Donte' Stallworth kills person with car....

[slim pickens]

Originally Posted by sagnam

Wow. What a wonderfully black and white world you must live in.

And to answer your question, absolutely.

wow. I appreciate all the incredible insight you always bring.

[sagnam]

Originally Posted by slim pickens

wow. I appreciate all the incredible insight you always bring.

What do you want me to say? It's obvious that nothing I say can change your mind. You overly exaggerated the point so you could be appalled, then you completely absolve one person of their wrong-doing in a situation because another person did something more wrong.

It's simple. There is not a finite amount of fault to go around, so there is no reason to pile "all" of it onto one person and completely absolve the other just because one person's degree of delinquency is greater that the other's. There is an infinite amount of fault to go around and even the jaywalker deserves some. That does not mean the drunk driver is any less at fault.

[Who is the Drizzle?]

The sentence seems a little light, but it's not like if he was sober he would have been at fault in the accident. So I can't blame them for not throwing the book at a guy where there's a good chance the DUI didn't cause the death.

And hey, if the victim's family would rather have money than sending a remorseful guy to prison for a few years, more power to them. Not my call.

[EatEmUpTigers711]

Originally Posted by slim pickens

wearing a seat belt is a law too. So if a drunk ran a red light and smashed someone, and they didnt wear a seat belt, then it would be "well they should of had a seat belt on. they are too blame as well"?.....not buying it.

Pretty much a completely different situation but since you're taking it there, yeah, that's a prime example of why wearing seat belts is a law.....because they can save lives. But really it's a horrible comparison because someone wearing a seat belt that gets smashed into by a drunk driver at a red light can, and might in most cases, still get killed or severely hurt regardless.

[sagnam]

Video Exists Of Stallworth Accident
Posted by Mike Florio on June 22, 2009, 1:34 p.m.

A source with knowledge of the March 14 collision between Brown receiver Donte’ Stallworth’s vehicle and 59-year-old Mario Reyes tells us that a video of the accident exists.

Per the source, the footage was shot by a nearby surveillance camera that monitors the gates to Reyes’ workplace.

We’re told that the video shows Reyes walking into the highway in an area that does not contain a crosswalk, and ultimately walking directly into the path of Stallworth’s Bentley.

Stallworth’s lawyer, David Cornwell, declined to confirm the existence of the video.

The contents of the video apparently had a significant impact on the ultimate plea deal. Though the 30-day prison term and two years of house arrest light have triggered significant criticism, the ultimate question for a jury would have been whether the evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Stallworth caused or contributed to the death of Mario Reyes. At a minimum, the contents of the tape, as they have been described to us, indicate that a reasonable jury could have found reasonable doubt.

Whether the video results in a reduced suspension from the NFL remains to be seen.

ProFootballTalk.com - Video Exists Of Stallworth Accident

[EatEmUpTigers711]

Originally Posted by sagnam

ProFootballTalk.com - Video Exists Of Stallworth Accident

And this is just another example that helps the both parties were at fault argument. His sentence seems light, but just like the article says, there's really nothing compelling enough to say that Stallworth or anyone else for that matter wouldn't have hit this guy even if they weren't driving drunk.

[DennisDubay]

Had Stallworth NOT been drunk this would be a nonstory.

But of course he drank the sinful swine of sinners and MUST PAY for someone elses actions.

Should he have been driving? No.
Would anyone know he had been drinking had this ****tard not walked INTO THE GUYS CAR? No.

[slim pickens]

My argument isnt the fact just because he was drunk....I drink around here everyday, drink with the best of them. But that dosent mean I cannot look down on something like this because I myself like beer. The fact that he stepped out in the street went out the window the minute he was hit by a DRUNK DRIVER. He should have never even been on the street anyways. I have 2 DUI's myself, which is not bragging, far from it, but I served more time than he got on my second one, sitting on a side street, then he got killing someone. So I am sour about that? maybe. maybe not. Either way, the fact that he should not even of been on the street driving at the time trumps anything the man did. $$$$$$ money talks plain and simple.

[PuNk42AE]

Well if he wasn't drunk would he have stopped, or would he still have just flashed his lights. We will never know...

[Who is the Drizzle?]

