Stallworth Pleads Guilty To DUI Manslaughter

[Joemailman]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d810d8394&template=with-video&confirm=true

He will get just a 30 day sentence due to his cooperation with prosecutors, and the victim's family's desire to put the matter behind him. He could still be suspended by the league, but is a very lucky man. He does seem to have taken responsibility for the tragedy he created, and has reached a financial agreement with the victim's family. Probably about the best he can do in this case.

[MJZiggy]

A 30-DAY SENTENCE??? For MANSLAUGHTER?????

Un-friggin-believable.

[packers11]

Whoever says money/ being a celebrity can't get you a lighter sentence, this is proof right here...

Put me in that same situation and i'm in jail for 15-30 years...

[Ryche]

I get 45 days for a 2nd DUI and i did'nt kill anyone.... But then again I don't have millions.

[sheepshead]

This is unreal. Boycott anything this guy does.

[Joemailman]

This is unreal. Boycott anything this guy does.

Well, I doubt a lot of people are running out to buy a Stallworth jersey. Not sure what you mean by that. At any rate, I believe that outrage at the sentence should be directed at those who set the sentence.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

A 30-DAY SENTENCE??? For MANSLAUGHTER?????

Un-friggin-believable.

That ain't the sentence.

2 years of house arrest.
8 years of probation.
Drug and alcohol testing
Lifetime driver's license suspension
1,000 hours of community service

I'm not approving of this, but saying a 30 sentence is just factually wrong.

In this day and age, Mr. Stallworth manned up and never shrunk from his responsibility. He never tried fancy legal maneuvers to get out of it.

[falco]

As is often the case these days, we can never let the facts get in the way of a good controversy.

[MJZiggy]

You do have a point there, he did man up and never tried to weasel out of his responsibility.

[Jimx29]

His lawyer did make a point that the victim was jaywalking....

[Tyrone Bigguns]

You do have a point there, he did man up and never tried to weasel out of his responsibility.

When was the last time ANYBODY stopped, called 911 and submitted to roadside testing.

Attorneys across the country are furious. :lol:

Irony: i'm doing online traffic school right now. :(


Pedestrians must not suddenly leave the curb or other roadside area and step into the pathway of a vehicle close enough to present a hazard. Even though the law says that any driver must take care for the safety of a pedestrian, the pedestrian must not step into a vehicle's path even if he or she is stepping into a crosswalk. If the vehicle cannot stop in time, the fact that the pedestrian was in the right is not going to console his bereaved relatives.

[MJZiggy]

I may make copies of that sign and post them around town...these people are friggin' suicidal! And the sidewalk is RIGHT THERE, PEOPLE! Get out of the street!!

[gbpackfan]

Hardly anything gets me fired up but this is a FUCKING JOKE! He kills a guy and gets 30 days!!!! My God. We are a broken society.

[Ryche]

I mean really Who in there right mind jaywalks when there are drunk drivers out there ... It was just a matter of time.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Hardly anything gets me fired up but this is a FUCKING JOKE! He kills a guy and gets 30 days!!!! My God. We are a broken society.

Why dont' you cry out to mario's family?

[MOBB DEEP]

FREE VICK DA GREAT...!!!!

[pbmax]

It also helped that he settled the civil suit (or paid a sum to foreclose the option of a civil suit) so the victim's family were on board. He also had no record, not even a traffic summons on his record.

A much different suspect than a person on their 2nd DUI arrest.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

It also helped that he settled the civil suit (or paid a sum to foreclose the option of a civil suit) so the victim's family were on board. He also had no record, not even a traffic summons on his record.

A much different suspect than a person on their 2nd DUI arrest.

Didn't just help, it was mandatory.

THe sentence wouldn't have passed without their agreement.

[Ryche]

It also helped that he settled the civil suit (or paid a sum to foreclose the option of a civil suit) so the victim's family were on board. He also had no record, not even a traffic summons on his record.

A much different suspect than a person on their 2nd DUI arrest.

Didn't just help, it was mandatory.

THe sentence wouldn't have passed without their agreement.


so then with money you can buy justice

[BallHawk]

2 years of house arrest.
8 years of probation.
Drug and alcohol testing
Lifetime driver's license suspension
1,000 hours of community service

Does the house arrest sentence specify anything about travel for NFL games and whether he's allowed to travel?

In a society with zero public transportation, how will he manage with a lifetime driver's license suspension? Get a limo everywhere?

[pbmax]

It also helped that he settled the civil suit (or paid a sum to foreclose the option of a civil suit) so the victim's family were on board. He also had no record, not even a traffic summons on his record.

A much different suspect than a person on their 2nd DUI arrest.

Didn't just help, it was mandatory.

THe sentence wouldn't have passed without their agreement.


so then with money you can buy justice
He didn't pay the prosecutor or judge. He paid the family. The victim's family decided to sign on to the deal. Should the victims have no say? Should the prosecutor not taken their wishes into account?

[Tyrone Bigguns]

2 years of house arrest.
8 years of probation.
Drug and alcohol testing
Lifetime driver's license suspension
1,000 hours of community service

Does the house arrest sentence specify anything about travel for NFL games and whether he's allowed to travel?

In a society with zero public transportation, how will he manage with a lifetime driver's license suspension? Get a limo everywhere?

1. Yes, he will be on house arrest but allowed to work
2. I guess so, after 5 years he will be allowed to apply for a dl (restricted, work dl)

[Tyrone Bigguns]

It also helped that he settled the civil suit (or paid a sum to foreclose the option of a civil suit) so the victim's family were on board. He also had no record, not even a traffic summons on his record.

A much different suspect than a person on their 2nd DUI arrest.

Didn't just help, it was mandatory.

THe sentence wouldn't have passed without their agreement.


so then with money you can buy justice

I want to welcome you to america. Apparently you are new to our country. I congratuate you on your choice or pro football team.

