Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

Even though they are not members of the compact, the non-signatory states likely have some questions regarding out of state suspensions.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=DBUCHANON101;563390]Im sure the prisons are full of ppl who had accidents or were negligent and killed someone.. and im sure they are sorry also.[/quote]

I highly doubt that. I'm not saying the justice system is consistent, because its obvioulsy not. But i think there are far fewer people guilty of this type of crime with long prison sentences that you want to beleive. I also think theres a difference between someone saying theyre sorry and someone who demonstrates true repentance by seeking to atone for their wrong in every way possible.

I'm not trying to deny the magnitute of what happened here - a man lost his life - but when i look at the mitigating circumstances in this case, and compare it to the type of scum that needs to be in a prison, i dont think theres a gross miscarriage of justice going on here. remember, justice isnt just about punishment. it involves mercy too.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=Redskin Jim;563278]All I have to say about the sentence is this: Stallworth is very lucky... It is a testament to wealth and privilege that he walked away with so light a sentence. A friend of mine had an accident when we were 22 and killed the passenger in his car. He was over the legal alcohol limit. He is a college grad, hard worker, well spoken fellow with no prior record then or since... He went to PRISON for 2 years and served 2 years probation! Just to add to the story He is black and I am white. We both met at our local bar after work today and saw the breaking news on espn.. He shared his story and we shook our heads in disbelief... We both agreed that Stallworth didn't intentionally kill the person, and I am sure he regets the decision to drive. That being said, I am saddened that my friend, was judged such, and Stallworth a to different standard.[/quote]

Different situation altogether.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

Brendan Haywood can't believe Stallworth only got 30 days either

[QUOTE]While I was watching Sports Center with some of the guys, we were all shocked to see the story about NFL player Donte’ Stallworth pleading guilty to DUI manslaughter and being sentenced to 30-days in jail and 1000 hours of community service. For me, this really hits home because my mother and I were hit by a drunk driver earlier this year. So let me get this straight, Michael Vick gets two years in jail for killing dogs and Stallworth gets only 30 days for killing someone? Now they say that justice is blind, but even Stevie Wonder can see that more than 30 days in jail was needed here. I think this was a terrible injustice. This is why so many people look at pro athletes with disgust and disdain. I was thoroughly disappointed.[/QUOTE]

[url=http://brendanhaywood.yardbarker.com/]BrendanHaywood's Blog - Yardbarker[/url]

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;563427]I highly doubt that. I'm not saying the justice system is consistent, because its obvioulsy not. But i think there are far fewer people guilty of this type of crime with long prison sentences that you want to beleive. I also think theres a difference between someone saying theyre sorry and someone who demonstrates true repentance by seeking to atone for their wrong in every way possible.

I'm not trying to deny the magnitute of what happened here - a man lost his life - but when i look at the mitigating circumstances in this case, and compare it to the type of scum that needs to be in a prison, i dont think theres a gross miscarriage of justice going on here. remember, justice isnt just about punishment. it involves mercy too.[/quote]

No my friend, justice is blind.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;563427]I highly doubt that. I'm not saying the justice system is consistent, because its obvioulsy not. But i think there are far fewer people guilty of this type of crime with long prison sentences that you want to beleive. I also think theres a difference between someone saying theyre sorry and someone who demonstrates true repentance by seeking to atone for their wrong in every way possible.

I'm not trying to deny the magnitute of what happened here - a man lost his life - but when i look at the mitigating circumstances in this case, and compare it to the type of scum that needs to be in a prison, i dont think theres a gross miscarriage of justice going on here. remember, justice isnt just about punishment. it involves mercy too.[/quote]

eh, how many anectdotes does it take to change one's opinion. I had a friend that had an epileptic seizure while driving, he had a doctors note, was on precscribed medicine, had done everything "right". He killed someone. Did a full 3 years in prison, lost all his insurance and 1/2 his pension to pay the victim's family. If he had had more money, he would have done less time. I don't really have a problem with Stallworths outcome, but again, it shows the discrepancies money ALWAYS brings.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=DBUCHANON101;563390]Im sure the prisons are full of ppl who had accidents or were negligent and killed someone.. and im sure they are sorry also.[/quote]

then don't drink and drive while if your poor???? who says you cant put a price on life

