Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is another issue to consider here, however. There is another discussion forum out there that reports that Stallworth is enrolled in the NFL's substance abuse program. That is from the Philadelphia Enquirer from March 5, 2007. I believe the city data terms of service doesn't allow the information of other talk formats. I'll send a pm on the issue if someone wants to check it out, though. If I'm not mistake that will call for a suspension, if that information is correct. UPDATE: I just googled in "Did Donte Stallworth already enroll in the NFL's substance abuse policy? There are some items there that details it.
UPDATE! I wish you guys are listening to the Jim Rome show on ESPN right now. I'm listening to a defense attorney telling Rome that the verdict is a sham. The guy is saying that the lightest sentence he had ever heard of a guy getting off in this situation is a year in jail.
the two incidents are so vastly different that the only thing they have in common is NFL players
the issue isn't human life v canine life
the issue is first the crimes and the situations around them
"Crime A" involves a period of 7 years where there was deliberate intention to cause harm - there were federal violations that included racketeering and gambling concerns - the guilty party pretty much funded the entire large scale operation and then did everything possible to skirt responsibility - he lied to federal investigators, lied to the league, lied to his - owner - other individuals in his group ended up bargaining before him - as the last man standing in such situations your are going to get hit the hardest
"Crime B" involves an individual who went out to have a night on the town - knowing that he drank too much had arranged for a ride home and went to bed - upon waking up in the morning he felt he was fine and wanted to go to the beach - at that point he had an accident - he immediately took responsibility, including calling 911, attending to the pedestrian, submitting to a blood test, pleading guilty before the case hit the courts and settling his civil responsibility outside of the courts as well and without delay - his sentance, imo, is a light - however it should only be viewed in contrast to like crimes - crime A is not a like crime - it has also been reported that there could of been difficulty in obtaining a conviction for what they were looking for due to contributing factors, such as the pedestrian entering the roadway illegally which would make it difficult to prove that alchohol influence was a contributing factor
i'll now leave you all back to your regularly scheduled outrage
^^ Where did you read that? From what was reported through several media outlets Donte was on his way home from the club. I seriously doubt he went out, went home and then came back out to "walk the beach" at 7 am. But I'd like to see the story if it was reported that way.
i heard it on the radio - searching the internet i'm having trouble finding anyone that is definitely filling in a timeline and without a trial we probably wont get one
Quote:
An additional police affidavit filed Wednesday said that on the morning of the crash, Stallworth was drinking at a club in the posh Fountainebleau hotel on South Beach. He left to go to a nearby home -- it's not clear if it was one of his three Miami-area properties -- and then headed out to the causeway where Reyes was struck.
however, looking at the place he was at and the place of the accident I find it hard to believe he was on his way out after a stop home and I have no idea of the sources of the radio guy this morning where I heard that
even if he was full leonard little, i'm not arguing that his punishment was suitable (even under the previous scenario I think it was light) - i'm arguing that the cases aren't comparable
if it was mike vick that night in miami and he hit a dog that was crossing the road he wouldn't of even gotten the minimal sentance that stallworth received
the issue isn't who was damaged by the crime - it goes well beyond that to duration, accountability, mitigating factors and the law that was being broken
It has nothing to do with PETA or a dog's life being more valuable. What a cheap shot at people who are trying to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves. The law is concerned with intent. Michael Vick intended to commit a crime by fighting dogs, and then he intended to cover up the crime by way of another crime. His sentence was just.
Dante Stallworth got off too easy, that is agreed. He exercised very bad judgement getting behind the wheel of the car. But therein lies the rub, the catch-22, if you will. Generally people who are that drunk are so drunk they don't realize they are that drunk. So because his judgement was impaired intent goes right out the window and a successful lawyer can argue it down to manslaughter. If you're not happy with the judgement, get out there and lobby to tighten up drunk driving laws and work to change society's attitude towards alcohol. While I am not certain of the circumstances in this case, I doubt he was drinking alone. Why isn't anyone who could have stopped him being held accountable? Seems like there is enough blame to go around. Maybe we need to stop treating athletes like they walk around on MT. Olympus and expect them to be as accountable for their actions as every other citizen.
But therein lies the rub, the catch-22, if you will. Generally people who are that drunk are so drunk they don't realize they are that drunk. So because his judgement was impaired intent goes right out the window and a successful lawyer can argue it down to manslaughter.
Unless we found out some one forced him to drink, HE was responsible for being drunk. HE go into his car and said I will drive home or wherever. When I was in college or went to the bar I made sure I got a cab, as do many people. I think this is a disgrace to justice.
If you can't see the difference between callous behavior and a stupid mistake, please stop posting. Stallworth was careless and hit a guy who was reckless. Vick derived pleasure out of watching animals kill each other and even finished the job himself on occasion. One guy knows his mistake, the other had to be told by national media.
If you can't see the difference between callous behavior and a stupid mistake, please stop posting. Stallworth was careless and hit a guy who was reckless. Vick derived pleasure out of watching animals kill each other and even finished the job himself on occasion. One guy knows his mistake, the other had to be told by national media.
Please if Stallworth didn't have the 5 million he settled with the family for then I think we are talking years instead of days for him.
Per FL law if the jaywalker caused the accident Stallworth would have been exonerated. Considering the victim crossed a highway out of the crosswalk, the DA's case wasn't that good. Stallworth could have fought this, done no time, but still be sued in civil court. The DA's resume shows a conviction for a pro athlete. Obviously this seems like the most ideal situation for all parties. Plus I'm not sure if the family would have received 5 million in a civil judgment.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