Toodles.

[Partial]

so then with money you can buy justice

Why? You should rot in the cell. Just be lucky you didn't take anyone's life because you're too inconsiderate, careless and pathetic to call for a cab.

[SnakeLH2006]

Hardly anything gets me fired up but this is a FUCKING JOKE! He kills a guy and gets 30 days!!!! My God. We are a broken society.

Bottom Line that is the quote of the night. There is no way any of us this side of millions would get that sentence for KILLING SOMEOONE. Wow. Dude killed someone driving wasted. Wow. Just look at that. 30 days. Shit. Snake would kill about 3 guys on my hit list, if I could 30 days. DAMN.

[MJZiggy]

2 years of house arrest.
8 years of probation.
Drug and alcohol testing
Lifetime driver's license suspension
1,000 hours of community service

Does the house arrest sentence specify anything about travel for NFL games and whether he's allowed to travel?

In a society with zero public transportation, how will he manage with a lifetime driver's license suspension? Get a limo everywhere?

I'm sure he can afford it. Look, if he's anywhere near a decent human being, horrific decision notwithstanding, then what the court doles out is the tip of the iceberg. He's gotta live with this now. Not that I agree with the sentence--but I'm sure he can afford a lifetime of cabs or a driver.

[hoosier]

2 years of house arrest.
8 years of probation.
Drug and alcohol testing
Lifetime driver's license suspension
1,000 hours of community service

Does the house arrest sentence specify anything about travel for NFL games and whether he's allowed to travel?

In a society with zero public transportation, how will he manage with a lifetime driver's license suspension? Get a limo everywhere?

Designated driver.

[Scott Campbell]

I have a real problem with a 30 day sentence. This is an outrage.

[hoosier]

I have a real problem with a 30 day sentence. This is an outrage.

Apparently the prosecutor, the judge, the family and others familiar with the case don't agree with you.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/5min/story/1100610.html

As part of his plea deal, Stallworth must perform 1,000 hours of community service, which likely will involve public service announcements and speeches to youth warning of the perils of drunken driving.

Miami-Dade State Attorney Katherine Fernández Rundle bristled at the notion that Stallworth, 28, got off easy, pointing to his consistent remorse and the Reyes family's desire to avoid protracted legal proceedings.

''People who say that ought to talk to the 15-year-old daughter,'' she said of Reyes' daughter, Daniela.

"It's not about the people outside of the circle. It's about the family and Stallworth and his sense of responsibility and accountability. He's being punished appropriately. This is what the family wanted.''

Even Mothers Against Drunk Driving, the vocal group whose members routinely attend court hearings for DUI defendants, said the deal was the best outcome because of the Reyes family's wishes.

''I think there are a lot of kids as well as adults who will listen to his message,'' Miami-Dade MADD Director Janet Mondshein said of Stallworth. "I think he'll do more good being out of jail and being active in prevention than he would be in jail.''

[Scott Campbell]

.......and others familiar with the case don't agree with you.



Perhaps not all your "others".

My opinion stands. This is an outrage.



http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/17/madd-doesnt-want-donte-stallworths-money/


It can’t be easy being Roger Goodell.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving put this statement on its Web site:

MADD is profoundly disappointed in the 30 day jail sentence for Donte Stallworth who killed a pedestrian while driving drunk. We have heard there may be a contribution to MADD in the settlement and if that is true, we will not accept any monies. This case is a clear test of the NFL’s continued tolerance of drunk driving among its players. We are closely watching what the NFL does.

Stallworth’s sentence seemed to catch many people off guard. Under terms of the plea deal, with one day already served, he has to serve only 24 more days.
The Plain Dealer:

CLEVELAND, Ohio — Even diehard Browns fans were stunned that wide receiver Donte Stallworth might be able to suit up again after just a month in jail for killing a man with his car while drunk behind the wheel.

But prosecutors weighed a lot of factors, including the wishes of the victim’s family, which accepted what was presumably a large payout from Stallworth to head off civil litigation. (Of course, ordinary people don’t have the financial wherewithal to make those deals.)

The news release from the the Miami-Dade prosecutor:
“Every case that we prosecute, especially those that involve the death of a human being, is closely scrutinized to ensure that a fair and just resolution is reached for all parties,” said prosecutor Katherine Fernandez Rundle. “We have specifically looked at the unique facts involved with this charge, Mr. Stallworth’s excellent pre-incident history of community service, abundant references that attest to his good character, his lack of any traffic violations or criminal convictions, his full and complete post-incident cooperation with law enforcement, and his willingness to accept complete responsibility for his actions.

“For all of these reasons, a just resolution of this case has been reached,” Ms. Rundle added. “The terms of the plea have been agreed upon between the State Attorney’s office and the police, and has been extended with the full endorsement and consent of the Reyes family, who believe that this plea and its timing are in the best interest of their 15-year-old daughter, the sole remaining child of Mario Reyes. Although no sentence can ever restore Mr. Reyes to his family, the provisions of this plea will provide closure to them and appropriate punishment for Mr. Stallworth’s conduct and the effects of his actions that night.”

The news release went on to say: “Stallworth will be sentenced to 30 days in the Dade County Jail to be followed by:
2 years of community control (house arrest)
8 years of reporting probation with the following special conditions:
1. drug and alcohol evaluation and treatment if recommended
2. random drug testing
3. lifetime driver’s license suspension and no driving (editor’s note: after five years, Stallworth could be approved for driving for reasons like employment.)
4. $2,500 donation to MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving)
5. $2,500 donation to “Parents of Murdered Children”
6. 1,000 hours of community service and all community service projects will
be performed with the input and consent of the State Attorney’s Office.
These may include Public Service Announcements and speaking
engagements with children about the danger and risks associated with
drugs, alcohol, and driving, and how this case has affected him.
7. Cost Recovery to the Miami Beach Police Department in the amount of
$1,842.88
8. Cost Recovery to Miami-Dade Police Department in the amount of $813.14
9. Court Costs of $583.00″

Extra point: A country like Sweden imposes severe penalties for drunk driving and has a far smaller rate of fatalities involving alcohol and car accidents. What’s the message sent by Stallworth’s sentence? And what kind of punishment should Goodell levy? (The Rams’ Leonard Little had an eight-game suspension after a drunk-driving accident in which a woman was killed.) Will Goodell be able to square his continuing suspension of Michael Vick with his decision on Stallworth?

