oddoublee Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 Stallworth is no bigger a sack of dung that anyone who has ever driven drunk. (half this board) agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 Actually, every single legal opinion I've heard states that the prosecution had a weak case. The prosecution must prove their case, NOT the defense. It would have been very hard to conclusively show that Stallworth could have avoided the man if he was sober. Per reports, the man darted out in front of Stallworth's car, who was driving down a multiple lane roadway. Stallworth said he honked his horn and flashed his lights at the vic. If he had time to do that, he had time to take evasive action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 There is absolutely no evidence that ML was drinking that night. Right? There wasn't. Wild assumptions don't count for much in the real world. But if you have any evidence, please tell the world. We've been dying to hear it for over a year now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conch Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 Intent 1. OJ 1.a. Carruth 3. Little. 4. Vick. 5. Stallworth. OJ slaughtered two, Carruth slaughtered 2. Stallworth never ran, called, 911, manned up and paid off the family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 Stallworth said he honked his horn and flashed his lights at the vic. If he had time to do that, he had time to take evasive action. Or you could easily say that it was Stallworth warning the man to get out of the way, and could not swerve, lest he hit someone else. Face it man, the DA had a very weak case. A good lawyer could easily create reasonable doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 Or you could easily say that it was Stallworth warning the man to get out of the way, and could not swerve, lest he hit someone else. Face it man, the DA had a very weak case. A good lawyer could easily create reasonable doubt. I don't know if Stallworth could have avoided the accident if he were sober. But the guy was already in the NFL's substance abuse program because of alcohol, and at the least got caught DUI and committed involuntary manslaughter. Getting 30 days is NOT a sufficient enough penalty, even if you think that his being drunk had little to do with him hitting the vic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlbillsfan1975 Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 But obviously the majority of drunk manslaughter charges are people who had no intent on running over and killing someone else. If intent is the difference between Vick and Stallworth, then what's the difference between Stallworth and the average citizen? Stallworth gets 24 days, most other people average 5 years. I don't know if Stallworth could have avoided the accident if he were sober. But the guy was already in the NFL's substance abuse program because of alcohol, and at the least got caught DUI and committed involuntary manslaughter. Getting 30 days is NOT a sufficient enough penalty, even if you think that his being drunk had little to do with him hitting the vic. The Judge in the case stated that Stallworth had never committed a serious crime before. The man was not in a crosswalk when he was struck. And Stallworth co operated 100% with the authorties. The second part about why he got off so lightly is that he settled a civil suit with the family already. Terms were not disclosed to my knowledge, but the family told the judge they did not want to prosecute much further. So yes haveing money did help him out. But if the victims family is ok with it then you should be too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 The Judge in the case stated that Stallworth had never committed a serious crime before. The man was not in a crosswalk when he was struck. And Stallworth co operated 100% with the authorties. The second part about why he got off so lightly is that he settled a civil suit with the family already. Terms were not disclosed to my knowledge, but the family told the judge they did not want to prosecute much further. So yes haveing money did help him out. But if the victims family is ok with it then you should be too. This is a hard situation all the way around. More time in jail will do nothing to erase the memory of what happened for either Stallworth or the family. The sad reality is that there are not many of us who can throw stones at what he did. Many of us are lucky to not be in the same exact situation because we have either driven drunk or allowed someone we know to do so (oh it was only a "few" beers). Unfortunately, there was a time when driving intoxicated was thought to be a bit of a joke. It is not and there are no reasons to ever think otherwise. Unfortunately it happens due to clouded judgement and because often it does not hurt anyone. Problem is that when it goes wrong, it often goes very, very wrong. As I said in an earlier post there is no way what Stallworth did is worse than Carruth... a sick person who had his pregnant girlfriend shot. IMO short of raping a child there is no crime more despicable than this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 The Judge in the case stated that Stallworth had never committed a serious crime before. The man was not in a crosswalk when he was struck. And Stallworth co operated 100% with the