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;563455]eh, how many anectdotes does it take to change one's opinion. I had a friend that had an epileptic seizure while driving, he had a doctors note, was on precscribed medicine, had done everything "right". He killed someone. Did a full 3 years in prison, lost all his insurance and 1/2 his pension to pay the victim's family. If he had had more money, he would have done less time. I don't really have a problem with Stallworths outcome, but again, it shows the discrepancies money ALWAYS brings.[/quote]

He must have had the worst lawyer in the world.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=DBUCHANON101;563328]Wasnt the guy in the show OZ doing time because he drove drunk and killed a little girl??

lol sorry, i love that movie.[/quote]

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

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;563384]I understand why some people think Stallworth got off light, but you have to look at everything in perspective. Prisons everywhere are overcrowded to the point that people who deliberately commit serious offenses (car theives, bank robbers, even rapists and child molesters) get out of jail early to make room for more "dangerous" or more recent offenders. For that reason, people who pose a minimal threat to society are given house arrest - yes, stallworth is going to be in prison 30 days, but he'll be under house arrest for 2 years, and probation for 8 after that. he also wont be able to drive again for life, thereby eliminating the threat he could repeat his crime.

Which brings me to my other point - what should be the purpose of prison anyways? not only to protect society from the criminal, but also to rehabilitate the criminal. Based on everything i've read, Stallworth isnt a threat to anyone and he has displayed genuine remorse and repentance for his crime... what good is supposed to come from sending Stallworth to jail for two (or more) years? really, what would that accomplish? Stallworth immediately accepted responsibility, apologized, has compensated the family, and has said he wants to be a public voice against drunk driving - to help prevent further tragedies like this.

So for those of you unsatisfied by the resolution of this case, please tell me - what more do you want? and if you do want more, is it really "justice" you're after?[/quote]

That was well said BHA.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

Our legal system vary from state to state on the punishment for crimes. Stallworth isn't the 1st person to drink and drive but he used bad judgement which resulted in taken a human life away. Lets be honest , I know I have used bad judgement driving home from the bar after drinking with the fellas. I was fortunate not to have gotten in a accident or struck a pedestrian. That was in my younger years, now I don't even drink any more.

I new when the story 1st broke that Stallworth had been drinking prior to the accident based on the fact that he never made a statement that he had not been drinking. The standard line is due to the on going investigation I can not comment on this incident. If it was me and I new I was not guilty of DUI you would bet I would have said that. When your guilty you dont want to make a statement that they can use against you later in court. Attorney always advise not to talk , let them prove your guilty.

His sentence 30 days in county jail for a felony drunk driving / Manslaughter conviction is way to short. People get sentenced to 30 days for writing bad checks. This is a joke of the legal system and If your famous you get a lesser sentence. Stallworth is a millionaire who can afford to call a taxi or Limo to pick him up there is no excuse for him to drive and risk all that he has obtained from playing in the NFL, but he decided to drive. Is this his 1st time driving DUI? I doubt it but these things seem to come back and bite us when we least expected it.


Vick kills dogs and Stallworth kills a human being. I know it was an accident that he hit the pedestrian out of the cross walk but he was DUI. If he was not drinking than it would be a accident that took a human being. He would not be jailed and he would not be liable. His car insurance may have paid out some money but thats about it. Stallworth broke the law like thousands of people due but it resulted in a death. His money played a huge part in him only serving 30 days due to the settlement he made with the victims family. The victim just got off from work so he had a family to provide for. Who knows their financial situation if the victim had life insurance. So the family Attorney saw a opportunity to help the victim's family financially due to the wealth of Stallworth. In court the vicitms family could have out more pressure on the DA's office if they did not the deal Stallworth was pleading to. This deal had to be worked out by both the DA's Office and the victims Attorney.


The family took the deal to be financially compensated and Stallworth would receive little jail time. Thats how the courts rule on these incidents. They all are happy, DA office gets a guilty conviction and family gets paid.