[hoosier]

.......and others familiar with the case don't agree with you.



Perhaps not all your "others".

My opinion stands. This is an outrage.



And I say your opinion means very little in comparison with those who know the details of the case or are personally affected by it. The MH article includes a number of local sources who have intimate knowledge of the case and who support the sentence (including the family of the victim), whereas the only sources you can find that share your outrage are the national chapter of MADD and a New York Times sports blog.

I know which side I find more convincing.

[pbmax]

Hardly anything gets me fired up but this is a FUCKING JOKE! He kills a guy and gets 30 days!!!! My God. We are a broken society.

Bottom Line that is the quote of the night. There is no way any of us this side of millions would get that sentence for KILLING SOMEOONE. Wow. Dude killed someone driving wasted. Wow. Just look at that. 30 days. Shit. Snake would kill about 3 guys on my hit list, if I could 30 days. DAMN.
Of course Snake, that would be murder, a completely different crime and the only place you would spend 30 days is the county lockup awaiting trial. After that, you get a few years somewhere less hospitable.

As for Society being broken, society and the legal system have been functioning along these lines for quite a long time, long before the internet made us keenly aware of what athletes on other teams are doing in the offseason. And long before football was America's #1 sport.

Sitting at home or work comfortably in front of your computer, people seem to refuse to see the difference between an intentional killing and an unintentional one. This is one simple fact that Vick apologists love to forget when they complain about his sentence versus Leonard Little's time served (apologies if that is the wrong player, I think its Little) for a DUI-influenced death.

Criminal punishments cannot be based on the outrage factor. For the victim's family, closure and a sense of justice cannot come from JUST a long prison sentence. Because if that is all you hang your hat on, then you inevitably will feel betrayed when they leave prison. Closure has to involve more than jail and a sense of revenge.

[Scott Campbell]

.......and others familiar with the case don't agree with you.



Perhaps not all your "others".

My opinion stands. This is an outrage.



And I say your opinion means very little in comparison with those who know the details of the case or are personally affected by it. The MH article includes a number of local sources who have intimate knowledge of the case and who support the sentence (including the family of the victim), whereas the only sources you can find that share your outrage are the national chapter of MADD and a New York Times sports blog.

I know which side I find more convincing.




I don't really care if my opinion means very little to you. That's not the point of having an opinion.

Perhaps you haven't been affected personally by a DUI.

[Scott Campbell]

For the victim's family, closure and a sense of justice cannot come from JUST a long prison sentence.



Ok, lets be honest here. It sure looks like the victims family views on justice are being swayed by a large monetary payment.

[hoosier]

.......and others familiar with the case don't agree with you.



Perhaps not all your "others".

My opinion stands. This is an outrage.



And I say your opinion means very little in comparison with those who know the details of the case or are personally affected by it. The MH article includes a number of local sources who have intimate knowledge of the case and who support the sentence (including the family of the victim), whereas the only sources you can find that share your outrage are the national chapter of MADD and a New York Times sports blog.

I know which side I find more convincing.




I don't really care if my opinion means very little to you. That's not the point of having an opinion.

Perhaps you haven't been affected personally by a DUI.

Whether or not I've been affected isn't the point, because this isn't about me. It's about Stallworth and the victim's family, and less immediately about the community or society as a whole.

The family, the prosecutor and the judge have all expressed their support for the sentence that was given, and have given compelling reasons as to why. Do you think your own feelings somehow outweigh those reasons? Do you think the family should have to relive the trauma of losing a father/husband/brother against their wishes so that others who have no direct stake in the situation can feel better? Do you think your feelings of moral outrage should take precedence over a plan for restitution and community service that might prevent something like this from happening again?

And what gives you this unique insight into the family's thinking?


Ok, lets be honest here. It sure looks like the victims family views on justice are being swayed by a large monetary payment.

[Scott Campbell]

And what gives you this unique insight into the family's thinking?




Run of the mill conventional cynicism.

[pbmax]

For the victim's family, closure and a sense of justice cannot come from JUST a long prison sentence.



Ok, lets be honest here. It sure looks like the victims family views on justice are being swayed by a large monetary payment.
So the uninvolved public should decide what is good for them?

From the outside, you think its about the money, but they may have also been impressed by Stallworth's free admission and his refusal to run away from the problem. Its much harder to forgive someone who can't even bring themselves to admit wrongdoing.

Actually, I have a low limit on how involved a victim or their family should be in sentencing. But if this follows the guidelines set by the legislature, then its OK by me.

[Scott Campbell]

The family, the prosecutor and the judge have all expressed their support for the sentence that was given, and have given compelling reasons as to why. Do you think your own feelings somehow outweigh those reasons? Do you think the family should have to relive the trauma of losing a father/husband/brother against their wishes so that others who have no direct stake in the situation can feel better? Do you think your feelings of moral outrage should take precedence over a plan for restitution and community service that might prevent something like this from happening again?



Here's what I get from your message - I can get stinking drunk, hop in my car, run your daughter over and leave her bloody corpse scattered all over the pavement, and buy you off for a few bucks and a "sincere apology".

30 days for killing a man? I am outraged.

