Too much alcohol in sports stadiums?

Edie Magnus Correspondent • Profile

If you have ever been to a major sporting event, inevitably you’ve seen them: the fans who have one beer too many.

Sure they are loud, and sometimes obnoxious— but are they dangerous?

One New Jersey family says “yes,” and claims a “culture of intoxication” at sporting events, encouraged by concession companies, is to blame. And after you hear their tragic story and look at what we captured with our hidden cameras, you may agree.

Without question, beer and sports are an inseparable pair in American culture— but a tragic accident has placed the concession companies that serve alcohol at sporting events in a unflattering light.

A Dateline hidden camera investigation provides some troubling evidence that rules intended to limit dangerous drinking at stadiums across the country are not being enforced.

It’s a problem with consequences not just for those at the game—but for anybody who might run into a drunk fan afterward.

Ronald Verni hadn’t thought much about buying beer at ball games until October 24, 1999.

It was on that day that Ronald, a New Jersey accountant and his wife Fazila took their daughter pumpkin picking in Pennsylvania. They liked doing weekend trips. Antonia, the couple’s only child at the time, was just 2 years old.

Fazila Verni: She’s very special because I had a hard time having a baby. And Antonia made it through. That makes her even more special.

Ronald Verni: We went on an old train ride with Antonia. And we went around the villages, a little pumpkin picking on the way home.

While the Vernis were off enjoying time together, several miles away, Daniel Lanzaro, a 30-year-old carpenter, was spending a very different kind of day with his family, drinking and watching football.

He arrived at Giants stadium around 10 a.m., well before the start of the afternoon game between the New York Giants and the New Orleans Saints so he could partake in the traditional sports ritual called tailgating. Sports arenas commonly open up their parking lots as many as six hours before gametime so that fans can gather to party.

Lanzaro partied all right. He would later admit he drank outside the ballpark— then kept on drinking inside while he was watching the game.  

Lanzaro, just 5-foot-5 and weighing only 145 lbs., downed between 8 to 12 12 oz. beers during the first half of the game.  And still he kept knocking it back. Lanzaro said he bought six more beers at one time during halftime.

And yet, Lanzaro got behind the wheel that day after drinking a estimated 192 ounces of beer — that’s about 16 cans. He left the football game at the third quarter, drove to two different strip clubs, where he said he did not drink, and then, shortly before 6 p.m., Lanzaro was finally headed home.

As was the Verni family. Ronald says Antonia got sick toward the end of their ride, so her mom, seated next to her in back, removed the child from her car seat and placed her in a regular seatbelt.

Ronald Verni: We were about 10 minutes away from home.

Edie Magnus, Dateline correspondent: Did you see the truck coming?

Ronald Verni: No, no I didn’t.

They were driving down this street when a red Ford pickup truck suddenly crossed the double yellow line and hit the Vernis’ Toyota Corolla head on.

The driver of the pickup was Daniel Lanzaro.

Ronald Verni: He hit us head on. See that’s the thing that’s really—rough about drunk driving accidents because they are more severe then regular accidents.

New Jersey police would later say the accident was one of the worst they’d ever seen.

Magnus: When did you learn that the man who had hit you was drunk?

Ronald Verni: About 10, 15 seconds after the accident. He was staggering. He was really swaying back and forth. He was significantly drunk.

Lanzaro refused to take a breathalyzer at the scene, but later on in the hospital, several hours after hitting the Vernis, his blood alcohol level measured .26 — nearly 3 times the legal limit.

Ronald’s wife was in a coma for two weeks. She faced months of healing, Ronald was told, but she’d be ok. The news about Antonia however was devastating.

Ronald Verni: I went into the emergency room where she was, she had alligator clip marks on her arms and legs. We were just looking for, like a reaction.

The impact of the crash had broken Antonia’s neck and crushed her spinal cord. It left the child a quadriplegic, permanently paralyzed from the neck down.