Anyone remember Jason Williams ( NJ Nets) he still has not done any jail time for Involunantary Manslaughter. Not even sure how long ago that case was in court.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=htownskinfan;563248]unbelieveable! 30 days? what a ****ing joke[/quote]

Plaxico Burress will do more time for hurting himself.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=coggs;563541]Plaxico Burress will do more time for hurting himself.[/quote]

Thats because his leg got a good lawyer thats going to make sure that Plaxico pays. Plus his leg is a Redskins fan, I mean after all it does bleed a burgundy red :D

I wonder though who's more messed up right now. Donte Stallworth who drove drunk and ended up...technically....accidentally killing a person but nevertheless took a life due to neggligence or Mike Vick who purposefuly tortured are killed dogs. It's an interesting phillosphocial question from my view and if I had to answer I'd say Stallworth easily f**ked up more, but Vick is more messed up in the head.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;563602]Thats because his leg got a good lawyer thats going to make sure that Plaxico pays. Plus his leg is a Redskins fan, I mean after all it does bleed a burgundy red :D

I wonder though who's more messed up right now. Donte Stallworth who drove drunk and ended up...technically....accidentally killing a person but nevertheless took a life due to neggligence or Mike Vick who purposefuly tortured are killed dogs. It's an interesting phillosphocial question from my view and if I had to answer I'd say Stallworth easily f**ked up more, but Vick is more messed up in the head.[/quote]

If Stallworth wasn't there it could've been any other car that hit him. Without seeing what happened and knowing more behind it it's hard to say that his BAC caused the accident. I'm guessing that they found that it really wasn't that.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;563257]The sad part is that all the family cares about is the payout. That is why it is only 30 days. They want Stallworth to be able to pay them off.

Pretty pathetic on their part.[/quote]

How do you know that?Seems like a pretty ignorant statement to make if you don't know the people.Is it possoble they could create ohhh....lets say a scholarship fund in the preson's name ......or something along that line, due you think it's possible that maybe the family believe's he is truely sorry and can do more good outside of prison then in it?

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=coggs;563541]Plaxico Burress will do more time for hurting himself.[/quote]

Stallworth was drunk both are stupid but Burress was sober when he took the gun out that night and then shot himself and tried to cover it up and still has not taken any responsability for his actions.Both did dumb things but they a very different situations.
Stallworth knows he killed someone and will live with that the rest of his life,Burress still doesn't think he did a damn thing wrong.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

Don't know if it's been mentioned, but Stallworth has been suspended indefinitely by the NFL

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=Giantone;563608]How do you know that?Seems like a pretty ignorant statement to make if you don't know the people.Is it possoble they could create ohhh....lets say a scholarship fund in the preson's name ......or something along that line, due you think it's possible that maybe the family believe's he is truely sorry and can do more good outside of prison then in it?[/quote]

I bet that is exactly what happened. Where is the outcry? They had a forum and they chose to take a check. Maybe I am making a false assumption, but I doubt it...

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=Giantone;563609]Stallworth was drunk both are stupid but Burress was sober when he took the gun out that night and then shot himself and tried to cover it up and still has not taken any responsability for his actions.Both did dumb things but they a very different situations.
Stallworth knows he killed someone and will live with that the rest of his life,Burress still doesn't think he did a damn thing wrong.[/quote]

Are you really trying to compare these crimes? Who gives a s--- if Burress was sober. He didn't hurt a soul. Stallworth killed a human being. Bottom line.

Shoot yourself in the leg or kill a human being. No comparison.

Or are you mad that he probably cost you a title?

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;563636]I bet that is exactly what happened. Where is the outcry? They had a forum and they chose to take a check. Maybe I am making a false assumption, but I doubt it...[/quote]

I think you're probably right. The man who was killed was running across the street trying to catch a bus at 7:15AM to get home AFTER a construction shift. We're talking a 59 year-old man with no automobile working a construction graveyard shift. It's pretty easy to assume that their family didn't have much money. I guess their idea of justice was focused more on dollars and cents than jail time.

I don't want to judge the family or try to diminish their love for this man. But IMO it's totally valid to judge their motives. I'm sure the attorney working the case was pretty darn influential on that matter as well. He likely sold them on the idea that they could make a boatload of cash (of which he'd get a nice %), and how that was the best course of action.

Anyway, I don't necessarily agree with it, but it's not awful either.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

unbelieveable. disgusting

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=GMScud;563642]I think you're probably right. The man who was killed was running across the street trying to catch a bus at 7:15AM to get home AFTER a construction shift. We're talking a 59 year-old man with no automobile working a construction graveyard shift. It's pretty easy to assume that their family didn't have much money. I guess their idea of justice was focused more on dollars and cents than jail time.

I don't want to judge the family or try to diminish their love for this man.[B] But IMO it's totally valid to judge their motives.[/B] I'm sure the attorney working the case was pretty darn influential on that matter as well. He likely sold them on the idea that they could make a boatload of cash (of which he'd get a nice %), and how that was the best course of action.