Originally Posted by slim pickens

My argument isnt the fact just because he was drunk....I drink around here everyday, drink with the best of them. But that dosent mean I cannot look down on something like this because I myself like beer. The fact that he stepped out in the street went out the window the minute he was hit by a DRUNK DRIVER. He should have never even been on the street anyways. I have 2 DUI's myself, which is not bragging, far from it, but I served more time than he got on my second one, sitting on a side street, then he got killing someone. So I am sour about that? maybe. maybe not. Either way, the fact that he should not even of been on the street driving at the time trumps anything the man did. $$$$$$ money talks plain and simple.

People that think so little of others to the point that they drive intoxicated are the inconsiderate scum of the earth to me. That said, legally you have look at a case without emotion,,,Stallworth wasn't blowing like a .25 and if there's video that the dude walked onto the street and there wasn't really anything wrong that Stallworth did, other than being over the limit.....I think all you can charge him for is being over the limit. So make it a penalty for a first time offender, but slightly harsher.

[sagnam]

Originally Posted by slim pickens

Either way, the fact that he should not even of been on the street driving at the time trumps anything the man did.

There is no trump, this isn't Euchre.

[will the thrill]

Originally Posted by nwilcox

Donte was DUI, he is to completely to blame for breaking a law. Was the other guy at fault yes as well. There is no 75/25 blame situation in something like this.

As for Donte getting 30 days in jail, lifetime ban on drivers license, house arrest. BIG DEAL.. If any one of us would have done this we would be in PRISON for years if not life. Guilty of killing someone the NFL should ban him as well, start setting a example here already.

It depends on the situation and nobody knows for sure. For all we know the guy walked out in front of Donte and he might have not been able to avoid hitting him completely sober. That being said there is zero way for anyone to know those kinds of particulars. It reminds me of the argument "If you drive drunk and don't kill someone, aren't you guilty of attempted manslaughter?" The situation is bad for all parties, but people and stars drunk drive all the time without hitting someone who walks out in front of them, it doesn't make it any better because they didn't hit anyone. If you're going to ban Donte for it, then you should ban anyone who gets a dui

[slim pickens]

Originally Posted by sagnam

There is no trump, this isn't Euchre.

*bravo*

best you can come up with.

[slim pickens]

Originally Posted by Who is the Drizzle?

People that think so little of others to the point that they drive intoxicated are the inconsiderate scum of the earth to me. That said, legally you have look at a case without emotion,,,Stallworth wasn't blowing like a .25 and if there's video that the dude walked onto the street and there wasn't really anything wrong that Stallworth did, other than being over the limit.....I think all you can charge him for is being over the limit. So make it a penalty for a first time offender, but slightly harsher.

dont matter what you blew. over the limit is over the limit. there isnt a law that says "well he was kinda over the limit"...

[sagnam]

Originally Posted by slim pickens

*bravo*

best you can come up with.

So sensitive. I told you that you would never listen to reason, but I expanded anyway. You still haven't explained how one person's bad decision completely absolves another's. And if there really is video tape evidence of "the vitctim" walking into traffic while on his cell phone ...

[Who is the Drizzle?]

Originally Posted by slim pickens

dont matter what you blew. over the limit is over the limit. there isnt a law that says "well he was kinda over the limit"...

legally, you are correct. and legally they also have to consider, i believe, who is at fault, and how much are they at fault. even in a dui case.

morally, there are different levels of intoxication that would influence my opinion.

[DTroppens]

I think what Donte' did was bad and he should be punished for it.

I'm sorry, it sounded better than bump. I was getting tired of seeing Michael Jackson's name as the last post in this folder for the last few days. This should do the trick.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Originally Posted by slim pickens

My argument isnt the fact just because he was drunk....I drink around here everyday, drink with the best of them. But that dosent mean I cannot look down on something like this because I myself like beer. The fact that he stepped out in the street went out the window the minute he was hit by a DRUNK DRIVER. He should have never even been on the street anyways. I have 2 DUI's myself, which is not bragging, far from it, but I served more time than he got on my second one, sitting on a side street, then he got killing someone. So I am sour about that? maybe. maybe not. Either way, the fact that he should not even of been on the street driving at the time trumps anything the man did. $$$$$$ money talks plain and simple.

I disagree with the logic here. Essentially, what appears to me is being expressed is the idea that regardless the circumstances, since Donte' was over the legal limit, he is de facto 100% at fault. Bullcrap.