[hoosier]

The family, the prosecutor and the judge have all expressed their support for the sentence that was given, and have given compelling reasons as to why. Do you think your own feelings somehow outweigh those reasons? Do you think the family should have to relive the trauma of losing a father/husband/brother against their wishes so that others who have no direct stake in the situation can feel better? Do you think your feelings of moral outrage should take precedence over a plan for restitution and community service that might prevent something like this from happening again?



Here's what I get from your message - I can get stinking drunk, hop in my car, run your daughter over and leave her bloody corpse scattered all over the pavement, and buy you off for a few bucks and a "sincere apology".

30 days for killing a man? I am outraged.

You conveniently leave out the part about the prosecutor, the local chapter of madd, and the judge also being on board with the sentence.

Your outrage is understandable. It's also a good reminder of why vigilante justice is a terrible idea. But then explain this to me: what sentence would NOT produce this sense of outrage? What is the "right" amount of time to put a person behind bars in order to make amends for killing someone while driving drunk? Do you think more prison time would somehow bring more justice?

[Scott Campbell]

What is the "right" amount of time to put a person behind bars in order to make amends for killing someone while driving drunk? Do you think more prison time would somehow bring more justice?


You were so quick to dismiss the source I provided that you may not have seen this:

"Extra point: A country like Sweden imposes severe penalties for drunk driving and has a far smaller rate of fatalities involving alcohol and car accidents. What’s the message sent by Stallworth’s sentence?"


I don't know what the exact right amount of time is. But it ain't 30 days.

[hoosier]

What is the "right" amount of time to put a person behind bars in order to make amends for killing someone while driving drunk? Do you think more prison time would somehow bring more justice?


You were so quick to dismiss the source I provided that you may not have seen this:

"Extra point: A country like Sweden imposes severe penalties for drunk driving and has a far smaller rate of fatalities involving alcohol and car accidents. What’s the message sent by Stallworth’s sentence?"


I don't know what the exact right amount of time is. But it ain't 30 days.

I'm not convinced that imposing strict penalties is the best way to modify this kind of behavior. If drunks as a species were good at taking consequences into consideration beforehand, we wouldn't have the problem to begin with. Just to drive my point home a little more, El Salvador used to have a law on the books that imposed death by firing squad for drunk drivers. Safe to say they didn't have many repeat offenders, but I'm not sure they didn't have a lot of first time duis.

[Fritz]

.......and others familiar with the case don't agree with you.



Perhaps not all your "others".

My opinion stands. This is an outrage.



And I say your opinion means very little in comparison with those who know the details of the case or are personally affected by it. The MH article includes a number of local sources who have intimate knowledge of the case and who support the sentence (including the family of the victim), whereas the only sources you can find that share your outrage are the national chapter of MADD and a New York Times sports blog.

I know which side I find more convincing.




I don't really care if my opinion means very little to you. That's not the point of having an opinion.

Perhaps you haven't been affected personally by a DUI.

Whether or not I've been affected isn't the point, because this isn't about me. It's about Stallworth and the victim's family, and less immediately about the community or society as a whole.

The family, the prosecutor and the judge have all expressed their support for the sentence that was given, and have given compelling reasons as to why. Do you think your own feelings somehow outweigh those reasons? Do you think the family should have to relive the trauma of losing a father/husband/brother against their wishes so that others who have no direct stake in the situation can feel better? Do you think your feelings of moral outrage should take precedence over a plan for restitution and community service that might prevent something like this from happening again?

And what gives you this unique insight into the family's thinking?


Ok, lets be honest here. It sure looks like the victims family views on justice are being swayed by a large monetary payment.

Hoosier, your words above that I've put into boldface type - you have to be careful. Certainly individual circumstances must be considered, and the victim's or the victim's family's wishes must be considered - but on the whole it really better not be about the guilty party and the victim, and "less immediately about the community or society as a whole."

If individuals can decide between them what punishments or payoffs are appropriate, then the level of justice will be even more unfair than it already is. No doubt that in general money can buy justice, but if there is no sense behind our legal system that this involves an entire society, then we're screwed.

It is about the community and society as a whole. That's where the whole system came from.

[Freak Out]

It is about the community and society as a whole. That's where the whole system came from.

When we get away from this we end up with a Serbian tribal style of justice with honor killings and buyouts.

[hoosier]

.......and others familiar with the case don't agree with you.



Perhaps not all your "others".

My opinion stands. This is an outrage.



And I say your opinion means very little in comparison with those who know the details of the case or are personally affected by it. The MH article includes a number of local sources who have intimate knowledge of the case and who support the sentence (including the family of the victim), whereas the only sources you can find that share your outrage are the national chapter of MADD and a New York Times sports blog.

I know which side I find more convincing.




I don't really care if my opinion means very little to you. That's not the point of having an opinion.

Perhaps you haven't been affected personally by a DUI.

Whether or not I've been affected isn't the point, because this isn't about me. It's about Stallworth and the victim's family, and less immediately about the community or society as a whole.

The family, the prosecutor and the judge have all expressed their support for the sentence that was given, and have given compelling reasons as to why. Do you think your own feelings somehow outweigh those reasons? Do you think the family should have to relive the trauma of losing a father/husband/brother against their wishes so that others who have no direct stake in the situation can feel better? Do you think your feelings of moral outrage should take precedence over a plan for restitution and community service that might prevent something like this from happening again?

And what gives you this unique insight into the family's thinking?


Ok, lets be honest here. It sure looks like the victims family views on justice are being swayed by a large monetary payment.

Hoosier, your words above that I've put into boldface type - you have to be careful. Certainly individual circumstances must be considered, and the victim's or the victim's family's wishes must be considered - but on the whole it really better not be about the guilty party and the victim, and "less immediately about the community or society as a whole."
If individuals can decide between them what punishments or payoffs are appropriate, then the level of justice will be even more unfair than it already is. No doubt that in general money can buy justice, but if there is no sense behind our legal system that this involves an entire society, then we're screwed.