Anyway, I don't necessarily agree with it, but it's not awful either.[/quote]

You mean to question their motives? I find it hard to judge them without knowing the full story. I find it best not to judge anyway. They have their reasons I'm sure and nothing is going to bring him back. Tragic accident.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=53Fan;563654]You mean to question their motives? I find it hard to judge them without knowing the full story. I find it best not to judge anyway. They have their reasons I'm sure and nothing is going to bring him back. Tragic accident.[/quote]

Well, I'm sure we could get into a big debate as to what "justice" means in this case. Money for the family? The harshest punishment for the plaintiff? As I said in an earlier post, I'm glad the family has been taken care financially. They certainly deserve that given the circumstances, and I'm sure they are devastated by their loss. I just think it smells a little like "take the money and run." You've got to admit, the pre-arranged financial agreement smells a helluva lot like Stallworth buying down the family and prosecution's ire. I'm in no way saying victim's relatives are happy about the situation, but I know that if I were in their shoes, I'd be appalled at a 30 day jail term for Stallworth.

I dunno. I wish both sides the best to be honest with you. I don't think Stallworth is a bad dude at all. I really don't. But I also think the victims family got dealt a shitty hand as well.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=skins89moss;563506]Our legal system vary from state to state on the punishment for crimes. Stallworth isn't the 1st person to drink and drive but he used bad judgement which resulted in taken a human life away. Lets be honest , I know I have used bad judgement driving home from the bar after drinking with the fellas. I was fortunate not to have gotten in a accident or struck a pedestrian. That was in my younger years, now I don't even drink any more.

I new when the story 1st broke that Stallworth had been drinking prior to the accident based on the fact that he never made a statement that he had not been drinking. The standard line is due to the on going investigation I can not comment on this incident. If it was me and I new I was not guilty of DUI you would bet I would have said that. When your guilty you dont want to make a statement that they can use against you later in court. Attorney always advise not to talk , let them prove your guilty.

His sentence 30 days in county jail for a felony drunk driving / Manslaughter conviction is way to short. People get sentenced to 30 days for writing bad checks. This is a joke of the legal system and If your famous you get a lesser sentence. Stallworth is a millionaire who can afford to call a taxi or Limo to pick him up there is no excuse for him to drive and risk all that he has obtained from playing in the NFL, but he decided to drive. Is this his 1st time driving DUI? I doubt it but these things seem to come back and bite us when we least expected it.


Vick kills dogs and Stallworth kills a human being. I know it was an accident that he hit the pedestrian out of the cross walk but he was DUI. If he was not drinking than it would be a accident that took a human being. He would not be jailed and he would not be liable. His car insurance may have paid out some money but thats about it. Stallworth broke the law like thousands of people due but it resulted in a death. His money played a huge part in him only serving 30 days due to the settlement he made with the victims family. The victim just got off from work so he had a family to provide for. Who knows their financial situation if the victim had life insurance. So the family Attorney saw a opportunity to help the victim's family financially due to the wealth of Stallworth. In court the vicitms family could have out more pressure on the DA's office if they did not the deal Stallworth was pleading to. This deal had to be worked out by both the DA's Office and the victims Attorney.


The family took the deal to be financially compensated and Stallworth would receive little jail time. Thats how the courts rule on these incidents. They all are happy, DA office gets a guilty conviction and family gets paid.

Anyone remember Jason Williams ( NJ Nets) he still has not done any jail time for Involunantary Manslaughter. Not even sure how long ago that case was in court.[/quote]

At least the NFL is not going to tolerate this and take a stand to clean up the league. It is a privillage to play in the NFL and make $200,000 or more a year to play football. Some players take it for granted that they get to play a sport that most of us would do for free let alone get paid to do.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

Does anyone know the details re: the man running across the street "in a hurry to catch a bus" mid block, not in a crosswalk? Fact is, there is a reason for crosswalks, they demarcate a zone where pedestrians have the right-of-way (pending signals). Thus, the man jay walking may have been a major part of why he was killed.

You have to consider at least, that maybe Stallworth would've hit him anyway. I know there was something about him flashing his lights. Maybe he would've done the same if he were sober?

So if you look at it that way, Stallworth then could've had his lawyer argue that he was only guilty of a dui, not manslaughter. His lawyer could've argued that the man jay walked, was in a hurry & would've been hit by anybody, drunk or not.

