|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 04, 2009 1:04 am
He's looking at some serious Prison time. The max is 15yrs.
The initial report said the state was looking at 4-6yrs
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 04, 2009 7:59 am
they need to look at the facts here.
1. Yes he was intoxicated.
2. The person he hit was not in a cross walk.
3. There are reports that the person he hit was also intoxicated.
4. It was dark and very early in the morning so they have to look at the type of clothing the victim was wearing.
5. It was reported that Stallworth was driving, not over, the speed limit.
There are other things for sure, but from what I have gathered, most of it looks to be in favor of Stallworth to just get the DUI instead of the vehicular manslaughter charge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 04, 2009 7:40 pm
vehicular manslaugter is what he did, (accidentally killing someone with a car) he is guilty in the eyes of the law, but it really was not his fault
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 04, 2009 8:40 pm
vegito61283 they need to look at the facts here. 1. Yes he was intoxicated. 2. The person he hit was not in a cross walk. 3. There are reports that the person he hit was also intoxicated. 4. It was dark and very early in the morning so they have to look at the type of clothing the victim was wearing. 5. It was reported that Stallworth was driving, not over, the speed limit. There are other things for sure, but from what I have gathered, most of it looks to be in favor of Stallworth to just get the DUI instead of the vehicular manslaughter charge. Agreed, but he dose deserve a minor punishment though for being intoxicated while driving. Also setting a bad example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 10:16 am
MeXiCaN cOoKiE Football vegito61283 they need to look at the facts here. 1. Yes he was intoxicated. 2. The person he hit was not in a cross walk. 3. There are reports that the person he hit was also intoxicated. 4. It was dark and very early in the morning so they have to look at the type of clothing the victim was wearing. 5. It was reported that Stallworth was driving, not over, the speed limit. There are other things for sure, but from what I have gathered, most of it looks to be in favor of Stallworth to just get the DUI instead of the vehicular manslaughter charge. Agreed, but he dose deserve a minor punishment though for being intoxicated while driving. Also setting a bad example. I agree whole heartedly. But if it is his first, it ends up being probation for the DUI. But with this, they may come down harder than they should and would for anyone else
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 3:22 pm
vegito61283 MeXiCaN cOoKiE Football vegito61283 they need to look at the facts here. 1. Yes he was intoxicated. 2. The person he hit was not in a cross walk. 3. There are reports that the person he hit was also intoxicated. 4. It was dark and very early in the morning so they have to look at the type of clothing the victim was wearing. 5. It was reported that Stallworth was driving, not over, the speed limit. There are other things for sure, but from what I have gathered, most of it looks to be in favor of Stallworth to just get the DUI instead of the vehicular manslaughter charge. Agreed, but he dose deserve a minor punishment though for being intoxicated while driving. Also setting a bad example. I agree whole heartedly. But if it is his first, it ends up being probation for the DUI. But with this, they may come down harder than they should and would for anyone else I know people make mistakes, but Stallworth took the life of somebody else. He was driving drunk, and killed somebody. The odds are against him, and he should and probably will get maximum punishment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 7:39 pm
I think he needs to get to be put away for a few years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 7:47 pm
Hey, so when I hit someone, I should have been put away? They found out that the person did not abide by the laws of the road. She went in front of me even though I had already stopped and pulled up further past the stop sign to get ready to pull out.
Plain and simple, they have to look at everything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 10:58 am
vegito61283 Hey, so when I hit someone, I should have been put away? They found out that the person did not abide by the laws of the road. She went in front of me even though I had already stopped and pulled up further past the stop sign to get ready to pull out. Plain and simple, they have to look at everything. But in that entire explanation, you never mentioned that you were drunk. So in your case, it was an accident. In Stallworth's case, he was driving under the influence. When drunk, your motor skills, awareness, and coordination all suffer. I can almost assure you that a less severe injury or no collision at all would have taken place, if Donte Stallworth was sober.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:04 pm
Dude-LAP vegito61283 Hey, so when I hit someone, I should have been put away? They found out that the person did not abide by the laws of the road. She went in front of me even though I had already stopped and pulled up further past the stop sign to get ready to pull out. Plain and simple, they have to look at everything. But in that entire explanation, you never mentioned that you were drunk. So in your case, it was an accident. In Stallworth's case, he was driving under the influence. When drunk, your motor skills, awareness, and coordination all suffer. I can almost assure you that a less severe injury or no collision at all would have taken place, if Donte Stallworth was sober. True, but sometimes you have to be able to seperate and look at the whole big picture. Yes he was driving drunk. It was dark, what was the victim wearing? clothes can be a big factor. I can give plenty of examples on that. The guy was not walking in a cross walk. He was walking across that road. It all has to be taken into account. I am not defending him. I believe he should get what he should get. Just not more than he deserves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 10:49 pm
vegito61283 Dude-LAP vegito61283 Hey, so when I hit someone, I should have been put away? They found out that the person did not abide by the laws of the road. She went in front of me even though I had already stopped and pulled up further past the stop sign to get ready to pull out. Plain and simple, they have to look at everything. But in that entire explanation, you never mentioned that you were drunk. So in your case, it was an accident. In Stallworth's case, he was driving under the influence. When drunk, your motor skills, awareness, and coordination all suffer. I can almost assure you that a less severe injury or no collision at all would have taken place, if Donte Stallworth was sober. True, but sometimes you have to be able to seperate and look at the whole big picture. Yes he was driving drunk. It was dark, what was the victim wearing? clothes can be a big factor. I can give plenty of examples on that. The guy was not walking in a cross walk. He was walking across that road. It all has to be taken into account. I am not defending him. I believe he should get what he should get. Just not more than he deserves. Agreed. But it was reported that Stallworth was driving drunk, and also speeding higher than the zone's limit. I don't know why the pedestrian was crossing in an unmarked area, but a sober Stallworth going slower probably wouldn't have killed him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 1:15 am
Regardless of the severity of his actual guilt, its really bad timing. Given all that's happened in the recent past & is still going on today, he's gonna be judged harshly.
Did they say the max he could get is still 15yrs?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 1:26 pm
Boy is he an idiot. He has messed up his NFL career.He is a dumb a**.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 2:34 pm
Quote: True, but sometimes you have to be able to seperate and look at the whole big picture. Yes he was driving drunk. It was dark, what was the victim wearing? clothes can be a big factor. I can give plenty of examples on that. The guy was not walking in a cross walk. He was walking across that road. It all has to be taken into account. I am not defending him. I believe he should get what he should get. Just not more than he deserves. You are missing the point here. HE WAS DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED! A condition that NONE OF US are excused from. So in the court of law, that condition itself is enough to convict him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 3:34 pm
diversaurus Quote: True, but sometimes you have to be able to seperate and look at the whole big picture. Yes he was driving drunk. It was dark, what was the victim wearing? clothes can be a big factor. I can give plenty of examples on that. The guy was not walking in a cross walk. He was walking across that road. It all has to be taken into account. I am not defending him. I believe he should get what he should get. Just not more than he deserves. You are missing the point here. HE WAS DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED! A condition that NONE OF US are excused from. So in the court of law, that condition itself is enough to convict him. True but we dont get as long as he will. Then again.... he killed somebody. Then again.... it was both their faults. This is a rather confusing side to pick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