authorties. The second part about why he got off so lightly is that he settled a civil suit with the family already. Terms were not disclosed to my knowledge, but the family told the judge they did not want to prosecute much further. So yes haveing money did help him out. But if the victims family is ok with it then you should be too. Well I'm not, and so aren't a lot of people. And just because the family is ok, because they got paid more money than they'll see in their lifetimes, it doesn't make it ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cookiemonster Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 Let's face it, we wouldn't want our kids hanging out with any of them, all three, er... four of them are big POS's. To what degree one is more than the other, shouldn't be debated. A POS is a POS, one is not better than the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zazie Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 1. OJ 1.a. Carruth 3. Little. 4. Vick. 5. Stallworth. OJ slaughtered two, Carruth slaughtered 2. Stallworth never ran, called, 911, manned up and paid off the family. I hate to say it but flip Carruth and OJ. Carruth was dead sober and planned the attack on his pregnant girlfriend and HIS OWN unborn child carefully and in advance. OJ was coked up and in the heat of the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLZFAN4LIFE Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 1. OJ 1.a. Carruth 3. Little. 4. Vick. 5. Stallworth. OJ slaughtered two, Carruth slaughtered 2. Stallworth never ran, called, 911, manned up and paid off the family. Carruth's girlfriend died from the shooting, but his son was delivered prematurely and damaged from the attack. This story is almost five years old... TOMMY TOMLINSON The Charlotte Observer The little boy plays on his mother's grave. His name is Chancellor Adams and Tuesday is his birthday. He's 5 and he has cerebral palsy He sprawls on a purple blanket and the leg braces show under his pants legs. He grins so wide you can see every tooth but the grin never makes it to his eyes. The grown-ups are trying to keep him on the blanket and change out the flowers on the grave marker and somebody forgets to hold down the birthday balloon. The moment they turn their backs it slips off through the tree branches, up and gone, the smiling clown on the balloon floating over the cemetery. The whole scene is sad and disturbing and beautiful all at once, and there is a terrible kind of logic to it, life and death and joy and anger all twisted together here at Sunset Memory Gardens. Chancellor's mother is the late Cherica Adams. His father is Rae Carruth. And maybe that explains the rest. Five years ago, as she drove on a dark stretch of Rea Road, Cherica was shot four times. In the hours after the shooting, she fingered Carruth -- a Carolina Panthers wide receiver -- as the one who was responsible. She died nearly a month later, on Dec. 14, 1999. By then police had arrested Carruth and three other men. The others pleaded guilty. One admitted shooting Cherica and said Carruth set it up. Carruth was convicted of conspiracy to commit murder and is serving nearly 19 years. Saundra Adams, Cherica's mother, takes care of Chancellor. She threw him a birthday party Sunday, but thought the public ought to be reminded of Cherica and Chancellor. So she invited reporters to the gravesite off Lawyers Road. Talk comes around to the news that Carruth plans to keep appealing his conviction. One reporter asks Saundra: Do you wish all this was over with? "It'll never be over with," she said. "My daughter's gone." And Chancellor is here. He looks like Cherica. He looks like Rae. He was born in chaos. While he was in the womb, one of the bullets that hit Cherica missed him by an inch. Doctors had to deliver him by emergency C-section, at least a month early. Most 5-year-olds tear around the house and talk until they run out of breath. But here is Chancellor. "Blow a kiss," Saundra says. It takes a couple of seconds for the thought to take hold. Then Chancellor pulls his right hand toward his mouth, so slowly he could be under water. Every step is a separate motion. Touch mouth. Move hand. Blow. Saundra's friend Judy Williams stands off to the side, about to cry. Williams is one of the founders of Mothers of Murdered Offspring. She has brought more balloons -- six purple ones. The group has chosen purple as the color of peace. Saundra helps Chancellor grip the ribbons, and then they let go. It's almost noon and Chancellor has school. (He goes to a day care for kids with developmental disabilities.) Saundra takes one hand and Judy takes the other and they help Chancellor walk to the car. His whole face broadcasts joy. Saundra latches the child safety seat and closes the back door and Chancellor waves from inside the warm car. Saundra stays outside to talk for a few minutes, there in the cemetery, a few steps from the grave. She looks up for a second. The balloons are long gone into the gray. She pulls her coat tight against the cold. What a shame. A little child support from a guy who could easily afford it and all of this could have been avoided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sig1Hunter Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 But obviously the majority of drunk manslaughter charges are people who had no intent on running