The fact that Stallworth admitted fault & cooperated from the get go was likely a blessing for the victim's family IMO. They wouldn't want to go through a long trial. It sounds to me like Stallworth did the right thing.

Has anyone considered that maybe the victim's family acknowledged that he was at fault to some degree?

Comparing this to Vick is simply not apples to apples. Like it or not, intent has a lot to do w/punishment in our legal system. Stallworth killed someone in an accident. Yes it's his fault he was drinking & driving, but that was not the only circumstance that caused it to happen.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[QUOTE=coggs;563541]Plaxico Burress will do more time for hurting himself.[/QUOTE]

why does everyone keep trying to compare Stallworth to Burress to Vick. All three cases involves different crimes with different motivations in different states with different laws. They also behaved differently after committing the crime. You can't compare all three as if they are the same. So lets talk about the differences and maybe you'll see why the punishments are different.

While Stallworths crime had the greatest negative impact, he's the only one of the three to show any semblance of genuine remorse.

Vick deliberately and willfully committed multiple sadistic and illegal crimes for a period of YEARS. When confronted with his crime, he lied - repeatedly. If he had come clean initially, displayed remorse, openly said he wanted to become a force to prevent dog-fighting, and entered a plea agreement, i highly doubt he would have spent any time at all in jail. Even now, Vick is only showing superficial remorse - he's bankrupt and needs money to pay his creditors so he's putting on a show to get back into the NFL.

Burress carried a loaded gun into a nightclub - what kind of person does that? i'll tell you - a thug. Carrying a loaded and concealed handgun has one and only one purpose - to deliberately harm another human being. Don't give me any crap about him needing it for protection either - if he felt he couldnt go somewhere without concealing a handgun, then he shouldnt be going to that place. Burress also tried to conceal his identity after his crime, and he's been dragging out his case so he can play in the NFL this year. He has rejected all plea deals that involved a short amount of jail time (even though the state carries a mandatory minimum 3 year sentence). So not only is he an unrepentant thug, but he's also an idiot.

Stallworth did a horrible horrible thing. it was irresponsible, but it was also unintentional. he has demonstrated genuine remorse and repentance. he's [i]accepted a plea deal[/i]. And so his punishment is less than that of Vick and probably Burress.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;563705]why does everyone keep trying to compare Stallworth to Burress to Vick. All three cases involves different crimes with different motivations in different states with different laws. They also behaved differently after committing the crime. You can't compare all three as if they are the same. So lets talk about the differences and maybe you'll see why the punishments are different.

While Stallworths crime had the greatest negative impact, he's the only one of the three to show any semblance of genuine remorse.

Vick deliberately and willfully committed multiple sadistic and illegal crimes for a period of YEARS. When confronted with his crime, he lied - repeatedly. If he had come clean initially, displayed remorse, openly said he wanted to become a force to prevent dog-fighting, and entered a plea agreement, i highly doubt he would have spent any time at all in jail. Even now, Vick is only showing superficial remorse - he's bankrupt and needs money to pay his creditors so he's putting on a show to get back into the NFL.

Burress carried a loaded gun into a nightclub - what kind of person does that? i'll tell you - a thug. Carrying a loaded and concealed handgun has one and only one purpose - to deliberately harm another human being. Don't give me any crap about him needing it for protection either - if he felt he couldnt go somewhere without concealing a handgun, then he shouldnt be going to that place. Burress also tried to conceal his identity after his crime, and he's been dragging out his case so he can play in the NFL this year. He has rejected all plea deals that involved a short amount of jail time (even though the state carries a mandatory minimum 3 year sentence). So not only is he an unrepentant thug, but he's also an idiot.

Stallworth did a horrible horrible thing. it was irresponsible, but it was also unintentional. he has demonstrated genuine remorse and repentance. he's [i]accepted a plea deal[/i]. And so his punishment is less than that of Vick and probably Burress.[/quote]

Outstanding post.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[QUOTE=freddyg12;563698]Does anyone know the details re: the man running across the street "in a hurry to catch a bus" mid block, not in a crosswalk? Fact is, there is a reason for crosswalks, they demarcate a zone where pedestrians have the right-of-way (pending signals). Thus, the man jay walking may have been a major part of why he was killed.

You have to consider at least, that maybe Stallworth would've hit him anyway. I know there was something about him flashing his lights. Maybe he would've done the same if he were sober?

