounge has not picked up on the autopsy reuslts saying she weighed 204 lbs.

by Anonymousreply 115November 16, 2009 4:16 PM

r14, I suffered a concussion from a car accident and it's true I didn't remember anything from before or after the accident. However, with a couple of days it all came back to me.

by Anonymousreply 116November 16, 2009 4:19 PM

r 112 - You are probably right, but the police report that was released doesn't indicate that the investigators were ever given the opportunity to talk to the boy. If that's true, even with the memory loss possibilit, shouldn't the case stay open at least until they have the chance to interview the lone surviving witness?

by Anonymousreply 117November 16, 2009 4:28 PM

why would the case stay open when she's dead?

by Anonymousreply 118November 16, 2009 4:33 PM

r116 - Even if the alleged criminal was killed, you still have to officially provide proof that they were in fact the killer, why they did it, how they did it, etc.

There is a Civil Case pending from the Bastardi/Longo families. I'm surprised they are not pushing to have answers.

by Anonymousreply 119November 16, 2009 5:14 PM

>>> Does the Taconic not have state troopers stationed along doing radar or anything? Shit, you can't go down a highway in Texas without seeing DPS officers everywhere and if you are Mexican or look like a hippie watch out.

There are certain roads in NY that are virtually unpoliced. The LIE at night -- especially on Saturday and Sunday nights when it is clogged with drunken bargoers, partiers, mall people and people returning from beaches, the Hamptons, etc... you won't see a cop car in Nassau County at all. In the daytime is a different story, but even then, Nassau County is pretty much cop-free on the LIE. It isn't until Suffolk that you see cops.

by Anonymousreply 120November 16, 2009 5:51 PM

MY Magazine has an article about this. The husband seems totally in denial.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 121November 16, 2009 11:19 PM

Is the husband is denial or just plain lying? I think the latter. According to him Diane was perfect, they never fought he never saw her drunk. I don't buy any of what he is selling.

by Anonymousreply 122November 17, 2009 7:00 PM

I'm not either R122. I have a feeling they fought quite frequently (maybe fueled by booze) and had a doozy that weekend. No couple is perfect and the ones who say they are usually have the worst relationship in the bunch. I thought someone had said that Diane drank because of the "stresses" of her marriage and daily life.

by Anonymousreply 123November 17, 2009 7:09 PM

"Though Diane could be impulsive, Danny never doubted her judgment. One time, Diane ran out for milk and returned with a flat-screen TV. Another time, she went out for groceries and returned with a Jeep Cherokee. "She deserved it,"� Danny tells me."

Big red flag right there. That is not rational behavior. You go out to buy groceries but end up with a new car? Sounds like groceries was as excuse to get out of the house and go drink, then catch a good buzz and impulse shop.

by Anonymousreply 124November 17, 2009 7:29 PM

the NY article in r121's link says that when she called her brother Warren Hance near the Tappan Zee Bridge, she was across the street from state police barraks. If Warren has called 911 immediately, the crash likely could have been prevented.

I believe that he knew his sister was drunk and was trying to save her from getting busted with a DWI. He told her to stay put until he got there, and never fathomed she'd toss the cell phone out the window, drive off and kill all of his children.

by Anonymousreply 125November 17, 2009 7:45 PM

Probably a mixture of denial and stupidity. Sounds like Danny is not the sharpest tool in the shed. Wouldn't most people be pissed off if their spouse went out for milk and came back with a flat-screen TV? At the risk of playing DL amateur psychiatrist, Diane sounds bipolar.

by Anonymousreply 126November 17, 2009 7:50 PM

From that article I get the impression that she was a total cunt. Bitchy to waitstaff, aggressive driving and honking horns at people on the road. She had a ton of problems.

by Anonymousreply 127November 17, 2009 7:51 PM

I hate to think what this means:

"Danny refuses to go to Manhattan and doesn't even like overcrowded Long Island; in that regard, he's like Mike's dad, who was fed up with his hometown, Yonkers, and "all the bullshit there,"� as he told Mike."

by Anonymousreply 128November 17, 2009 8:01 PM

agree with r126 Bipolar and self medicating w/Booze & Pot.

Hubs knew all about it -

by Anonymousreply 129November 17, 2009 8:05 PM

So sad and happen all the time- auto crashes that is and other mayhem- not necessarily multiple deaths, but that's all.

