Police investigate member of Roethlisberger's golf foursome for public urination
Ohio authorities investigated a complaint that a member of Ben Roethlisberger's golfing foursome urinated publicly on the Country Club at Muirfield course, but issued no citation.
Dublin police said Tuesday that the Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback wasn't the person who urinated behind a pine tree between the 17th green and 18th tee box of the course bordering the Jack Nicklaus-built course that's home to the PGA's Memorial Tournament.
Instead, it was one of three unnamed friends from Roethlisberger's hometown of Findlay, Ohio. The woman who complained, Nanette "Nan" Fowler, didn't want to press charges, said Dublin police spokesman David Ball.
"We spoke to the golf course (management), and they agreed to discuss this issue internally with their members," Ball said.
A police report said Fowler phoned the golf club, and then police, at 6:53 p.m. Friday to complain about a tall, white man wearing a blue golf shirt and khaki shorts who was "urinating into some trees." The report said a woman at the pro shop told Fowler "it was Ben Roethlisberger," although officials later disputed it was Roethlisberger.
Fowler didn't return telephone calls seeking comment.
Roethlisberger's group played through without meeting with officers. A golf pro sent to investigate the complaint did not locate the group. The club issued a reminder to members to use public restrooms.
Country club executives, Roethlisberger's agent Ryan Tollner and the Steelers declined to comment on the incident.
Roethlisberger has been under scrutiny for his actions since a Georgia college student in March accused him of raping her in a bar restroom. Detectives found no evidence to arrest him, but the incident caused NFL commissioner Roger Goodell to suspend Roethlisberger for up to six games.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.