Alz,

You need to remember that Slaten is the guy who was fired for secretly putting Dave Duncan on the air without his permission.  Slaten hates everything Larussa and panders to a couple hundred idiots who worship him because he's "not afraid to tell it like it is."  Slaten doesn't actually attend anything sports related, so when he speaks, he rarely speaks of first hand knowledge.  It's all just hot air.

He's Rush Limbaugh discussing sports rather than politics.  It's much better to simply ignore him.

This is frightening:

http://www.riverfronttimes.com/2008-08-27/news/kevin-slaten-s-head-is-about-to-explode-the-exiled-sports-talk-radio-ranter-needs-to-get-some-things-off-his-chest/

So cool. He pretty much sparks adversity and hates LaRussa because he got canned because of the problems with Duncan. Makes a lot more sense. Still going to avoid him, the only thing worse than listening to him blast off is listening to 2/3rds of the inbred callers who agree with him, though they can't quantify why exactly.

-----Original Message-----
From: kevin slaten [mailto:kslaten@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 3:38 PM
To: Billy
Subject: Larussa email

William,

Read your silly little email sent to Jason Posey instead of me. Too absurd to address all you left out. Have fun being bored listening elsewhere.

Kevin Slaten


From: Billy
To: kslaten@hotmail.com
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 13:54:24 -0500
Subject: RE: Larussa email

Kevin,

While I don't fear a discussion with you, I have no intention of subjecting myself to a forum where you can simply shout over me over a radio station. I thought about emailing you, and decided that your show just wasn't my slice of pie. Instead I sent it to the producer, because I figured he would at least want the feedback for why any listener decided to change the station.

Since we are discussing it, and I applaud you for the reply, angry though it may be, it shows spirit and backbone. These are two components of yours that I certainly admire.

So to the email:

Are you leading with a statement that my "Silly Little Email" had too much to cover for you to discuss it? Which is it? Silly and Little, or too much for you to discuss? Just curious.

While your reply would be okay for most other people, I must say I find it amusing for some guy who insists others answer his questions before actually posting answers of his own to duck and dodge because there's too much to cover. That's a far cry from the norm where you wanted a strict set of specifics from .... Dave was it? I'm not a long time listener, so I apologize for not knowing for sure. I know that's a big thing with you. Point still stands, if you beg someone to come loaded with facts, don't run the other direction when someone presents them.

Let's just call a spade a spade, I read the RFT article and went over the internet to see if it had merit, and it did in a few places. Want the basic understanding? You were violating (whether you meant to or it was a misunderstanding or what, I'll even give you this. It truly might have been accidental) FCC regulations by throwing Duncan on the radio without consent. He apparently had no great love of you anyway, and made it an issue. You got canned, and took quite some time for you to get back.

So I'd probably be mad too if he grew to be a legend for the baseball fans of St. Louis. It's okay man. I think you're letting your emotions get the better of your judgment, but at least I understand why you seem to be so passionate about it. Not entirely sure how you've migrated that to TLR, or decided that because their friends, Jim Leyland must be scum too, but that's your business.

Enjoy your show.

Here's the ref link for your article, though I'm positive you already know the one I'm talking about.

http://www.riverfronttimes.com/2008-08-27/news/kevin-slaten-s-head-is-about-to-explode-the-exiled-sports-talk-radio-ranter-needs-to-get-some-things-off-his-chest/

From: kevin slaten [mailto:kslaten@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 2:11 PM
To: Billy
Subject: RE: Larussa email

Your email is from a person without any grasp of a single fact.  You know nothing about me and even less about the Cardinals and Duncan.
I'll address simply this one.  Since I had nothing to with putting Duncan on the air I violated nothing. 
That's why the station settled my lawsuit to my satisfaction.  It didn't take me long at all to get back on.  In fact, the day my non-compete ran out I was back on.  Get your facts straight and that's why I won't address your email point by point.  They're all wrong. And for someone who claims not to listen regularly you sure seem to know a lot about my show.  Again, enjoy your boredom and you should know I don't care if you listen or not.

Kevin

From: Billy
To: kslaten@hotmail.com
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 14:28:44 -0500
Subject: RE: Larussa email
Again, no substance, more rant. I get it, you’re angry. Stay angry my friend.

From: kevin slaten [mailto:kslaten@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 2:34 PM
To: Billy
Subject: RE: Larussa email

Occupy yourself elsewhere. translation: get a life.  and continue to ignore facts.

