Charles Pugh-car crash

**One Shot** · February-18-10, 09:33 PM

Anyone catch this? The story makes me wanna say "Pugh". Why in the hell would you drive a city owned car home on two flat tires.

That damage is definately not minor.

**pffft** · February-18-10, 10:07 PM

Oops
http://www.detnews.com/article/20100...r--drives-home

Buy American · February-18-10, 10:16 PM

He drove the car home because he didn't know any better and he was more than likely a bit drunk. Since he drove home from the scene, he could have called the police from home but chose to wait until Monday....why? He waited until Monday to file a police report because the alcohol would be out of his system and a breathanalyzer wouldn't do any good.
He should pay the City for the repairs [[if the car isn't totalled)...but oops, I forgot, he can't afford to pay his rent.

As Judge Judy would say..."don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining".

**President Sekou** · February-18-10, 11:35 PM

Probably doing or giving the Teddy Pendegrass while a little buzzed of one too many apple-tini's. Either way his story is bs, and I'm just loving the start this one is getting off to.

**dookie joe** · February-18-10, 11:55 PM

Somewhere in the distance, I can hear the Right Rev. Winans cackling:

His judgement cometh and that right soon.

**detroitbob** · February-19-10, 05:57 AM

Well, Winan sputtering pontifications aside...if a normal citizen has a similar accident, no one injured and the car more [[or less) driveable, the Detroit Police will not appear. 911 will simply tell you to go to the nearest police station and file a report. Call your insurance, get your own tow, etc. So, filing the report on Monday sounds reasonable. If I would have left my car at 75 and Mack after 10pm on any given night I doubt it would be there the next day. And I don't drive a Crown Vic. So citizen Pugh acted just like any normal Detroit resident. No problem in my book.

**stasu1213** · February-19-10, 06:08 AM

I think Charles Pugh should get a used government car that the former president had used. That would be his punishment. No new car for him for awhile. And for God's sake do not let him use public money to buy hisself an SUV

**mam2009** · February-19-10, 07:02 AM

Before we go too far off on the tangeant of Council President Pugh being drunk and concealing it [[with no evidence or indication of that), let's consider that if his story is true there should be evidence of it at the site -- on the curb, on the sign, etc.). Could we at least wait to hear a LITTLE more information before jumping to unfounded conclusions?

And detroitbob, while I do agree that it would not be unusal for most Detroiters to drive the car home rather than wait for police [[who likely will not show up for even a two-car accident -- especially on a Friday night) I don't think Mr. Pugh has been in the category of "regular" Detroiter for quite some time. A car would have shown up for the President of the Detroit City Council and for a well known news anchor. But you have to ask, why bother? No one was hurt and the City's gonna fix the car regardless of whether its reported on Friday, Saturday or Monday morning.

**sumas** · February-19-10, 07:32 AM

Monday sounds reasonable to me. A close friend had his car stolen. Tried to get a car to come out for the report but they wouldn't. Since he is very ill, we tried to file the report at the station for him had all his paper work, ID etc. no way would they take the report but grudgingly agreed to send a scout car. They did, 6 hours later.

Probably Pugh didn't want to pull a Beatty, "Do you know who the ####, I am?"

**Lostlegumes** · February-19-10, 07:48 AM

Maybe he wasn't driving the car--

**sumas** · February-19-10, 07:50 AM

I believe his story. You should see my poor car. Three hit and runs. Two while we were driving and one while it was parked. We just carry PLPD since the car is 10 years old so can't afford to fix the poor baby. Never bothered to file a police report because what or how would that serve me. Gut feeling is all those hit and runs were stolen vehicles. Fortunately my car is still driveable. It just looks so forlorn. Won't give it up though because it only has 67,000 original miles.

**daddeeo** · February-19-10, 08:00 AM

He needs to take a course in defensive driving. Nice way to start your tenure on the council.
Let's hope this was an aberration and not the start of more shenanigans by one of our civic leaders.
He already has one strike against him.

**sumas** · February-19-10, 08:08 AM

Ok dad, what is the one strike?

**kryptonite** · February-19-10, 08:55 AM

Pugh is not real bright. I can remember reports on Fox that he botched up badly, and he rarely seemed knowledgable if something was not scripted. I remember him asking someone how to water potted plants once when they were interviewing a local nursery owner about spring plantings. When the lady showed him how to use a sprinkling can to pour water on the plants he was amazed. Duh....

bartock · February-19-10, 08:59 AM

Originally Posted by Lostlegumes

Maybe he wasn't driving the car--

I'll put my chips on this theory.

Buy American · February-19-10, 09:09 AM

Photos of the car show the damage is extensive: Two flat tires, a cracked front bumper, damage to the passenger side and a missing rearview driver-side mirror. Pugh said he drove home on one flat tire and the other deflated later. The driver-side front tire is popped off the rim. Pugh said the sign broke off and flew over the car.

From The Detroit News: http://detroitnews.com/article/20100...#ixzz0fzVLMJgZ

I see damage on the driver's side...how did the passenger side get damaged as well?

It's not "reasonable" to drive a car a mile home on two flat tires. So much more damage can be done in that drive home. I stick to my theory until proven otherwise.
Charles Pugh, as said above, wasn't the brightest reporter on Fox 2. We heard complaints about his stammering, studdering way of reporting the news many times. If he was reading script from the teleprompter, he couldn't read it properly.

Also, it would be a help if there were cameras in that area that could shed some light on this mystery?

**kryptonite** · February-19-10, 09:15 AM

The entire story sounds questionable. Possibly he had been drinking and did not want police involved because a sobriety test would be required if police arrived.