It is about the community and society as a whole. That's where the whole system came from.

By "less immediately" I didn't mean that the interests of community and society should secondary to family, just that they aren't immediately visible in the court room and aren't always easy to discern, whereas the family and its wishes usually are. "At a more abstract level," in other words. I don't disagree at all with your point, by the way, that the legal system works primarily for the good of the whole and not in the interests of those immediately affected, even if the good of the whole can be hard to fathom sometimes.

[Fritz]

Right. It's just a question of emphasis. I think we're on the same page here.

Unless my post is the beginning of a new page of the thread. Then we wouldn't be on the same page.

[Patler]

There are many purposes for criminal punishment, and we may differ on what they are or how they should be ranked. But on any list, punishment to fulfill society's need for vengeance is quite low in priority, relative to punishing in a way to deter and rehabilitate the criminal, "compensate" and fulfill the need for vengeance of the victims, and to deter others in society from committing similar acts.

The period of incarceration is awful light, probably too light of a component in the overall punishment, but a lot of the other purposes for criminal punishment are met by the overall sentence. Those closest to the situation apparently felt that increased incarceration would not further the need to punish Stallworth and would not further the needs of the victims. The only purpose for greater incarceration would be to satisfy society.

Would the uproar be any less if the sentence was 1 year? 18 months? 2 years? Some might continue to be outraged at 5 years, or even 10.

If the criminal is truly remorseful, "rehabilitated"; and the victims family is satisfied, choosing a punishment purely to make society feel better is a difficult task.

Personally, I think something more than 30 days was in order, but that would only make me feel better and would serve no other purpose. All in all, my feelings are not very important in this situation.

[MOBB DEEP]

I have a real problem with a 30 day sentence. This is an outrage.

SC, u think vick da great is outraged??

[Zool]

I have a real problem with a 30 day sentence. This is an outrage.

SC, u think vick da great is outraged??

Exactly. Killed dogs and got 2 years. Stallworth kills a human and gets 30 days plus detention in the principals office.

[Gunakor]

I have a real problem with a 30 day sentence. This is an outrage.

SC, u think vick da great is outraged??

I think he has enough on his own plate to worry about right now. He need not concern himself with this. And even if he did, he only need to go back to his statements before his incarceration that he was absolutely clean, did nothing wrong, had nothing to do with dogfighting, etc. Perhaps if he were as cooperative and honest right from the very beginning as Stallworth has been the sentence would have been different for him too. Sucks for him.

[Patler]

I think he has enough on his own plate to worry about right now. He need not concern himself with this. And even if he did, he only need to go back to his statements before his incarceration that he was absolutely clean, did nothing wrong, had nothing to do with dogfighting, etc. Perhaps if he were as cooperative and honest right from the very beginning as Stallworth has been the sentence would have been different for him too. Sucks for him.

Exactly. Besides, Vick did what he did because he intended to do it. Everything was intentional. Stallworth killed a guy unintentionally because he was stupid. Yes, he is responsible for the result of his acts, but the result is not what he intended. That doesn't excuse him by any means, but there is a different angle to the culpability.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I have a real problem with a 30 day sentence. This is an outrage.

SC, u think vick da great is outraged??

Exactly. Killed dogs and got 2 years. Stallworth kills a human and gets 30 days plus detention in the principals office.

You don't see the difference tween and accident and something planned and executed. Sheesh. :roll:

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Ty acknowledges that some on this board feel the sentence is light...conveniently leaving out the rest of the sentence.

Ty is posting while also completing his online traffic school...dang those scottsdale police.

Ty knows this...the gentleman killed was also at fault. He didn't cross at the crosswalk, he darted out, etc. Ty doesn't condone drunk driving, but ty isn't convinced that Stallworth wouldnt' have hit him sober.

Ty leaves all of you with this question, do you think the prosecutor is incompetent? Do you not understand that this deal was struck because of many reasons including a lack of evidence or feeling that it might be lost in court.

Would you all feel better or worse if Stallworth went to court with a high powered team of attorneys was was pronounced "not guilty."

[Scott Campbell]

I have a real problem with a 30 day sentence. This is an outrage.

SC, u think vick da great is outraged??



Who cares what that clown thinks.

[Zool]

I have a real problem with a 30 day sentence. This is an outrage.

SC, u think vick da great is outraged??

Exactly. Killed dogs and got 2 years. Stallworth kills a human and gets 30 days plus detention in the principals office.

You don't see the difference tween and accident and something planned and executed. Sheesh. :roll:

OK well I'm accidentally going to run over a dog while drinking. You don't agree that human life should be valued at a much higher price?

[MadScientist]

Ty acknowledges that some on this board feel the sentence is light...conveniently leaving out the rest of the sentence.

Ty is posting while also completing his online traffic school...dang those scottsdale police.

Ty knows this...the gentleman killed was also at fault. He didn't cross at the crosswalk, he darted out, etc. Ty doesn't condone drunk driving, but ty isn't convinced that Stallworth wouldnt' have hit him sober.

Ty leaves all of you with this question, do you think the prosecutor is incompetent? Do you not understand that this deal was struck because of many reasons including a lack of evidence or feeling that it might be lost in court.

Would you all feel better or worse if Stallworth went to court with a high powered team of attorneys was was pronounced "not guilty."

If Ty did the same thing Stallworth did, how long would Ty's ass be sitting in jail.

Combining the all the parts of the sentence and the level of fault of the victim does balance things out more. But the bottom line is that if feels like he will be spending less time in jail than a normal person, and different levels of justice for different classes of people creates outrage.

[Gunakor]

I have a real problem with a 30 day sentence. This is an outrage.

SC, u think vick da great is outraged??