From: Billy
To: kslaten@hotmail.com
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 15:23:24 -0500
Subject: RE: Larussa email
What facts would you like me to ignore?
“I won't address your email point by pointâ€
Perhaps this one?
“Too absurd to address all you left outâ€
Perhaps you mean dismissing my statement saying it took quite some time to get back. To me 6 months without being able to do the job I want to do is quite some time, to you (though you’re quire a bit older) it must seem like a long weekend. I love that you couldn’t bypass the non-compete despite being terminated, clearly you were wrongfully terminated since you had to spend 6 months in exile.

A preacher should be a practitioner. Unlike you who like to throw his opinions as fact, that is my opinion, and not fact. You were offered a chance to explain your views, and decided defending your stance that “bullpen use should not be a credit to Larussa during the 2011 World Series, but definitely should count as a bad mark against him when it comes to Lance Lynn† would be catastrophic. It would be, because it’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. Sure when you’re dealing with someone with a 14 IQ and have the mighty mute button, and a loud boisterous CARPE DIEM, you are the man. In this email however, you are apparently overmatched. You know what’s brilliant? You turned my same argument into a shot against Dave, though it was hard to make out without you whining about amazingly boring statistics like “Wins against the spread……† What the?!? Who cares about wins against the spread?!?!? How much money has Larussa cost you that you would even try to use that? Seriously, seek help.

“Well Tony had the budget!!! Tony was supposed to win!!!† Yet you turn around and compare winning percentage against ….. JOE TORRE of the 200-300 million annual Yankees. HAHAHAHAHA you are such a blow-hard. Are you kidding me? As a side question, what’s Joe Torre’s win against the spread look like while being the manager for the Yankees, it’s “0 - every loss†? Wins against the spread and budget! Brilliant. Stay angry my friend, stay angry.

You wanted examples of World Series management, I gave you a full 7 game breakdown of moves that Larussa made which worked (Craig had how many Pinch hit RBI’s? What was the overall bullpen ERA?). Unfortunately I won’t go into a forum where you can use the mute button to ensure nobody but you gets to talk, and it’s killing you. You lost.

I will happily get a life, and sure enjoy watching Tony Larussa getting his number retired right up there with Whitey. As it should be. They should probably retired Duncan’s too, just for having a hand in getting you canned. If I ever decide to go on a 4 day bender and drive my SUV into a wall, while waiting for the paramedics to arrive, I will likely be in the right frame of mind to listen to your show and consider it informative. Course, the radio could be busted, so no promises.

Vae Victus Princess Slaten.

I haven't quite got to the point where I ask him how he should be making moral judgments against someone when he started throwing punches with some guy and the guy's girlfriend after a fender bender.

I'm just waiting for him to play the morality card before that gets tossed.

From: kevin slaten [mailto:kslaten@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 5:23 PM
To: Billy
Subject: RE: Larussa email

Again, your mastery of the absurd is comical.  You know nothing about winning and losing lawsuits.  Your stupidity is amusing to me.  If you think your points about La russa are so strong, call the show.  Happy to put you in your place and destroy the nitwit comments you made disguised as facts while ignoring the obvious mistakes your hero made throughout the series.  Go ahead, call.  Otherwise, stop emailing me and get your own show.

From: Billy
To: kslaten@hotmail.com
Date: Wed, 10 May 2012 09:19:45 -0500
Subject: RE: Larussa email

Kevin,

You are absolutely correct, I’ve never been fired and had to go to court to settle it. Nor have I ever decided to throw punches on a guy and his girlfriend after a traffic accident (Did I read that right? Really? You were swinging on the girl?). You have all the experience there on me. I asked you more than a few questions (just about the examples with the Cardinals), which you decided to dismiss telling me I knew nothing. I’m not one of your callers who will simply call because they know you’re just talking trash, but don’t put their ducks in a row to prove it. Unfortunately for you, I do know how many times Craig came in as a pinch hitter and was huge for us. I do know who Larussa ran out to the mound, who the matchups were, and what the results were. I also know that it takes a good manager to know when to put Arthur Rhodes (possibly the only working professional that approaches you in age) in the game. I asked many questions, and presented a lot of facts. I didn’t say he didn’t make mistakes, if you look back. While I understand your need to get me on the defensive about something, I have never said that. Unlike you, I don’t hold Larussa accountable for the bad moves (All of Scrabble’s appearances weren’t perfect, and Tony’s bench management really left us in a bit of a lurch in game 6 after Hamilton’s home run) without giving him credit for the pinch hit/bullpen moves when they were successful.