**mam2009** · February-19-10, 09:58 AM

Originally Posted by Buy American

He drove the car home because he didn't know any better and he was more than likely a bit drunk. Since he drove home from the scene, he could have called the police from home but chose to wait until Monday....why? He waited until Monday to file a police report because the alcohol would be out of his system and a breathanalyzer wouldn't do any good...

I stick to my theory until proven otherwise.

John Roach, a spokesman for the Detroit Police, said "all the DPD did was take a report. MSP investigated the scene and found it was consistent with the report." He declined further comment.

From The Detroit News: http://detroitnews.com/article/20100...#ixzz0fzfZ6Jfw

Why insist that someone is guilty until proven innocent when they've had no prior history of trying to bamboozle us?

**firstandten** · February-19-10, 10:56 AM

The drama begins !!! Should be an interesting four years

Buy American · February-19-10, 11:13 AM

Originally Posted by mam2009

John Roach, a spokesman for the Detroit Police, said "all the DPD did was take a report. MSP investigated the scene and found it was consistent with the report." He declined further comment.

From The Detroit News: http://detroitnews.com/article/20100...#ixzz0fzfZ6Jfw

Why insist that someone is guilty until proven innocent when they've had no prior history of trying to bamboozle us?

There is always a first time.

The DPD made the report two days after the alleged "near miss". Did anyone do a breathanalyzer on Friday? No...because Pugh chose to report it two days later. MSP investigated and saw it was consistent with Pugh's explanation. Two days after the fact. That is very suspicious in my mind and in my opinion, Pugh is not telling the truth. A simple phone call from home on Friday night would have ended all this speculation, but he chose to wait until Monday....I ask why? My theory is he was drunk and needed time to sober up.

There must be cameras somewhere in the area that would have filmed this incident...if it happened the way Pugh says I would apologize for thinking that he was drunk...but he still left the scene of an accident, which is against the law. He implied that he didn't feel safe in that neighborhood.

**Motor City Sam** · February-19-10, 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by mam2009

John Roach, a spokesman for the Detroit Police, said "all the DPD did was take a report. MSP investigated the scene and found it was consistent with the report." He declined further comment.

From The Detroit News: http://detroitnews.com/article/20100...#ixzz0fzfZ6Jfw

Why insist that someone is guilty until proven innocent when they've had no prior history of trying to bamboozle us?

I wouldn't say he has no prior history of trying to bamboozle. He continued to deny he was not a Kilpatrick supporter, although his own actions and words show that he was. He told the Detroit Free Press editorial board early in the campaign that his money problems were all behind him, at the same time his condo was going through foreclosure proceedings and he was behind in other financial obligations. I remember reading that he told people at the Detroityes picnic that "if you don't understand that you can't spend more money than you bring in, you shouldn't be on council", which is something that he has obviously been gulity of. His word is not exactly beyond reproach, given his history.

As far as the accident, it's certainly worth questioning his version of events. His claim of not wanting to wait for police on I-75 at 9:45 PM rings hollow, since a call from the City council president will obviously bring a police car to the scene immediately. And if his concern was waiting at that spot, he could have driven to the McDonald's restaurant right there at I-75 and Mack and called the police from there.

Pugh is so far living down to the low expectations I have for him as a council person.

Route29 · February-19-10, 11:35 AM

I think it is worth noting that Pugh lives by Lafayette Park [[1300 if I'm not mistaken? Correct me if I'm wrong) which is less than 2 miles from I-75 and Mack.

I would have driven home that extra mile and a half than sit around and wait for god only knows what god only knows when.

His actions would be much more suspect if he tried to haul his ass all the way over to Rosedale or Palmer Woods or something.

**Motor City Sam** · February-19-10, 11:39 AM

Originally Posted by Route29

I think it is worth noting that Pugh lives by Lafayette Park [[1300 if I'm not mistaken? Correct me if I'm wrong) which is less than 2 miles from I-75 and Mack.

I would have driven home that extra mile and a half than sit around and wait for god only knows what god only knows when.

His actions would be much more suspect if he tried to haul his ass all the way over to Rosedale or Palmer Woods or something.

I thought Pugh lived in Midtown at the Ellington. Am I wrong about that.

Route 29, you might be well advised to drive home rather than wait for the cops to find time to come, even though you would be committing a relatively minor crime. But Pugh wouldn't have had to wait long for a police car to show up if he had bothered to make the call.

**elfez** · February-19-10, 12:02 PM

Didn't Charles promise to turn over a new leaf in the city of Detroit, providing professionalism and accountability within the council? This action, or lack there of just perpetuates the City Council follies of the past.

**Detroitnerd** · February-19-10, 12:23 PM

Originally Posted by elfez

Didn't Charles promise to turn over a new leaf in the city of Detroit, providing professionalism and accountability within the council? This action, or lack there of just perpetuates the City Council follies of the past.

I'm thinking Pugh's actions don't necessarily mean he did anything really wrong. Would it have been wiser for a person of his caliber to wait for police? Sure. But he's innocent until proven guilty.

I do find it interesting, however, that this happens in the wake of criticizing [[the temerity!) an influential pastor. Seems to me I recall that even when it had been shown beyond a reasonable doubt that a certain mayor was guilty of much more serious crimes, these were the same people who hemmed and hawed and talked about due process. Could it be that our great ecclesiastical leaders are a mite bit hypocritical? At least when it comes to who they believe is on God's side?

If I had my druthers, Pugh wouldn't be council president [[due to his name recognition), but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for now, and especially when this hoopla has the appearance of a deliberate, second-hand slam.