Exactly. Killed dogs and got 2 years. Stallworth kills a human and gets 30 days plus detention in the principals office.

You don't see the difference tween and accident and something planned and executed. Sheesh. :roll:

OK well I'm accidentally going to run over a dog while drinking. You don't agree that human life should be valued at a much higher price?

Are you going to be fully cooperative with the authorities right from the very beginning of the investigation, or are you going to lie repeatedly about what happened? If you only look at the crime itself, yes, this is a horrible injustice. If you take into account the criminal's ownership of the crime, is he remorseful, is he cooperative, etc...

Maybe we should speak with the victims family, who seem to be just fine with this. As reported, they just wanted to put it behind them. They don't seem to view Stallworth as the same monster many viewed Vick as.

I'm not excusing what Stallworth did, don't take it that way. What I'm suggesting is that if Vick were as honest about his criminal activity as Stallworth has been regarding his, Vick could have gotten a significantly reduced sentence as well. It's not just dogs vs. humans, it's Stallworth's case vs. Vick's case. There's more to both than just the crime itself that was considered in sentencing.

[Patler]

Ty acknowledges that some on this board feel the sentence is light...conveniently leaving out the rest of the sentence.

Ty is posting while also completing his online traffic school...dang those scottsdale police.

Ty knows this...the gentleman killed was also at fault. He didn't cross at the crosswalk, he darted out, etc. Ty doesn't condone drunk driving, but ty isn't convinced that Stallworth wouldnt' have hit him sober.

Ty leaves all of you with this question, do you think the prosecutor is incompetent? Do you not understand that this deal was struck because of many reasons including a lack of evidence or feeling that it might be lost in court.

Would you all feel better or worse if Stallworth went to court with a high powered team of attorneys was was pronounced "not guilty."

I don't think we have left out the rest of the sentence. It's been listed on here and mentioned by many. I think most are aware of the other components of his sentence. Personally, I think the financial contributions to the two organizations are laughably small for a guy of his means, but the judge may have limits on what he can impose in that regard.

I have a problem with the 30 day sentence because it is almost like leaving a penny tip. It's almost more insulting to the conscience than if he had given him no time. It seems to me that he should have given him no time, or sufficient time that the incarceration alone interrupts the flow of his life. Six months or a year would do that. Even 90 days would have.

Now I am sure you will go on about the inconveniences resulting from the other components of his sentence, and I agree that there are some. However, I think there is a special significance to the inconvenience of incarceration, when your life is dictated by someone else 24/7. In this situation, I think the length of that inconvenience should be longer than an NFL training camp is.

[Scott Campbell]

If Ty did the same thing Stallworth did, how long would Ty's ass be sitting in jail.



Not nearly long enough. :lol:

[Scott Campbell]

OK well I'm accidentally going to run over a dog while drinking. You don't agree that human life should be valued at a much higher price?


Do we get to pick the dog?


http://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/images/avatars/145672441549bb3f3e9aff7.gif

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I have a real problem with a 30 day sentence. This is an outrage.

SC, u think vick da great is outraged??

Exactly. Killed dogs and got 2 years. Stallworth kills a human and gets 30 days plus detention in the principals office.

You don't see the difference tween and accident and something planned and executed. Sheesh. :roll:

OK well I'm accidentally going to run over a dog while drinking. You don't agree that human life should be valued at a much higher price?

Of course. That isn't the issue, you are clouding it.

But, i'm sure the dog's wife and puppies will appreciate the settlement.

[Fritz]

Do dogs have wives?

Are puppies children?

Is Ty's use of the third person an indication of Snake's influence on this board, or entirely unrelated?

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Ty acknowledges that some on this board feel the sentence is light...conveniently leaving out the rest of the sentence.

Ty is posting while also completing his online traffic school...dang those scottsdale police.

Ty knows this...the gentleman killed was also at fault. He didn't cross at the crosswalk, he darted out, etc. Ty doesn't condone drunk driving, but ty isn't convinced that Stallworth wouldnt' have hit him sober.

Ty leaves all of you with this question, do you think the prosecutor is incompetent? Do you not understand that this deal was struck because of many reasons including a lack of evidence or feeling that it might be lost in court.

Would you all feel better or worse if Stallworth went to court with a high powered team of attorneys was was pronounced "not guilty."

If Ty did the same thing Stallworth did, how long would Ty's ass be sitting in jail.

Combining the all the parts of the sentence and the level of fault of the victim does balance things out more. But the bottom line is that if feels like he will be spending less time in jail than a normal person, and different levels of justice for different classes of people creates outrage.

Ty: maybe less..as Ty doesn't have Donte's money, would go to court and win the case. :lol:

Normal person: who are they? How do you define normalcy?

Justice: Are you new to this country. THis country always has different justice, cars, jobs, companies, etc..for those with more money.

I'll expect the same level of outrage for the poor who have to rely on overworked Public Defenders who plea bargain their cases out..regardless of innocence or guilt.

I'll expect the same outrage for "normal" folk who go to court with "normal" attorneys who lose to more expensive and better attorneys.

But, i doubt i'll hear anything from you or the rest of the forum..those cases happen daily, and they arent' reported.

I guess those chants of "no justice, no peace" ring a bit more loudly now.

[Fritz]

No, I'm with ya, Ty.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Do dogs have wives?

Are puppies children?

Is Ty's use of the third person an indication of Snake's influence on this board, or entirely unrelated?

Wives: No, but they will be recognized if we allow gay marriage. :wink:

Ty: Ty was on this board long before snake...snake is aping ty.

[Fritz]

And . . . are puppies children?

[KYPack]

You've always got "Biggun-ized", Ty.

That's some bullshit you invented for sure.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Ty acknowledges that some on this board feel the sentence is light...conveniently leaving out the rest of the sentence.

Ty is posting while also completing his online traffic school...dang those scottsdale police.

