Stallworth to serve 30 days

[John Denny]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

From what I had have heard this type of sentence is relatively common in cases with similar circumstances and evidence. Apparently the burden of proof by Fla law includes proving that the accused's intoxication directly led to the death. Given that the victim was jay-walking there was precedence that he might have been found not guilty and done no time at all.

To me the most interesting part of this whole thing is the comparison to Vick. Vick's crimes are obviously pretty sh*tty but in the end he went to the poke for a long dam time for killing some dogs and DOnte killsanother human and ends up serving 30 days and 2 years home confinement. What the hell is wrong with our priorities in this country?

Well put.

But to put it in perspective, I know of a civilian (and by that I mean a common joe) who hit and killed someone who was changing a tire late at night on the side of the road and got nothing so 30 days seems about right unfortunately. No matter what their sentence amounts to, they'll have to live with the fact that they took someone's life and that is more weight than anyone should ever have to bear.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

From what I had have heard this type of sentence is relatively common in cases with similar circumstances and evidence. Apparently the burden of proof by Fla law includes proving that the accused's intoxication directly led to the death. Given that the victim was jay-walking there was precedence that he might have been found not guilty and done no time at all.

To me the most interesting part of this whole thing is the comparison to Vick. Vick's crimes are obviously pretty sh*tty but in the end he went to the poke for a long dam time for killing some dogs and DOnte killsanother human and ends up serving 30 days and 2 years home confinement. What the hell is wrong with our priorities in this country?

delettteedd

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

From what I had have heard this type of sentence is relatively common in cases with similar circumstances and evidence. Apparently the burden of proof by Fla law includes proving that the accused's intoxication directly led to the death. Given that the victim was jay-walking there was precedence that he might have been found not guilty and done no time at all.

To me the most interesting part of this whole thing is the comparison to Vick. Vick's crimes are obviously pretty sh*tty but in the end he went to the poke for a long dam time for killing some dogs and DOnte killsanother human and ends up serving 30 days and 2 years home confinement. What the hell is wrong with our priorities in this country?

Well as you said, if Stallworth wasn't drinking he very well could've been found not guilty. Who's to say the drinking had anything at all to do with the guy's death? Vick was sponsoring a major dog fighting ring and lied to pretty much everyone, including the feds. If Vick would've just come clean when this first came out he might have done very little jail time. But I see your point, is a dog's life worth more than a humans?? No.

[CRedskinsRule]

I read, no link tho, that he also lost his driving privileges for life.

[KLHJ2]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I read, no link tho, that he also lost his driving privileges for life.

If that's true then only in the state of Florida. He can always get a license in another state.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Angry

If that's true then only in the state of Florida. He can always get a license in another state.

Not unless: a) He lies on his application as there will likely be several questions concerning his status in other states and/or whether he has pled guilty to moving violations; and b) the particular State doesn't run a database check. At least that's how it would work for most reciprocal licenses - State's tend to honor the actions of other States in those cases.

It is my belief that, if you are suspended or revoked in some other State, you will be denied a Maryland license

[KLHJ2]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Not unless: a) He lies on his application as there will likely be several questions concerning his status in other states and/or whether he has pled guilty to moving violations; and b) the particular State doesn't run a database check. At least that's how it would work for most reciprocal licenses - State's tend to honor the actions of other States in those cases.

It is my belief that, if you are suspended or revoked in some other State, you will be denied a Maryland license

Why would he lie on any application? It's not like he isn't well known, especially now. He may not get a MD license, but I am sure that there is some state out there that would be willing to give him a license.

In retrospect though, I doubt very seriously that they have revoked his driving privileges for life. It wasn't in the posted article and that would have been a huge oversight on the part of the press.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Angry

Why would he lie on any application? It's not like he isn't well known, especially now. He may not get a MD license, but I am sure that there is some state out there that would be willing to give him a license.