It is entirely possible for a person who is legally drunk when involved in an accident to not be the cause of said accident. For example, it is possible for a drunk driver to be driving through an intersection on a green light and be blind sided by a sober person running a red.

I think it is entirely appropriate and reasonable to consider what part driving under the influence likely had on the occurence and severity of an accident. If driving under the influence is judged to be at most incidental to an accident, I personally have no qualms with the driver under the influence being punished no worse than s/he would have had they simply been pulled over and found to be DUI. I realize this probably isn't a popular sentiment, but I think it fair and reasonable.

I also can see possible justification for you getting more time for your 2nd offense than Donte' got for his first and someone died. If I were a judge, and someone were before me with a 2nd offense DUI, it is really hard for me to buy it was merely poor judgement. It would seem to me a lesson wasn't learned with the first go round, and a stiff penalty seems to be in order. WRT Donte', if it were his first offense and there were adequate evidence to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that his being under the influence did not cause or increase the severity of the accident (i.e. had he been sober, the end result would have almost certainly been the same), I would think it most fair to give a standard penalty for a 1st offense DUI. Just my opinion.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Originally Posted by slim pickens

dont matter what you blew. over the limit is over the limit. there isnt a law that says "well he was kinda over the limit"...

Sure - Donte' should be punished for being DUI. I don't think anyone is suggesting otherwise. The question is how much should be be punished for the accident and subsequent death of a pedestrian..

[jonjd]

Suspended for 2009. Awesome news. ESPN writes:

Cleveland Browns wide receiver Donte' Stallworth has been suspended without pay for the 2009 season for violating the NFL's personal conduct policy and its substance abuse policy, the league said Thursday.

Stallworth, 28, who pleaded guilty to DUI manslaughter in Florida in connection with the March 14 crash in which he struck and killed construction worker Mario Reyes, will be reinstated after the Super Bowl in February 2010, the league said.

In a letter to Stallworth made public Thursday, commissioner Roger Goodell said, "I believe that further consequences are necessary" in addition to the punishment handed down by the legal system.

"There is no question that your actions had tragic consequences to an innocent man and his family, and that you have violated both the Substances of Abuse and Personal Conduct Policies," Goodell said. "In that respect, you are clearly guilty of conduct detrimental to the integrity of and public confidence in the NFL."

"Your conduct endangered yourself and others, leading to the death of an innocent man. The NFL and NFL players must live with the stain that you have placed on their reputations," Goodell said.

Goodell suspended Stallworth indefinitely on June 18, two days after Stallworth pleaded guilty.

After Stallworth spent the night drinking at a bar in Miami Beach's Fountainebleau hotel, police said he hit Reyes, a construction crane operator who was rushing to catch a bus after finishing his shift at about 7:15 a.m.

Stallworth told police he flashed his lights in an attempt to warn Reyes, who was not in a crosswalk when he was struck.

Stallworth had a blood-alcohol level of .126 after the crash, well above Florida's .08 limit. Stallworth stopped after the crash and immediately told officers he had hit Reyes. Police estimated Stallworth was driving about 50 mph in a 40 mph zone.

Stallworth was given a 30-day jail sentence, of which he served 24 days, and reached an undisclosed financial settlement with Reyes' family. Besides jail time, Stallworth's sentence included two years of house arrest, eight years of probation and other restrictions.

Stallworth, who met with Goodell earlier this month, said afterwards he would live with whatever punishment Goodell handed down.

In a statement he issued on Aug. 6, a day after meeting with Goodell, Stallworth had said "I recognize that there is a difference between the legal standard in my criminal case and the standard to which NFL players are held.

"It is clear that I exercised poor judgment and caused irreparable harm to Mario Reyes, his family, the NFL, its owners, coaches, employees and to my fellow players."

A college star at Tennessee, Stallworth has also played for the New England Patriots, Philadelphia Eagles and New Orleans Saints. His first year with Cleveland was marred by injuries. He hurt his leg in training camp, which sidelined him for most of the season.

The Browns signed him to a seven-year, $35 million contract in 2008, hoping he could be a complementary No. 2 receiver and take pressure off Braylon Edwards. But Stallworth never got going because of the injury and made only seven starts. Edwards spent the season dropping important passes and Cleveland finished a disappointing 4-12.

[sagnam]

Punishment seems fair to me.

[Who is the Drizzle?]

I was thinking 12 games, but if you're going to go 12 you might as well go for the whole season. So fair and expected.