Ty knows this...the gentleman killed was also at fault. He didn't cross at the crosswalk, he darted out, etc. Ty doesn't condone drunk driving, but ty isn't convinced that Stallworth wouldnt' have hit him sober.

Ty leaves all of you with this question, do you think the prosecutor is incompetent? Do you not understand that this deal was struck because of many reasons including a lack of evidence or feeling that it might be lost in court.

Would you all feel better or worse if Stallworth went to court with a high powered team of attorneys was was pronounced "not guilty."

I don't think we have left out the rest of the sentence. It's been listed on here and mentioned by many. I think most are aware of the other components of his sentence. Personally, I think the financial contributions to the two organizations are laughably small for a guy of his means, but the judge may have limits on what he can impose in that regard.

I have a problem with the 30 day sentence because it is almost like leaving a penny tip. It's almost more insulting to the conscience than if he had given him no time. It seems to me that he should have given him no time, or sufficient time that the incarceration alone interrupts the flow of his life. Six months or a year would do that. Even 90 days would have.

Now I am sure you will go on about the inconveniences resulting from the other components of his sentence, and I agree that there are some. However, I think there is a special significance to the inconvenience of incarceration, when your life is dictated by someone else 24/7. In this situation, I think the length of that inconvenience should be longer than an NFL training camp is.

It was listed when Ty posted it, not before. That is telling. Manufactured outrage. I'm not saying we shouldn't be outraged, but let's at least start with the whole sentence and then pick out the part that outrages us.

Orgs: why should he even give money to them? I do acknowledge your point, my point would be that he shouldn't have to give to them at all. Better something than nothing.

30 days: I do see that point. But, he is on house arrest for a long time. And the license is not within the norm either. Neihter is his probation.

Essentially the plea puts him in the hands of the system for a long time. Ask anybody who has been in the system..and the one thing they want is to be out. They would rather due their sentence and have no probation than vice versa..not all, but most. Being on probation isn't easy..mentally or any other way.

As for jail, i dont' know about the jail and 6 months...sometimes you have guys in jail that are allowed to work while in jail..then return at night. Is that ok? Remember, jail isn't the same thing as prison..the prisoner and their rights are different.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

You've always got "Biggun-ized", Ty.

That's some bullshit you invented for sure.

What part is bullshit?

[pbmax]

OK well I'm accidentally going to run over a dog while drinking. You don't agree that human life should be valued at a much higher price?
Yes, I believe it should, but that doesn't mean punishments for different crimes will always add up this way. When prosecuting a criminal, there are more factors to consider than "species". Stallworth committed one horrific act, without prior intention to do harm.

Vick, intentionally and repeatedly (you do remember than he personally killed multiple dogs?), with malice aforethought and while attempting to hide what he was doing, committed the same crimes over and over again. He not only committed them, he arranged and paid for others to do the same. And all of this illegal activity was to support another illegal activity - gambling on dog fights,

Just because each has had the same number of media circuses (one) doesn't mean the frequency of their behavior is the same.

[sheepshead]

From Goodall via PFT:


“The conduct reflected in your guilty plea resulted in the tragic loss of life and was inexcusable,” Goodell wrote to Stallworth. “While the criminal justice system has determined the legal consequences of this incident, it is my responsibility as NFL Commissioner to determine appropriate league discipline for your actions, which have caused irreparable harm to the victim and his family, your club, your fellow players and the NFL.

“The conduct that led to your conviction plainly violates both the Personal Conduct and Substances of Abuse policies. Either provides me with full authority to take appropriate disciplinary action against you, including a fine or suspension without pay, and to impose appropriate conditions on your continued participation in the NFL. In this case, there is ample evidence to warrant significant discipline under both policies.

“There is no reasonable dispute that your continued eligibility for participation at this time would undermine the integrity of and public confidence in our league. Accordingly, I have decided to suspend you indefinitely, effective immediately. In due course, we will contact your representatives to schedule a meeting with you, after which I will make a final determination on discipline. Pending my final determination, you will not be permitted to visit the club’s facility or participate in any team activities.

“Everyone associated with the league derives tremendous benefits from participating in our game and from the extraordinary support we receive from the public. With these benefits comes, among other things, the responsibility to conduct ourselves in a lawful and responsible way, with no entitlement to or expectation of favorable treatment.”


Hard Ball, I'm glad.

[pbmax]

Hard Ball, I'm glad.
While I like what Goodell is doing in general, its hard to root for justice when the motivating factor behind it is money.

Was the Personal Conduct Policy in place during Leonard Little's trial?

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Hard Ball, I'm glad.
While I like what Goodell is doing in general, its hard to root for justice when the motivating factor behind it is money.

Was the Personal Conduct Policy in place during Leonard Little's trial?

Which trial, the manslaughter in 98 or the felony case in 04. :oops:

Interesting sentencing disparity for little and manslaughter: Little received 90 days in jail, four years probation and 1000 hours of community service.

Stallworth's attorney is an idiot. Shoulda gone to trial.

[Scott Campbell]

I have a real problem with a 30 day sentence. This is an outrage.

Apparently the prosecutor, the judge, the family and others familiar with the case don't agree with you.



I stand by my opinion. This is an outrage. And now it appears that Goodall agrees with me.


From Goodall vie PFT:


“The conduct reflected in your guilty plea resulted in the tragic loss of life and was inexcusable,” Goodell wrote to Stallworth. “While the criminal justice system has determined the legal consequences of this incident, it is my responsibility as NFL Commissioner to determine appropriate league discipline for your actions, which have caused irreparable harm to the victim and his family, your club, your fellow players and the NFL.

“The conduct that led to your conviction plainly violates both the Personal Conduct and Substances of Abuse policies. Either provides me with full authority to take appropriate disciplinary action against you, including a fine or suspension without pay, and to impose appropriate conditions on your continued participation in the NFL. In this case, there is ample evidence to warrant significant discipline under both policies.