Husband is in denial because he is either also alcoholic, or a classic enabler. I am a recovering alcoholic and if I had a dime for every story I have heard of my fellow alcoholics driving drunk... I'd have lots more money than I do.

Daily pot smoking may not mean you are an addict or an alcoholic, but you are at least close to it- or in denial, which is the most probably case. Pot is not as lethal as heavy drinking- but no one who has smoked a joint in 2009 can drive effectively- no one.

Lots and lots of denial by substance abusers- which is of course the main part of the problem of getting clean. This is a terrible tragedy and something all people who drink heavily, smoke heavily or do some other substance- and think they can function normally should think hard about. Fact is, you cannot and you may learn the hard way like this family, just what happens.

by Anonymousreply 130November 17, 2009 8:28 PM

Hubs not only knew all about it he didn't give a shit as long as he didn't have to do anything. He enjoyed having his space and since she was a control freak who ran everything else he could hunt and fish.

by Anonymousreply 131November 17, 2009 8:32 PM

That article mentioned a call to Oyster Bay near where Diane worked. Some of the people commenting mentioned the possibility of an affair gone bad. Anyone up there heard anything about this mysterious call?

by Anonymousreply 132November 17, 2009 8:37 PM

The most troubling thing in that article is the part about Warren and Jackie Hance. It said Jackie didn't want to speak to investigators. How could the Hances cover for that piece of shit sister after she killed their kids?

by Anonymousreply 133November 17, 2009 11:26 PM

Some of the "it was suicide" freaks are in this thread. Ah, I've missed them so.

Reading the report, I notice that Diane Schuler's cell phone was found sitting "neatly" on a divider, which answers a question a lot of us had. At the time, several people speculated she threw the phone out the window, which clearly wasn't the case.

by Anonymousreply 134November 17, 2009 11:55 PM

R65 needs to read R134. She didn't throw the phone out the window at all.

I'll never understand righteous indignation amongst people who can't even be arsed to get the basic facts straight.

by Anonymousreply 135November 17, 2009 11:58 PM

[quote]Hubs not only knew all about it he didn't give a shit as long as he didn't have to do anything. He enjoyed having his space and since she was a control freak who ran everything else he could hunt and fish.

I'm not big on speculation when we don't know all the details, but I have to say this sounds pretty accurate. Maybe she wasn't a control freak, maybe she was just expected to drive the kids and no one else would do it. The trip wasn't going well, considering that she stopped to try to get some Tylenol during the ride.

I don't think there's any need to make up suicide, affairs, or any other drama. The drama is already here: She had a drinking problem and smoked too much pot. She may have acted normal when she went into the convenience store and McD's, but a LOT of drunks act normal for the first few drinks.

by Anonymousreply 136November 18, 2009 12:18 AM

Here she is in a video in the gas station convenience store. She's a fatty. Most boozers are.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 137November 18, 2009 3:55 PM

[italic] "Danny refuses to go to Manhattan and doesn't even like overcrowded Long Island; in that regard, he's like Mike's dad, who was fed up with his hometown, Yonkers, and "all the bullshit there," as he told Mike." [/italic]

I know all of this code-talk. I grew up with these yobbos. "All the bullshit there" means "blacks and Hispanics." Refusing to go to Manhattan means "Too many ni__ers there. I'll stay right here, where the sp__s and the ni__ers know there place, which is nowhere around me or my neighborhood. Not to mention NYC is run by rich Jews!"

I heard all of this talk growing up on Long Island. In fact, after a school reunion I somehow got added to an email list with a bunch of the people I went to school with who were from Babylon and West Babylon. (I went to parochial school, so we had kids from a lot of towns going to school there.) Anyway, they kept emailing back and forth all this rightwing shit like you'd hear on Fox News. Bullshit like that fake George Carlin letter.

I told them to drop my name from their list, I wasn't interested in lies. I'm sure that raised a few racist eyebrows, but who cares - I guess they got my email address from the reunion person who was in charge of tracking people down. I didn't go to the reunion; had no interest at all.

