Report: Financial agreement avoids suit (Donte Stallworth)

[Dos Equis]

Vick and Stallworth's case have nothing to do with each other. One can be used as an example of how to handle yourself properly during an investigation and the other couldnt have been handled worse.

Stallworth was completely cooperative with the police, complied with the sobriety tests, didnt lie, was willing to offer financial support to the victims family. The financial settlement was was a result of a mutual agreement between the victim's family and Stallworth. The fact that the man darted out on the the street and not in a crosswalk also had an effect. Coupled with the fact that Stallworth had no previous criminal record or even a single traffic violation.

Vick on the other hand financed the operation for years, knew what he was doing was illegal, lied to the feds on more than one occasion, failed a drug test during the court process and would not admit guilt until he had no choice.

this has nothing to do with comparing the value of a dogs life and a humans life. Both cases were handled correctly IMO.

I understand your point, and how a person responds after committing a crime is important.  But how the respective players conducted themselves after committing their respective crimes isn't the issue for me with these two.  It's the crime itself and the punishment each received.  It has everything to do with comparing the value of animals versus people.  People are more important.  The punishment for killing a person should always be greater than the punishment for killing animals.  

I actually don't think either case was handled correctly.    

[Dos Equis]

yes someone without the $$ Stallworth had would not be so fortunate, but that follows life. People with more money can afford better lawyers and doctors better cars and so forth

True.  Money is not supposed to have that kind of impact on the criminal justice system, but it does.  That's why OJ was free for so long. 

[ATHEIST]

True.  Money is not supposed to have that kind of impact on the criminal justice system, but it does.  That's why OJ was free for so long. 

This is a huge problem that should not be accepted.

[Dos Equis]

This is a huge problem that should not be accepted.

Not really anything we can do about it.   

[Earl1972]

  The difference is still dogs vs. people, and people are more important and more valuable than animals. 

i disagree most people are assholes

E

[Doug_Steele]

i disagree most people are assholes

E

I treat my dogs better then i treat most people!!  My two oldest doggies have their own love seats 

[Dos Equis]

i disagree most people are assholes

E

Some, not most.  I guess it depends on where you live.   

[body88]

I understand your point, and how a person responds after committing a crime is important.  But how the respective players conducted themselves after committing their respective crimes isn't the issue for me with these two.  It's the crime itself and the punishment each received.  It has everything to do with comparing the value of animals versus people.  People are more important.  The punishment for killing a person should always be greater than the punishment for killing animals.  

I actually don't think either case was handled correctly.    

Beach, the reason why the public got so upset over Vick is because they could relate to the case.  Most people only had to look a couple feet to the right or to the left to see their dog looking back at them.  They said to themselves "how could that monster do such terrible things to such a nice animal".  If most of the public had a relative killed by a drunk driver, there would have been more outrage.  Also, most people are guilty of driving intoxicated at one time or another, and "those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones".  Stallworth was not out to harm anyone and he showed an extreme amount of remorse; not to mention he's rich.  He can do more good out of jail anyway.  His community service will force him to educate others on the dangers of having a few drinks to many.

[Dos Equis]

Beach, the reason why the public got so upset over Vick is because they could relate to the case.  Most people only had to look a couple feet to the right or to the left to see their dog looking back at them.  They said to themselves "how could that monster do such terrible things to such a nice animal".  If most of the public had a relative killed by a drunk driver, there would have been more outrage.  Also, most people are guilty of driving intoxicated at one time or another, and "those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones".  Stallworth was not out to harm anyone and he showed an extreme amount of remorse; not to mention he's rich.  He can do more good out of jail anyway.  His community service will force him to educate others on the dangers of having a few drinks to many.

Yeah I understand the outrage over Vick.  What he did was inexcusable.  Just like any other person who abuses dogs.  No question people who abuse dogs should be punished.   

I do not agree about drunk driving.  I wouldn't say most people are guilty of it at one point or another.  Even if they are, it's still a far more serious crime than abusing animals.  Any crime that endangers the lives of people is very serious.  I went back and forth with someone (Earl?) in another thread already about whether death as a result of drunk driving is "intentional."  I maintain it is, because everyone who drives knows that alcohol impairs driving and kills thousands of people every year.  A drunk driver doesn't necessarily target a specific person, but it's no different than pointing a partially loaded gun at someone and pulling the trigger.   

Drunk driving is head and shoulders a more pervasive problem and causes substantially more harm than animal cruelty. 

Regarding Stallworth doing more good outside of prison, you could make the same statements about Vick.  What should happen is Stallworth should do his public service, help the community, etc. after he spends more than 30 days in jail.   

[big L dawg]

would you guys kill a person before you would kill your dog.

[Dos Equis]

Neither.

[Earl1972]

Some, not most.  I guess it depends on where you live.   

like china where they eat dogs?