“There is no reasonable dispute that your continued eligibility for participation at this time would undermine the integrity of and public confidence in our league. Accordingly, I have decided to suspend you indefinitely, effective immediately. In due course, we will contact your representatives to schedule a meeting with you, after which I will make a final determination on discipline. Pending my final determination, you will not be permitted to visit the club’s facility or participate in any team activities.

“Everyone associated with the league derives tremendous benefits from participating in our game and from the extraordinary support we receive from the public. With these benefits comes, among other things, the responsibility to conduct ourselves in a lawful and responsible way, with no entitlement to or expectation of favorable treatment.”

[DannoMac21]

FREE VICK DA GREAT...!!!!

lmfao

[pbmax]

Eh, this joke wasn't worth the effort.

[mraynrand]

From Goodall via PFT: Pending my final determination, you will not be permitted to visit the club’s facility or participate in any team activities.

So much for going on the 'team building' outing to see the dog fights.

[Joemailman]

Hard Ball, I'm glad.
While I like what Goodell is doing in general, its hard to root for justice when the motivating factor behind it is money.

Was the Personal Conduct Policy in place during Leonard Little's trial?

The NFL unveiled its new Personal Conduct Policy in April 2007. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2832098

[SnakeLH2006]

Pretty good and heated topic.

Snake's Take from posts on this topic aka PackerRat facts :roll: :

1) So as long as one is (seems) remorseful, let's be lenient and give them a lax sentence for justice is truly blind. 30 days for killing a man while driving drunk and admitting it...2 years for killing dogs. Both are douches, yet it seems kinda surreal when you think about it. Yes, I understand intent vs. an accident, but what kind of example does this lead to avoiding drunken driving? Don't 2nd offense drunk drivers face a mandatory 30 days? Just saying. Whether it was Donte's intent or not, 30 days seems pretty light and does NOT set a good precedent for future drivers who like to get impaired. When I was a kid, my grandpa got hit by an innattentive driver and killed while getting his mail. My family did not press charges as they did not want the woman to go to jail for an accident. She was not drinking. But if someone killed your significant other/child while CHOOSING to drive wasted, would 30 days satisfy you? That is the driver's choice to drive wasted and endanger society, not just an accident, and very dangerous to boot.
2) I do agree if the family is ok with it, 30 days is ok, but when the hell did that come into the equation for justice? Does money talk...looks like it. If this was some drunken mill-worker driving for more booze at 9pm and hits a jaywalker, does the blue-collar guy get the same sentence without an army of lawyers abitrating a lenient sentence WITHOUT a fat monetary payout...Still unlikely.
3) Ty, I'm a big fan of Dave Chappelle, and you, but Snake doesn't copy your style, as I didn't join LONG after you, but a mere 80 days after you in July 2006. Thanks for the pub tho. :D
4) If Snake wins the lottery, I could just get wasted and stage a few drunken manslaughters...3 off the ole hitlest...90 days. That's what it sounds like...but I gotta act remorseful, and have some cash-money to part with. :roll: Everyone would be cool with that?

[MOBB DEEP]

i forget, what exactly did jared allen do?

for some reason that cat rubs me wrong way...

[Joemailman]

I'm guessing the prosecutor agreed to the light sentence is exchange for the guilty plea because they weren't real confident they could get a manslaughter conviction if the case went to trial. If, as some have reported, the victim was jaywalking, it may have been difficult to prove that Stallworth's intoxication was the sole reason for the accident. After all, a jaywalker can be in danger even if there isn't a drunk driver around. If the jaywalking story is true, it's not surprising the family would want to avoid an extended trial. Having to listen to testimony that the victim may have been partially responsible for the accident would have made a very tough and tragic situation even worse.

[pbmax]

The sound of another shoe dropping (via PFT):

Video Exists Of Stallworth Accident (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/06/22/video-exists-of-stallworth-accident/)
Posted by Mike Florio on June 22, 2009, 1:34 p.m.

A source with knowledge of the March 14 collision between Brown receiver Donte’ Stallworth’s vehicle and 59-year-old Mario Reyes tells us that a video of the accident exists.

Per the source, the footage was shot by a nearby surveillance camera that monitors the gates to Reyes’ workplace.

We’re told that the video shows Reyes walking into the highway in an area that does not contain a crosswalk, and ultimately walking directly into the path of Stallworth’s Bentley.

Stallworth’s lawyer, David Cornwell, declined to confirm the existence of the video.

The contents of the video apparently had a significant impact on the ultimate plea deal. Though the 30-day prison term and two years of house arrest light have triggered significant criticism, the ultimate question for a jury would have been whether the evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Stallworth caused or contributed to the death of Mario Reyes. At a minimum, the contents of the tape, as they have been described to us, indicate that a reasonable jury could have found reasonable doubt.

Whether the video results in a reduced suspension from the NFL remains to be seen.

[Scott Campbell]

A video that showed a guy to be attempting suicide might change my mind on the situation.

[MJZiggy]

Yes, if that were the case, shouldn't they have dropped manslaughter altogether? Guess the prosecutor had to get his conviction...

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Wow. What a surprise. :roll:

Who woulda thought that the DA wasn't just giving light sentences for the hell of it.

Anybody who followed this saw 2 things:

1. THe daughter didn't want it to go to trial. Court appointed person noted that it would cause her emotional damage (or some term like that).

2. That the case was far from open and shut. Mario had crossed where there was no crosswalk..and that even sober, Stallworth might have hit him.

Ty is by no means exonerating STallworth for driving drunk, but Ty is also not letting a pedestrian off the hook because he broke the law as well.

[woodbuck27]

Stallworth details events before DUI crash in recorded police interview
AP

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8112f653&template=without-video-with-comments&confirm=true