My aunt married a guy who insisted they first move to some miniscule upstate town and then down south. He hasn't been back to Long Island for decades and claims it's because of traffic, but it isn't. He only associates with white Northern Europeans and will only live in 100% white towns. He comes from an area of Long Island where kids were actually sent to Nazi camp in the 1930s. The Bund was closed down before he was old enough to go to camp; otherwise, I'm sure he'd have gone.

I know alllllll the code words.

by Anonymousreply 138November 18, 2009 4:16 PM

Whether or not the husband is in denial or stupid, I'm sick of all the people trying to come after him for her actions. She's dead, the kids are dead, the people she hit are dead, nothing is going to bring them back. It was a tragic accident, get over it, move on.

by Anonymousreply 139November 18, 2009 4:23 PM

The family with the three dead children are not covering up anything. They did speak to invesigators, just because they did not want to speak to private investigators means nothing.

by Anonymousreply 140November 18, 2009 4:38 PM

R138, I agree that native Long Islanders are a strange breed. I had a friend, an English guy, who was living on LI for awhile, and he brought some of his Lawn Guyland friends out with us for a night of clubbing. They were petrified to be in Evil Manhattan. He told us later that one of the guys kissed the ground when they got back and thanked God he was back on Long Island. Very insular.

by Anonymousreply 141November 18, 2009 4:42 PM

Don't forget the fags! Another reason why the Guylanders don't like the city. Blacks, Jews, Spanish and faggots who hold hands and act like a man and a woman together! Totally fucking gross, man! I gotta get back to Massapequa Park before I puke!

Aw shit, I'm pukin' anyway becuz I drank too much. Bllawgh!

by Anonymousreply 142November 18, 2009 5:03 PM

The lawsuits are beginning.

Danny Schuler hasn't accepted responsibility to be the executor of his wife's estate (on advice from his lawyer) so the court announced today it will appoint one.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 143November 18, 2009 5:09 PM

I have a summer house on Long Island. My neighbor hasn't been to the city in 40 years. He's 61. He grew up in Queens Village. He thought of going to Madison Square Garden once to see "the Scrooge show they put on there". MSG sits right atop Penn Station, where the Long Island Railroad brings people from LI into Manhattan. The guy wouldn't even have to walk on the street. But he decided not to. Too dangerous. He'd have to make a break for the train before it got too late.

Most Long Islanders' city experience is limited to the St Patrick's Day Parade or a Rangers game.

by Anonymousreply 144November 18, 2009 5:11 PM

speaking of Rangers games, I've been invited to the Rangers Islanders game on the day after Christmas. Is it going to be a boozy hostile Long Island crowd cheering for the Islanders?

by Anonymousreply 145November 18, 2009 5:18 PM

I am wondering, do most grown men dress like this? I assume that is Daniel Schuler in the photo with the boy. I honestly don't have any adult friends who dress like this.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 146November 18, 2009 5:27 PM

Fat suburban hausherrs do R146.

by Anonymousreply 147November 18, 2009 6:12 PM

A lot of them absolutely do, R146. That's how my straight guy friend dresses when he's not at work.

by Anonymousreply 148November 18, 2009 6:18 PM

I hope the fat cow is rotting in hell.

by Anonymousreply 149November 18, 2009 6:22 PM

I feel very sorry for the Bastardis, but they need to let their lawsuit go. The person who killed their relatives is dead. They want revenge so badly, yet the cannot punish the person responsible because she's gone. Stop making it into an opera. Grieve for the dead and let the living go. As awful as this Danny Schuler seems, he did not get drunk and kill all those people, nor did he let his wife get into the car falling-down drunk. She seems in control at the gas station. She was hiding her drinking

From this article, it sounds as if the Schulers lived two separate lives. They only saw each other on the weekend and they only communicated about chores. Rake the leaves, paint the house, do the bills. Drive upstate. Take the kids. Take the dog.

It sounds like a deadly dull life and maybe that's why she was drinking. The husband went hunting and fishing for relaxation, but she didn't ever seem to do anything pleasurable to relax. She went to work, did all the finances, took care of the kids. The husband was like a big kid himself, dressing up as a rent-a-cop and coming home to a house that his wife kept going like clockwork. He did a few chores.

She didn't speak to her mother. That is a very big deal to a woman who has children (and no sisters. Diane Schuler only had brothers). Mothers are usually sounding boards for their daughters when the daughters have kids. They provide advice, babysitting, support, love for the grandchildren. Not having a mother is tough, but it's especially tough to a daughter when she has kids.