over and killing someone else. If intent is the difference between Vick and Stallworth, then what's the difference between Stallworth and the average citizen? Stallworth gets 24 days, most other people average 5 years. A big part of the case, IMO, is that in order to prove the DUI Manslaughter case the prosecution has to prove what is called "causation". It is simply not enough for Stallworth to have been legally intoxicated and killed someone. This would be easy to prove with only the blood results and the autopsy. The prosecution also has to prove that Stallworth caused the crash that killed the pedestrian. If the pedestrian was legally crossing the roadway in a marked crosswalk, this would also be relatively easy to prove. But, since the facts of the case (that we know of) show that the pedestrian was not crossing in the crosswalk, then causation falls partially on the pedestrian. Without causation of the manslaughter aspect of the offense, the state is left with simple DUI. The parties met in the middle, with a resolution that was appeasing to everyone involved - including the victim's family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlbillsfan1975 Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 Well I'm not, and so aren't a lot of people. And just because the family is ok, because they got paid more money than they'll see in their lifetimes, it doesn't make it ok. Yeah, but i bet if all of you recieved a couple million each, then you would be much happier and more content with the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfreak Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 So how does Michael Vick get 1 year in prison for killing dogs, and Donte Stallworth gets 1 month in prison for killing a human being? $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Organizations like PETA-Obama is going to jail next for killing a fly on camera-Peta is all upset. They need to find a life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 Yeah, but i bet if all of you recieved a couple million each, then you would be much happier and more content with the situation. Well, that's the difference between criminal and civil cases. The victim/family of the victim might be happy to get paid-off, but society demands more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfreak Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 Well I'm not, and so aren't a lot of people. And just because the family is ok, because they got paid more money than they'll see in their lifetimes, it doesn't make it ok. I don't like it either, but listening to ESPN radio yesterday, the fact that Stallworth didn't run and took responsibility for his FU'd actions, made a big difference. That is something that is about as rare as winning the lottery when you talk about millionaire atheletes. Remember, Marshawn Lynch about a year ago? Sure she didnt get killed, but she could very well have been killed, and he ran and hid like a F*cking retard, and parked in his front yard with pieces of the vehicle still on the road. I agree, he should have gotten more time, mainly becuase he was drunk. If he was sober, he probably wouldn't have gotten any punishment, and if the guy wasn't in a crosswalk maybe he shouldn't have. The judge may be looking at the punishment as being punishment for a first offense DUI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlbillsfan1975 Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 Well, that's the difference between criminal and civil cases. The victim/family of the victim might be happy to get paid-off, but society demands more. HAHA. wow. ok. i give. But i must say you and i really dont have a dog in the fight at the end of the day. If the family is ok with the punishment, then why shouild you not be? I mean really? Save all the legal mumbo jumbo crap and talk like a human being. Is it because you are afraid you are going to be on the streets of Miami heading home from work at 7 am. and get hit by Stallworth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 Well, that's the difference between criminal and civil cases. The victim/family of the victim might be happy to get paid-off, but society demands more. VOR, you might demand more. But you don't speak for society and neither do I. Personally I think it's a satisfactory outcome to a very unfortunate situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 I don't know if Stallworth could have avoided the accident if he were sober. But the guy was already in the NFL's substance abuse program because of alcohol, and at the least got caught DUI and committed involuntary manslaughter. Getting 30 days is NOT a sufficient enough penalty, even if you think that his being drunk had little to do with him hitting the vic. Take a look at florida law. The victim was technically in the wrong as well, making it very difficult to really nail stallworth. They would have had a hellacious time proving it was stallworth's drunkenness that caused the accident. Then stallworth behaved appropriately, staying there, calling the cops to let them know what happened, and complied with all of their requests. Its a very sad and unfortunate situation. But that doesn't diminish the fact that the prosecution would have had a very hard time convicting stallworth guilty in a criminal court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts