Legendary journalist Dan Rather says he understands that the family of baseball player Tyler Skaggs is still grieving, but he is adamant that the public has a right to know his cause of death.
Skaggs, 27, died suddenly in a hotel room, and even though police claim there was no sign of foul play or suicide, an actual cause of death has not been given, reveals Too Fab. At this time, the toxicology is still said to be pending, but authorities have called the death to be that of natural causes.
Rather argues that Skaggs was a public person, and the public has the right to know how an otherwise healthy professional athlete died suddenly.
“Do I think the public should know about the death of that pitcher? You bet. I do think the public should know. I am aware that the family is entitled to some privacy, and if the family made a request for privacy, I did think seriously about that, but you know he was 27-years-old…. to be found under those circumstances. You bet, I think the public should know.”
Skaggs, who played for the Los Angeles Angels, was on the road in preparation to play against the Texas Rangers when he was found in his hotel room.
The veteran journalist, 87, claims he still comes down on the right of the public to know, adding that the cause of death could also prove of educational merit, especially among younger people.
“Life is unpredictable. You never know, you’re 27, you’re having a great year, you’re living your dream, boom it goes. This is a reminder of how fragile life is.”
The discussion about revealing Skaggs’ cause of death is back in the news after a southern California newspaper released a story suggesting that the pitcher might have died of an opioid overdose, spurring threats of a lawsuit by the Los Angeles Angels Major League Baseball team, for which Skaggs pitched.
The Santa Monica Observer speculated that the pitcher might have been using prescription drugs and accidentally overdosed on narcotics from more than one doctor. The article was taken down after criticism from the team, the family and police.
Publisher David Ganezer stated that the article was not taken down because of legal threats, but rather because of multiple personal threats and attacks from anonymous sources.
“There are certain things worth risking your life and safety for, and others that just are not.”