She sounds like someone who was trying to keep it all together who finally went kablooey. It's a shame she caused the deaths of so many people. But the Bastardis have to let the lawsuit go. Don't treat it as a payday, or to exact revenge from someone who was not involved in the accident.

The lawyers for both sides are making this into a mess.

by Anonymousreply 150November 18, 2009 8:37 PM

>>A lot of them absolutely do, [R146].

He looks like a big fat baby. Baby Huey. He is dressed the same way his child is dressed. Shouldn't men dress a little differently from their post-toddler children?

by Anonymousreply 151November 18, 2009 8:43 PM

I agree with you r150. I think she was a secret drinker, and Danny Schuler didn't know his wife at all.

I just wish her brother Warren Hance called 911 immediately. I bet he does too.

by Anonymousreply 152November 18, 2009 8:46 PM

"I am wondering, do most grown men dress like this?"

Take a drive through any suburban neighborhood on a Saturday afternoon and you'll see.

by Anonymousreply 153November 18, 2009 8:48 PM

Straight men are horrible dressers, among other things.

by Anonymousreply 154November 18, 2009 9:05 PM

She wasn't a secret drinker because several people, including relatives, said she drank heavily! She was the bread winner and the husband wasn't about to mess with the good thing he had going.

by Anonymousreply 155November 18, 2009 9:07 PM

I guess it's the fatness of the man and the hugeness of the oversized clothes. It looks ridiculous to me. How can anyone allow themselves to look like that? If you are fat, it would seem you would want to stay way from tent-like, silly clothing. But perhaps the oversized clothing is what leads to the fatness.

When did the suburbs finally pick up early 1990s hip hop fashion?

by Anonymousreply 156November 18, 2009 9:12 PM

Actually the relative said she was a daily pot smoker, not a heavy drinker. None of her relatives have said she was a heavy drinker.

by Anonymousreply 157November 18, 2009 9:15 PM

>>> She was the bread winner

This is actually very common on LI. Of everyone I've known, I'd say well more than half of the wives/girlfriends make a lot more than the husbands/boyfriends.

by Anonymousreply 158November 18, 2009 9:18 PM

Black slippers with white socks are always a bold fashion statement.

by Anonymousreply 159November 18, 2009 9:20 PM

Actually the relative said she was a daily pot smoker, not a heavy drinker. None of her relatives have said she was a heavy drinker. --------------------------------------------------------- There are some people on this broad that must read at a second grade level.

As per the NYT, which is linked in this thread:

[quote]"Joan Schuler said that the deceased smoked marijuana virtually every single day of her life,"� Mr. Anolik said. "She thought that that was much better than every other medicine; she considered it a type of medicine to keep her calm."� He also said that Joan Schuler told the police that her sister-in-law drank heavily on a regular basis. "She confirmed the fact that she liked the liquor,"� Mr. Anolik said. "She was a hard drinker."�

by Anonymousreply 160November 18, 2009 11:48 PM

Thanks, R160. I don't know why some people are so invested on blaming either drugs or alcohol to the exclusion of the other. Personally, I maintain that she must have been bipolar and self-medicating with both. And no, I do not believe it was a suicide.

by Anonymousreply 161November 18, 2009 11:55 PM

broad = board

by Anonymousreply 162November 18, 2009 11:57 PM

Newsflash: straight men dress like slobs. Especially bluecollar types in flyover country (and LI is totally flyover).

Now that we've cleared this up, can you please move on? Or start another thread devoted to this startling and fascinating revelation? Thanks.

by Anonymousreply 163November 19, 2009 12:00 AM

We'll talk about whatever we fucking want to r163. Now go drink your chocolate milk before one of the other kids grabs it.

by Anonymousreply 164November 19, 2009 12:10 AM

Lohud: Sichol said the Bastardis intended to sue the estate of Diane Schuler, and her brother, Warren Hance.

Suing the family of the three dead girls is disgusting on so many levels.

by Anonymousreply 165November 19, 2009 1:45 AM

I guess they're suing the brother because he didn't call 911 right away. For Christ sake, if my kids were in a car with my drunken sister one of them called me and told me there's "something wrong with Aunt Diane" and my sister got on the phone slurring her words and complaining of tunnel vision, I would call 911 immediately. I wouldn't jump in my car, pick up my father and head upstate. I'd want the cops to pull them over ASAP, drunk or not. By the time Warren Hance called the police, they were all dead.