So if you look at it that way, Stallworth then could've had his lawyer argue that he was only guilty of a dui, not manslaughter. His lawyer could've argued that the man jay walked, was in a hurry & would've been hit by anybody, drunk or not.

The fact that Stallworth admitted fault & cooperated from the get go was likely a blessing for the victim's family IMO. They wouldn't want to go through a long trial. It sounds to me like Stallworth did the right thing.

Has anyone considered that maybe the victim's family acknowledged that he was at fault to some degree?

Comparing this to Vick is simply not apples to apples. Like it or not, intent has a lot to do w/punishment in our legal system. Stallworth killed someone in an accident. Yes it's his fault he was drinking & driving, but that was not the only circumstance that caused it to happen.[/QUOTE]

well said, freddy. i'm also appalled that so many people are criticizing the man's family and accusing them of money.

Money ALWAYS gets paid in these sorts of situations. We dont even know for sure whether Stallworths wealth factored into the payout... he had a 5MM umbrella (and we should all have atleast 1MM) and plantiffs usually dont sue for more than what an insurance policy will cover. Also, there is no reason to believe the family got more money from Stallworth by asking the prosecution to settle the case than they would have gotten after a DUI/Manslaughter conviction and subsequent civil case... something that would have dragged out in the courts for months or years. Maybe the family - like many of us - recognized that this was a horrible accident, stallworth showed genuine remorse, and their husband/father was partially at fault. Maybe they have no malice towards stallworth and didnt think he deserved to spend years in prison for an accident. Maybe theyve forgiven him (as much as humanly possible). Maybe they just wanted this all to be over with so they can move on with their lives and grieve - instead of spending the next few months or years of their lives in court... But to question their motives in settling is disgustingly insensitive in my opinion. Theyve suffered a tremendous loss and their loved one is gone forever. We don't know what played into their decision but to accuse them of not loving their father/husband or just wanting money... its grossly insensitive and ignorant.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

The cases are apples and oranges. Comparing them all "as is" really is pointless.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;563708]well said, freddy. i'm also appalled that so many people are criticizing the man's family and accusing them of money.

Money ALWAYS gets paid in these sorts of situations. [i]We dont even know for sure whether Stallworths wealth factored into the payout... he had a 5MM umbrella (and we should all have atleast 1MM) and plantiffs usually dont sue for more than what an insurance policy will cover. There is no reason to believe the family got MORE money from Stallworth by asking the prosecution to settle the case than they would have gotten after a DUI/Manslaughter conviction and subsequent civil case... something that would have dragged out in the courts for months or years. Maybe the family - like many of us - recognized that this was a horrible accident, stallworth showed genuine remorse, and their husband/father was partially at fault. Maybe they have no malice towards stallworth and didnt think he deserved to spend years in prison for an accident. Maybe theyve forgiven him (as much as humanly possible). Maybe they just wanted this all to be over with so they can move on with their lives and grieve - instead of spending the next few months or years of their lives in court... But to question their motives in settling is disgustingly insensitive in my opinion. Theyve suffered a tremendous loss and their loved one is gone forever. We don't know what played into their decision but to accuse them of not loving their father/husband or just wanting money... its grossly insensitive and ignorant.[/quote]

Thanks, good points from you as well.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

Nothing here that we haven't already discussed, but here's a letter Stallworth's lawyer sent to PFT:

[url=http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/06/19/cornwell-addresses-critics-of-stallworth-sentence/]ProFootballTalk.com - Cornwell Addresses Critics Of Stallworth Sentence[/url]
[QUOTE]
[B]Cornwell Addresses Critics Of Stallworth Sentence[/B]
[I]Posted by Mike Florio on June 19, 2009, 12:09 p.m. EDT
[Editor’s note: David Cornwell, counsel for Browns receiver Donte’ Stallworth, submit this item to us on Friday, and he asked us to post it in its entirety.][/I]

On March 14, 2009, shortly after 2:00 a.m., I answered my cell phone in Hawaii and heard the following: “DC, this is bad. I hit a man.”

With this simple declaration, Donte’ Stallworth described a tragedy and took personal responsibility for it. Over the next three months, Donte’ and his mother, Donna, guided this process with a simple yet profound directive: “I am responsible. Do the right thing.”