In retrospect though, I doubt very seriously that they have revoked his driving privileges for life. It wasn't in the posted article and that would have been a huge oversight on the part of the press.

Here is the link:
Donte Stallworth of Cleveland Browns reaches financial agreement with family of victim Mario Reyes - ESPN

Stallworth must also undergo drug and alcohol testing, will have a lifetime driver's license suspension and must perform 1,000 hours of community service. Lyons said after five years, Stallworth could win approval for limited driving for reasons such as employment.

And I have had driver's licenses in Md, Colo, and La. In every state, and every application it asks if your license is revoked or suspended in any state. Like Joe said all the States uphold each others laws in cases like this.

[freddyg12]

Every case has to be based on its individual circumstances, that's why there are judges & juries.

I'm not so up in arms about his sentencing, and I totally disagree w/ statements about fame & privledge being to his advantage. In the past maybe, but I don't think so now. I think it's actually often the opposite; the more media exposure there is the more pressure judges & juries feel to not let someone famous off. I think the OJ trial really changed things, maybe for the better.

The only advantage Stallworth had was good representation, which he's able to afford. From what little details there are in these articles, it sounds as if the family realized the man was jay-walking & Stallworth tried to react. He's guilty of the crime because the alcohol affected his ability to react. If he weren't drunk he would've likely pleaded not guilty and sounds like he had a good chance of getting off.

You can say that 30 days isn't that much, but it was a plea bargain. It will save the court & the victim's family the pain of going through w/a trial. He got 8 years probation. At any time if he violates it he could be locked up.

Like it or not our justice system differentiates on crimes that involve the loss of life, even murder. From what I read in the article, it sounds like a decent end for all parties was reached & Stallworth owned up to the crime. Give him some credit for that at least.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

Every case has to be based on its individual circumstances, that's why there are judges & juries.

I'm not so up in arms about his sentencing, and I totally disagree w/ statements about fame & privledge being to his advantage. In the past maybe, but I don't think so now. I think it's actually often the opposite; the more media exposure there is the more pressure judges & juries feel to not let someone famous off. I think the OJ trial really changed things, maybe for the better.

The only advantage Stallworth had was good representation, which he's able to afford. From what little details there are in these articles, it sounds as if the family realized the man was jay-walking & Stallworth tried to react. He's guilty of the crime because the alcohol affected his ability to react. If he weren't drunk he would've likely pleaded not guilty and sounds like he had a good chance of getting off.

You can say that 30 days isn't that much, but it was a plea bargain. It will save the court & the victim's family the pain of going through w/a trial. He got 8 years probation. At any time if he violates it he could be locked up.

Like it or not our justice system differentiates on crimes that involve the loss of life, even murder. From what I read in the article, it sounds like a decent end for all parties was reached & Stallworth owned up to the crime. Give him some credit for that at least.

Coincidentally, today is the 15 year anniversary of OJ Simpson's Bronco chase.

[Redskin Jim]

Thanks, FRPLG and freddyg12 for adding some perspective to this for me.

[DBUCHANON101]

Wasnt the guy in the show OZ doing time because he drove drunk and killed a little girl??

the family took the money,Donte went home. just shows if you have money you can do anything. Had it been you or me, we would be spending the rest of our lives in a federal pound me in the @$$ prison.
lol sorry, i love that movie.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by DBUCHANON101

Wasnt the guy in the show OZ doing time because he drove drunk and killed a little girl??

I thought it was Prison Break

[SkinDogg]

Originally Posted by DBUCHANON101

Wasnt the guy in the show OZ doing time because he drove drunk and killed a little girl??

lol sorry, i love that movie.

You're thinking of Tobias. Love OZ, too.

[Ruhskins]

I've actually driven a couple of times through that causeway, and it is a straight up highway, cars drive through there pretty fast. I honestly don't know whether Stallworth being under the influence made much of a difference, but we'll never know. Pretty unfortunate situation for everyone.