E

[Earl1972]

would you guys kill a person before you would kill your dog.

i can kill a person for self defense, name one good reason for me to ever kill my dog

and "beach bum" i don't think you know what the word "intentional" means

E

[Dos Equis]

like china where they eat dogs?

E

You mean the Philippines? 

[Dos Equis]

i can kill a person for self defense, name one good reason for me to ever kill my dog

and "beach bum" i don't think you know what the word "intentional" means

E

"Earl" I don't think you know what the word "accident" means. 

[Earl1972]

"Earl" I don't think you know what the word "accident" means. 

actually yeah i do

stallworth had an accident, vick's incident was intentional

hope that clears up any confusion

E

[Dos Equis]

actually yeah i do

stallworth had an accident, vick's incident was intentional

hope that clears up any confusion

E

As I suspected.  You really don't understand the distinction. 

[Earl1972]

As I suspected.  You really don't understand the distinction. 

so you are saying stallworth got behind the wheel and said "i feel like running somebody over with my car"

E

[Dos Equis]

so you are saying stallworth got behind the wheel and said "i feel like running somebody over with my car"

E

Nope.  I'm saying when you get behind the wheel of a car while drunk, the fact you hit and kill someone isn't an "accident."  It's reckless behavior.  Reckless behavior always has some kind of conscious element, where you know that your conduct can either injure or kill someone.  That's why Stallworth was facing 15 years in prison.  You don't go to prison for 15 years because of an "accident."   

This exchange feels like deja vu all over again.   

[Earl1972]

Nope.  I'm saying when you get behind the wheel of a car while drunk, the fact you hit and kill someone isn't an "accident."  It's reckless behavior.  Reckless behavior always has some kind of conscious element, where you know that your conduct can either injure or kill someone.  That's why Stallworth was facing 15 years in prison.  You don't go to prison for 15 years because of an "accident."   

This exchange feels like deja vu all over again.   

right because if the accident was intentional he would be going to prison for at least 15 years

i wouldn't be surprised if stallworth, like many people that drive after drinking didn't think he was drunk

if he felt his drinking would drastically affect his driving skills he probably wouldn't have gotten behind the wheel

vick on the other hand intentionally slaughtered innocent animals that just wanted to be loved

E

[Dos Equis]

right because if the accident was intentional he would be going to prison for at least 15 years

No, the story says "Stallworth had faced up to 15 years in prison" for what you are calling an "accident." 

[Earl1972]

No, the story says "Stallworth had faced up to 15 years in prison" for what you are calling an "accident." 

nobody ever goes away for 15 years in a drunk driving accident

E

[Dos Equis]

nobody ever goes away for 15 years in a drunk driving accident

E

Yes they do. 

[Earl1972]

Yes they do. 

example?

there are tons of drunk driving fatalities every day, i've yet to hear of any of them going to jail for 15 years

5 at most

always hear of drunk driving accidents but never "dog fighting accidents"

E

[Dos Equis]

example?

there are tons of drunk driving fatalities every day, i've yet to hear of any of them going to jail for 15 years

5 at most

always hear of drunk driving accidents but never "dog fighting accidents"

E

Patrick Ballard Pleads Guilty To Manslaughter
By Chad Petri Reporter
Published: Thu, January 15, 2009 - 4:01 pm Last Updated: Thu, January 15, 2009 - 5:22 pm

The man who hit and killed two Baldwin County bicyclists on Labor Day in 2007 has pleaded guilty to a lesser charge.

Patrick Ballard was originally charged with murder for the deaths of Archie Clemons and Bill Imle. Prosecutors say Ballard was drunk at the time of the accident on Bromley Road near Stapleton.

Ballard was scheduled to go to trial February second, but he pleaded guilty to manslaughter on Thursday afternoon. As part of the plea deal, he was sentenced to 20 years in prison on both counts. The judge ruled Ballard will serve the sentences consecutively. He faces up to 40 years in jail.

http://www.wkrg.com/crime/article/ballard_case_update/22695/

Thirty-five year sentence for this repeat offender:  http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1356&dat=19880610&id=55wTAAAAIBAJ&sjid=7AYEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4356,1946341


Driver gets 18 years for death of woman, 21
Corey Bieniek was driving drunk, speeding at time of accident
BY JESSICA SMITH Staff Writer
Ajudge sentenced Corey Bieniek to 18 years in prison last week for causing the death of 21-year-old Samar Seliem, who had been backing out of her driveway when Bieniek's speeding vehicle hit her car.

Bieniek, 20, of the Cliffwood Beach section, had been driving while intoxicated when he hit Seliem's vehicle in front of her family's Marlboro Road home Dec. 30.  . . . .

http://suburban.gmnews.com/news/2007/1206/front_page/002.html