I am baffled by the outcry and criticism of Donte’s punishment. In tragic circumstances such as these, our civil and criminal laws are designed to determine who is responsible and hold that person accountable. By immediately accepting his responsibility and agreeing to be held accountable, Donte’ spared the Reyes family the pain of reliving a tragedy and spared the State of Florida the expense and risks of attempting to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in what would have been a highly publicized and hotly contested trial.

Everyone who was involved in this process approved of the result: law enforcement, Florida State Court Judge Dennis Murphy, State Attorney, Katherine Rundle, the Miami/Dade County chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, and, most importantly, Mr. Reyes’ family. Ms. Rundle stated that: “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” confirmed that “a just resolution of this case has been reached.” This is precisely how the criminal justice system in this country is supposed to work.

We have been asked to justify Donte’s sentence by comparing it to Michael Vick’s sentence. We cannot do so any better than we can explain the difference between an apple and an orange. Sometimes a difference is so obvious that describing it is illusive.

Under our system of justice, every case stands on its own merits and the facts drive the results. A major factor in this resolution was the Reyes family’s desire not to relive this tragedy through a trial, so we will not try this case in the media. However, it must be noted that given “the unique facts involved,” causation was in dispute and would have been the central focus of Donte’s defense.

Critics of Donte’ punishment are essentially accusing the judge and the prosecutor of complicity in a scheme that defies description. Had we forced a trial and won an acquittal based on “the unique facts involved,” Donte’ would have been exonerated, Mr. Reyes’ daughter would have been psychologically scared, and our critics would have gotten their train wreck. The public has every right to express its opinion, but judicial
determinations are based on facts and evidence.

Any assertion that financial considerations drove the result is offensive, tramples on Mr. Reyes’ memory, and is a vicious accusation about his family. Donte’ accepted his responsibility minutes after the tragedy and accepted his civil responsibility to Mr. Reyes’ family. There was no reason to delay resolution of the civil issues with the family.

Donte’ is a good person who did a bad thing. The authenticity of Donte’s remorse and good character is revealed in the consistency of his conduct throughout this tragic ordeal. From his pained acknowledgment “DC . . . I hit a man” to his statement in open court “I
offer my plea and I accept my responsibility for this tragedy,” Donte’ Stallworth has consistently accepted personal responsibility for his conduct and the pain that he caused.

“I am responsible. Do the right thing.”

What more could we ask?[/QUOTE]

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;563639]Are you really trying to compare these crimes? Who gives a s--- if Burress was sober. He didn't hurt a soul. Stallworth killed a human being. Bottom line.

Shoot yourself in the leg or kill a human being. No comparison.

Or are you mad that he probably cost you a title?[/quote]

Yeah he wasn't charged with shooting somebody. That's the law in NY as far as guns go.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=freddyg12;563698]Does anyone know the details re: the man running across the street "in a hurry to catch a bus" mid block, not in a crosswalk? Fact is, there is a reason for crosswalks, they demarcate a zone where pedestrians have the right-of-way (pending signals). Thus, the man jay walking may have been a major part of why he was killed.

You have to consider at least, that maybe Stallworth would've hit him anyway. I know there was something about him flashing his lights. Maybe he would've done the same if he were sober?

So if you look at it that way, Stallworth then could've had his lawyer argue that he was only guilty of a dui, not manslaughter. His lawyer could've argued that the man jay walked, was in a hurry & would've been hit by anybody, drunk or not.

The fact that Stallworth admitted fault & cooperated from the get go was likely a blessing for the victim's family IMO. They wouldn't want to go through a long trial. It sounds to me like Stallworth did the right thing.

Has anyone considered that maybe the victim's family acknowledged that he was at fault to some degree?

Comparing this to Vick is simply not apples to apples. Like it or not, intent has a lot to do w/punishment in our legal system. Stallworth killed someone in an accident. Yes it's his fault he was drinking & driving, but that was not the only circumstance that caused it to happen.[/quote]

Thanks, you chose to expound upon that and it is exactly how I feel about the situation.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;563639]Are you really trying to compare these crimes?

Or are you mad that he probably cost you a title?[/quote]


No , someone else did and I was explaining the difference but I think that went by you.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=freddyg12;563698]Does anyone know the details re: the man running across the street "in a hurry to catch a bus" mid block, not in a crosswalk? Fact is, there is a reason for crosswalks, they demarcate a zone where pedestrians have the right-of-way (pending signals). Thus, the man jay walking may have been a major part of why he was killed.