To call the show, I would probably need to listen to the show. That ended with the original email, or are you so reading impaired you missed that too? I didn’t begin the email chain here, you did. Unlike you’re petty radio show, you don’t get to mandate who has the last word here. If you want the emails to stop, stop replying and walk away with your tail between your legs.

Here’s the view on Larussa. He won 2 World Series titles, Manager of the Year, 7 NL Central titles, and earned the 2004 NL Pennant. He made the postseason a total of 9 times. Only 3 of those seasons were under .500. If that’s nothing special to you, then I can only assume you’ve never liked a single manager, because there’s only 2-4 managers ever with results on that level.

Here’s the important part. He wouldn’t give you the time of day, so you hate him. Him and Duncan. Why? Despite your best deflection efforts to me….
"Since I had nothing to with putting Duncan Duncan on the air I violated nothing."
Yet there you are on the radio interview with Duncan, who’s saying he better not be on the radio, and that’s you telling him he is! How on earth did you know that, since you had nothing to do with it?

Feel free to reply for another beating Princess. Or ask me to call your show some more, maybe the 5th time is the charm….

Vae Victus Princess.

ROTFLMAO! Remind me never to piss you off.

That's on you now, apparently he called my statement libelous, although asking him for validity of whether I read any truth in an internet article in an email probably can't be called libel. It would need to be a solid declaration of untrue statements, that were malicious. However, it upset him and he requested we stop correspondence. I acknowledged the request and re-emailed Jason Posey informing him of Slaten's wishes and asking him not to forward Kevin anymore of my emails.

was fun while it lasted. You can feel free to email him all you like.

Alz,

I can't get involved in an email attack since the only email address I use is my work email, but I'd send him one more in response to his claim of libel.  In that email I would point out that as a lawyer, he should know that under Missouri law, the elements of defamation (slander or libel) are: (1) publication; (2) of a defamatory statement; (3) which identifies the plaintiff; (4) that is false; (5) that is published with a requisite degree of fault; and (6) damages the plaintiff's reputation. See Castle Rock Remodeling, LLC v. Better Business Bureau of Greater St. Louis, Inc. 354 S.W.3d 234, 239 (Mo. App. 2011).  Further, a "publication" requires a communication to a third person.  Dean v. Wissmann, 996 S.W.2d 631, 633 (Mo. App. 1999).  Unless you cc'd someone else on your email (or unless he's aware that you're posting the emails here), there isn't any legal basis for a claim of libel.

ETA- I'd also probably add that there isn't likely any basis for him to conclude damage to his reputation since you did nothing more than repeat allegations which have been public for years.

Last edited by forsberg_us (5/10/2012 1:56 pm)

forsberg_us wrote:

Alz,

I can't get involved in an email attack since the only email address I use is my work email, but I'd send him one more in response to his claim of libel.  In that email I would point out that as a lawyer, he should know that under Missouri law, the elements of defamation (slander or libel) are: (1) publication; (2) of a defamatory statement; (3) which identifies the plaintiff; (4) that is false; (5) that is published with a requisite degree of fault; and (6) damages the plaintiff's reputation. See Castle Rock Remodeling, LLC v. Better Business Bureau of Greater St. Louis, Inc. 354 S.W.3d 234, 239 (Mo. App. 2011).  Further, a "publication" requires a communication to a third person.  Dean v. Wissmann, 996 S.W.2d 631, 633 (Mo. App. 1999).  Unless you cc'd someone else on your email (or unless he's aware that you're posting the emails here), there isn't any legal basis for a claim of libel.

ETA- I'd also probably add that there isn't likely any basis for him to conclude damage to his reputation since you did nothing more than repeat allegations which have been public for years.

Actually I misspoke on his email, he had said he would consider further contact to be harassment. Here's the exact phrasing.

"I've asked you respectfully to quit bothering me with your libelous remarks.  For the final time, your facts are ALL wrong and you speak from ignorance.  Should you contact me again, whether by email, text, twitter or otherwise, I will consider it harassment and take the appropriate legal action.  Take your juvenile jealousy elsewhere.

Kevin Slaten"

My reply was nice.

"Understood Kevin, I could debate your use of the term "respectfully" as you did little but insult me each email, but I understand your response, and will abide those wishes. I would ask you not contact me again as well. Please do not reply to any emails forwarded to you from me again either, which started this entire dialogue to begin with. To help facilitate this, I’ll pass a message along to Jason outlining the situation clearly for him so he does not mistakenly forward you any emails on my behalf. Good luck with your show!"

I don't believe anything I did was construed as unwanted (the last email outlining compliance of his request might not even qualify). I don't plan on emailing him again. I have no reason to.