Look for his marriage to be dissolved in 6 months.

by Anonymousreply 166November 19, 2009 3:03 AM

The fact that he didn't call the police immediately pretty much proves that he knew she was a heavy drinker. I mean, if my sister called me and spoke to me all disoriented and she wasn't a known drunk, I would be afraid she'd had a stroke or something and would call the police immediately. I'd want her taken to a hospital for medical attention right away. Especially if I had kids who were in the car with her.

The fact that he waited to call the police means he knew she was 3 sheets to the wind and trying to cover up for her. And look where it got him. And them.

by Anonymousreply 167November 19, 2009 2:24 PM

Whoa -- she was a big girl. Much bigger than pictures show her. I guess in photos she only allowed people to take her picture from the chest up. This gas station video shows the whole package.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 168November 19, 2009 5:49 PM

R166 is right and I agree that the marriage will be destroyed over this. Deaths of children are stressful enough and quite a few marriages break up over it but when you bear some responsibility for those deaths you have a guaranteed divorce in the future and I'm betting it's acrimonious once the wife's grief is over and the rage sets in.

by Anonymousreply 169November 19, 2009 6:35 PM

Under normal circumstances I'd agree about the marriage. However, I would imagine the mom would want another child eventually. Wouldn't it be logical to stay in the marriage for now?

by Anonymousreply 170November 19, 2009 6:40 PM

My father used to keep a Scotch and water in the beverage holder by the driver's seat. It's a miracle he didn't get any of us killed. He did manage to drive us into a ditch once. I can't believe my relatives would let us get into the car with him without saying a word.

by Anonymousreply 171November 19, 2009 7:17 PM

Warren Hance needs to be the poster boy of what happens when people keep quiet about family members that are out of control drinkers, druggies.

When his wife leaves, this should be his life�s work to say:

[italic]�If anyone has a family members that is a drunk and/or druggie, FORGET family loyalty, and scream it to from the roof tops.

Call the police, call child protective services keep your kids away from, �Auntie� or �Uncle� or �Grand Pa� and �Granny� and tell these relatives WHY you are doing it.

Because if you don�t you will be like me, my name is Warren Hance and I helped to kill my kids.

My kids are dead because I didn�t want any family �unpleasantness.�

My kids are dead because my �family loyalty� to a drunkard sister was more important to me then their lives.

Since my suicide will really be the perfect form of abdicating responsibility, I am sentenced to being the living example of a cowardly, punk assed, irresponsible sorry excuse for a human being. I must repeat this everyday to groups of parents, families, young people, etc until the day I die.

I can never rest until I have made it clear that people everywhere have a responsibility to others."[/italic]

A bit hysterical, but something meaningful might coming from this tradgedy.

by Anonymousreply 172November 19, 2009 8:26 PM

What a whale.

by Anonymousreply 173November 19, 2009 10:03 PM

>>> Wouldn't it be logical to stay in the marriage for now?

Nope. It's logical to get out now while she's still young enough to attract another husband. Then she can have more children.

by Anonymousreply 174November 19, 2009 10:47 PM

New York has a vicarious liability law that exposes the owner of a vehicle to liability for accidents - until recently it applied to vehicle leasing companies, but that was rescinded by a federal law. Warren Hance owned the minivan that Diane Schuler was driving. Not that this would make it right or wrong, but if vicarious liability still applies to private owners maybe that (not the phone call) is the reason the Bastardi family's lawyers are considering suing him.

by Anonymousreply 175November 19, 2009 11:09 PM

Happy Holidays, you've been served!

Families of victims killed by Diane Schuler sue the estate of Diane Schuler and her brother, father of the three dead girls.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 176December 10, 2009 8:42 PM

If I were a judge I'd throw out the case against Hance. He lost his 3 kids. Nothing can be worse than that. He's been paid back in spades.

His wife will absolutely leave him. So he has lost his entire family, the same way the Bastardis lost their family.

It's even steven.

by Anonymousreply 177December 10, 2009 8:53 PM
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.


Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!