You have to consider at least, that maybe Stallworth would've hit him anyway. I know there was something about him flashing his lights. Maybe he would've done the same if he were sober?

So if you look at it that way, Stallworth then could've had his lawyer argue that he was only guilty of a dui, not manslaughter. His lawyer could've argued that the man jay walked, was in a hurry & would've been hit by anybody, drunk or not.

The fact that Stallworth admitted fault & cooperated from the get go was likely a blessing for the victim's family IMO. They wouldn't want to go through a long trial. It sounds to me like Stallworth did the right thing.

Has anyone considered that maybe the victim's family acknowledged that he was at fault to some degree?

Comparing this to Vick is simply not apples to apples. Like it or not, intent has a lot to do w/punishment in our legal system. Stallworth killed someone in an accident. Yes it's his fault he was drinking & driving, but that was not the only circumstance that caused it to happen.[/quote]


Very Good POINT! It was actually one of the reason for settling....all the witness's said ,the man was J-walking and in FL. in the civil trial he would have been considerd" as contributing negligence in his own death " and would not have gotten a thing,intent has everything to do with it and so does accountablility.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

DS drinking that night then driving was , to see the least a bad decision . Not going to judge him , or the victim . Living here in NO. VA. It is amazing more people do not get hit by cars ,,,, people run out in front of cars < moving at 40-50 mph > all day ??? I watched a women this past Sunday , pushing a stroller with one hand , and dragging a 3 yr old with the other across rt 50 , very dangerous . Today , I watched a girl walk right in front of a car < NOVA campus , Alex. > , I pod in her ear , she never saw the car , he slowed very quickly and stopped . Maybe we should punish people for being in the road on foot , Im brave but no way I take on a 3,000 lb car . STAY out of the road , you will lose , take a minute to get to the X Walk and wait .

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=budw38;563767]DS drinking that night then driving was , to see the least a bad decision . Not going to judge him , or the victim . Living here in NO. VA. It is amazing more people do not get hit by cars ,,,, people run out in front of cars < moving at 40-50 mph > all day ??? I watched a women this past Sunday , pushing a stroller with one hand , and dragging a 3 yr old with the other across rt 50 , very dangerous . Today , I watched a girl walk right in front of a car < NOVA campus , Alex. > , I pod in her ear , she never saw the car , he slowed very quickly and stopped . Maybe we should punish people for being in the road on foot , Im brave but no way I take on a 3,000 lb car . STAY out of the road , you will lose , take a minute to get to the X Walk and wait .[/quote]

Am i the only one that finds this hard to read?

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=budw38;563767]DS drinking that night then driving was , to see the least a bad decision . Not going to judge him , or the victim . Living here in NO. VA. It is amazing more people do not get hit by cars ,,,, people run out in front of cars < moving at 40-50 mph > all day ??? I watched a women this past Sunday , pushing a stroller with one hand , and dragging a 3 yr old with the other across rt 50 , very dangerous . Today , I watched a girl walk right in front of a car < NOVA campus , Alex. > , I pod in her ear , she never saw the car , he slowed very quickly and stopped . Maybe we should punish people for being in the road on foot , Im brave but no way I take on a 3,000 lb car . STAY out of the road , you will lose , take a minute to get to the X Walk and wait .[/quote]

This is really hard to read. But I get what you're saying. People are idiotic. It's amazing the way pedestrians just ignore shit when they're near intersections, streets, etc etc. The worst are cyclists. They ride on the damn road like they have every right to it as an automobile. And I understand technically they do, it just pisses me off when you're on a two lane road, there's a line of cars stuck behind some jerk in spandex on his 10 speed. They want all the rights that cars have, then they proceed to run through stop signs and red lights like they don't exist.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=GMScud;563787]This is really hard to read. But I get what you're saying. People are idiotic. It's amazing the way pedestrians just ignore shit when they're near intersections, streets, etc etc. The worst are cyclists. They ride on the damn road like they have every right to it as an automobile. And I understand technically they do,[B] it just pisses me off when you're on a two lane road, there's a line of cars stuck behind some jerk in spandex on his 10 speed.[/B] They want all the rights that cars have, then they proceed to run through stop signs and red lights like they don't exist.[/quote]

:laughing- Me too. They're either very trusting or complete idiots.

Re: Stallworth to serve 30 days
 

[quote=WaldSkins;563768]Am i the only one that finds this hard to read?[/quote]

FD now has some competition