Here's why it is colossally stupid to believe that Paul Cahill had a blood alcohol of .27 at the time of his death.......
Paul couldn't have been doing his job, drunk as a skunk and not been noticed. I am well aware that the scene would have been chaotic. However, you are talking about a man being stumbling drunk. Hard to miss, no matter what else is going on. And while we would be overwhelmed at that scene, this is what the BFD train for. His fellow firefighters would have been focused and they would not have missed it.
Anytime someone makes a charge like this, I say "Why?" and "How?". Is anyone asking these questions? Not that I have heard. Not seriously.
Please tell me why the other guys from that house would take a guy who was so drunk to a fire? I have heard many say in recent days that they were "covering" for him. What nonsense! That's not covering. That's lunacy. "Covering" is leaving him at the firehouse to sleep it off. "Covering" is leaving him in the truck. "Covering" is not sticking a hose in his hand and following him into a burning building.
I am a good friend. I am there for my friends. But I would not follow my friend into a life-threatening situation to save their job. Especially not when there are lots of other ways to save their job....none of which involve endangering my life or theirs.
If you are sober and your friend is drunk, do you let him drive you home? But if you take his keys people will know he is drunk! See the lack of logic in this argument?
I have friends and family for whom I would lay down my life................but I wouldn't throw it away. Well, that's what you have to believe if you buy this story. You have to believe that rather than embarrass Paul Cahill................rather than cost him a rip with the higher-ups.......rather than have him be written up and sent to a drug and alcohol abuse program, the men of Engine 30 and Ladder 25 instead chose to put a nozzle in his hands and send him into a fire. Not just send him, mind you...........but follow him.
Cut it out.