Vick's charges were felonies. Stallworth's were not.

Vick's charges were felonies. Stallworth's were not.

 

Stallworth killed a person... Tell me that's less important than a dog...

Stallworth killed a person... Tell me that's less important than a dog...

 

I was just saying. :lol:

Stallworth killed a person... Tell me that's less important than a dog...

 

Or the person ran out in front of his car. Do you ever use your cellphone while driving. Many years ago Yale released a study that talking on a cellphone was at least as dangerous as driving drunk. This was before the texting explosion. Should we convict everyone for murder with no other questions asked if the person was on a cellphone?

First off I think 30 days is ridiculous. However, from what I've been reading there were some problems with the test of his BAC and there was a chance that if it had went to trial that it could have been thrown out. The DA decided to take the conviction with a minimal sentence since he had no prior record, the victim's family wanted the matter settled and the victim himself was at least partially responsible for the accident by jaywalking. It is too lenient in my opinion but I do understand how this decision was reached.

Or the person ran out in front of his car. Do you ever use your cellphone while driving. Many years ago Yale released a study that talking on a cellphone was at least as dangerous as driving drunk. This was before the texting explosion. Should we convict everyone for murder with no other questions asked if the person was on a cellphone?

 

Maybe if he wasn't drunk he would have seen the person run out in front of the car and he could have avoided. I respect the devils advocate role, it's one of my favorites, but when you are driving drunk there is no argument that can save you. Driving drunk is driving drunk and someone died because of it.

In Stallworth's defense:

 

1) His blood alcohol test was not off the charts. Not an excuse, but it was similar to anyone who's had a few while out to dinner or with friends.

2) He stopped and tried to help the victim. He didn't run off, or try to avoid anything.

3) He seems (to me) to have real remorse. He's taken responsibility from moment 1.

 

 

Those are significant factors in weighing the outcome.

^ He called the family several times and they have already reached a cash settlement so no one will be suing him. It's a bad situation and he is an idiot for driving drunk but I'm not lumping him in the group with all the others that have messed up such as Vick. Sounds like he made a mistake and a tragic accident happened regardless of his state of mind.

Stallworth hit the guy at 7 in the morning. He obviously had more than a few drinks if he was legally drunk at 7 in the morning.

 

Michael Vick also showed remorse and will be doing PETA ads against dogfighting and he also paid for the removal and replacement homes for all of the dogs that were on his property. He still didn't take a human life. I will never see Vick's actions being anywhere near worse than Stallworth's regardless of the cash settlement and remorse Stallworth shows.

Stallworth hit the guy at 7 in the morning. He obviously had more than a few drinks if he was legally drunk at 7 in the morning.

 

I'm not defending Stallworth or his actions but that argument holds no water.

I'm not defending Stallworth or his actions but that argument holds no water.

 

I only use it because I speak from experience.

 

Doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, legally drunk is legally drunk. For anyone to excuse drunk driving is baffling to me.

Stallworth hit the guy at 7 in the morning. He obviously had more than a few drinks if he was legally drunk at 7 in the morning.

 

Michael Vick also showed remorse and will be doing PETA ads against dogfighting and he also paid for the removal and replacement homes for all of the dogs that were on his property. He still didn't take a human life. I will never see Vick's actions being anywhere near worse than Stallworth's regardless of the cash settlement and remorse Stallworth shows.

 

First, I'm not taking a side here, just presenting some circumstances that legally put Stallworth's defense in a position to get a good deal for him.

 

The time of day makes no difference. He could have spent the night at friend's after drinking, gotten up and thought he was OK to drive home. I'll bet there's more than one on this board that could have been in the same position at some point, an not realize their BAC was still over the legal limit.

 

I'm not condemning him or defening him. Simply presenting the types of things that courts consider when deciding what charges can be applied an what the harshness of the sentence could be.

I understand completely. Stallworth has great lawyers and he got away with murder. I also understand all of the other stuff as well when it comes to the court of law.

 

Consider me the guy who feels guilty and knows that morally it is wrong for me to get behind the wheel after even 1 beer whether it puts me legally over the limit or not. Drinking and driving is not a good combination and in this instance a life was taken and good expensive lawyers got a drunk driver who murdered someone with his car 30 days in jail. Right or wrong, just another situation in where money can buy your justice or freedom.

^ He called the family several times and they have already reached a cash settlement so no one will be suing him. It's a bad situation and he is an idiot for driving drunk but I'm not lumping him in the group with all the others that have messed up such as Vick. Sounds like he made a mistake and a tragic accident happened regardless of his state of mind.

 

C'mon HammerTime you cannot be serious. Whether or not Stallworth has apologized, cried, reached a cash settlement, or whatever he is responsible for the death of a human being. He chose to get behind the wheel of the car while drunk, he should get the same punishment that you or I would get. No amount of remorse will bring the victim back.

 

Michael Vick ran a dog fighting ring, which is terrible and he got a fair sentence (if not too harsh considering how much money he lost and how other athletes/celebrities get a slap on the wrist. How is 30 days in jail a fair punishment for Man Slaughter?

 

As for the Cell Phone thing that is garbage. You can hang up your phone, and many of us have hands free or at least speaker phone, which is just a little different than having a person in the car, IMO. When you're drunk driving you cannot suddenly be undrunk when you feel like it. At least with talking on the phone, eating, etc. you have your motor skills and depth perception. I do not buy what ever study Yale released, statistics may show a trend, but common sense tells us other wise.

C'mon HammerTime you cannot be serious. Whether or not Stallworth has apologized, cried, reached a cash settlement, or whatever he is responsible for the death of a human being. He chose to get behind the wheel of the car while drunk, he should get the same punishment that you or I would get. No amount of remorse will bring the victim back.

 

Michael Vick ran a dog fighting ring, which is terrible and he got a fair sentence (if not too harsh considering how much money he lost and how other athletes/celebrities get a slap on the wrist. How is 30 days in jail a fair punishment for Man Slaughter?

 

As for the Cell Phone thing that is garbage. You can hang up your phone, and many of us have hands free or at least speaker phone, which is just a little different than having a person in the car, IMO. When you're drunk driving you cannot suddenly be undrunk when you feel like it. At least with talking on the phone, eating, etc. you have your motor skills and depth perception. I do not buy what ever study Yale released, statistics may show a trend, but common sense tells us other wise.

 

 

Well said post by my former arch rival and future teammate CatsX3.....