In August 2003, when Antonia was 6 years old, Daniel Lanzaro pleaded guilty to vehicular assault.  He was sentenced to 5 years in prison.

And that might have been the end of it, but New Jersey, like most states, has laws on the books that say if you have a liquor license, and you serve someone who is visibly intoxicated, you’re responsible for what happens after that person is served. So the Vernis went after not just the drunk driver, but Aramark, the billion dollar concessions company that sells beer here at the meadowlands and at several dozen other stadiums around the country.

Ronald Verni: They sold the beer. They’re responsible.

Magnus: Did you go after them because they had he deep pockets in this case and your drunk driver did not?

Ronald Verni: No, not necessarily. They were responsible. They served an excessive amount of alcohol. Somebody knew he was intoxicated and they served him anyway.

The case came to trial in December 2004. Antonia Verni was then 7 years old. Lawyers for Aramark argued the company does everything it can to prevent fans from abusing alcohol inside the stadiums it serves.  

Employees agree in writing never serve anyone who is visibly intoxicated, and to serve a maximum of two beers per person per purchase.

But Daniel Lanzaro, you’ll remember, said he’d bought himself 6 beers at once during halftime of that Giants-Saints game in 1999.

Magnus: How did he manage to get a beer vender to sell him that many beers at once?

David Mazie, attorney representing the Verni family: He gave him a $10 tip.  But he said that he always did that.

Magnus: And it wasn’t a problem.

Mazie: It’s not a problem. What we learned here was that they have rules for public perception.  And then we have the reality. The reality was, they don’t enforce their rules. They serve as much beer as they possibly can, and they look the other way.

Aramark’s attorneys argued it was unreasonable to expect the vendors to detect the intoxication level of an experienced, high tolerance drinker like Daniel Lanzaro — an admitted alcoholic. 

But Lanzaro’s sister-in-law who was with him at the game testified he was noticeably “slurring his words” and that his eyes looked “like floating eyeballs in your head.”  “I saw the eyes of a drunk,”  she said.

Aramark has never been able to figure out which of its employees violated company policy and sold Lanzaro all those beers. 

Magnus:  What is the company supposed to do?  I mean, if they have training, and they have a policy.  And they have spotters, right?  Undercover spotters, who are supposed to be identifying any infractions.  What more can they do?

Mazie: Enforce the policies. 

According to David Mazie Aramark’s documents show that the company rarely disciplines vendors who sell more beer than they are supposed to.

Magnus: But Aramark did not hit a family on a road.

Mazie: Aramark’s the one who made the decision to serve somebody who was visibly intoxicated, repeatedly. To get him to a .27 blood alcohol concentration.  They don’t serve him, the accident doesn’t happen.

The trial lasted a month and included a dramatic appearance by the wheelchair-bound Antonia Verni which left jurors weeping.

They awarded the Verni family $135 million— one portion, largely symbolic, to come from the drunk driver; and the rest $105 million from Aramark.  It was the largest alcohol liability ruling in U.S. history. 

Aramark declined to be interviewed by Dateline for this story, but did issue a statement: “We are sorry about the injuries suffered by Antonia Verni in this automobile accident and our thoughts are with her and her family.” It went on to say Aramark was “disappointed with the verdict and we are currently in the appeal process.”

Verni: They could try it once.  They could try it a 100 times.  Okay?  I love the exposure. Let’s bring it on again. It’s that simple.  Because, what it’ll do is it’ll prevent future Antonias from happening across the country.

So did the verdict send a message that’s gotten through?

MORE FROM DATELINE

Dateline Section Front

NBC's People of the Year: Read the interviews The Night Mary Jane Disappeared The Friday the 13th Mystery Mystery at Lost Dog Road Slideshow: Photos in the Bob Duke case When The Smoke Clears   Sneak peek: When The Smoke Clears Slideshow: The Christie Fleming murder Transcript: Dan Brown and Secrets Of The Lost Symbol Through The Pouring Rain Dateline Section Front   Add Dateline headlines to your news reader: