It's amazing the type of trouble you can buy your way out of when you make 5 million dollars per year.

It would be interesting indeed to find the sentence for others in Miami who have committed the same offense. I would speculate that it was more rigorous. The story did say that he had reached a "financial arrangement" with the victim's family. Whoopeedoo. That's not supposed to have anything to do with the criminal charges. And, both the NFL and the Browns are "looking into" the incident.
I would think that 30 days is not a sufficient penalty. And, I would hope that the Browns would "fire" Mr. Stallworth and that the NFL would bar him from employment in the organization.

I've mulled this one over for a while. 30 days is certainly too short. At the same time, I think among the folks I grew up with in Miami probably 75% have driven off South Beach late at night with a BAC above the legal limit.
And though it sounds cold, I really hope he gave this poor guys family a pile of money. I heard he was catching the bus in the morning after a graveyard construction shift; it would be good to think his family got rich for his efforts.
The best thing Dante Stallworth can do now is get super public about how awful it feels to have killed someone through his own recklessness, a message we could all stand to absorb.

Walter –

My guess is that the team and the league are assessing public opinion and will react accordingly. Case in point, the delay in allowing Michael Vick back into the league has more to do with the concern over negative publicity than whether or not he is remorseful and rehabilitated. It’s purely a business decision masquerading as a moral dilemma.

Moses –

I’m certain countless individuals have foolishly gotten behind the wheel of a vehicle while “legally” intoxicated. Those who have been unfortunate enough to injure others have had to pay a price, in many cases having their lives ruined. Let’s hope Mr. Stallworth makes the most of his partial indulgence, using his wealth and celebrity to make a difference.

Spin quote: "It's amazing the type of trouble you can buy your way out of when you make 5 million dollars per year."

Indeed it is, but the issue is twofold. One, how long does someone need to be in the slammer to learn a lesson and two, what constitutes sufficient punishment?

The victim is dead. How much in financial terms and in punishment terms is a life worth? Generally, I favor lengthy prison sentences for any loss of life, accidential or not, but in this case 30 days may give him enough time to ponder his mistake. I agree Spin, let's see what he can do with the break he has been given.

Spin Doc,

First, I have to say that I agree that anyone driving while over the legal limit and who kills somebody should probably receive more than 30 days in jail.

This article shows there is more to the story.
“Stallworth, 28, also reached a confidential financial settlement with the family of 59-year-old Mario Reyes, a construction worker struck and killed early on March 14 by Stallworth, driving drunk in his black 2005 Bentley.
Stallworth had faced 15 years in prison for his DUI manslaughter conviction. After his release from jail, he must serve two years of house arrest and spend eight years on probation. The house arrest provisions will allow him to resume his football career, his attorney said.
Stallworth also must undergo drug and alcohol testing, will have a lifetime driver’s license suspension and must perform 1,000 hours of community service. Lyons said after five years, Stallworth could win approval for limited driving such as for employment.
And the article says that after 5 years, “Stallworth could win approval for limited driving such as for employment.”
However, I don’t think I agree with the conclusion that “society places a much higher value on protecting animals than the loss of human life.” This is not true, and my own perspective is that we don’t place enough value on protecting animals. Perpetrators of animal abuse rarely get any kind of punishment that truly fits their crime. In addition, I think the example made with Vick’s punishment was a solid step forward in attempting to establish a better and more humane approach on a societal level towards animals in a society that needs a little attitude adjustment in that area.

Without knowing anything about either, Vick or Stallworth, beyond what I’ve read about the actions of both, I see some distinctions between Vick and Stallworth that seem significant. First, Vick’s actions were large-scale, ongoing, and intentional. He was covering up his actions because he knew they were criminal and wrong. Beyond that, on another level, Vick’s actions reveal an aspect of his nature that involves an almost “antisocial personality” tendency toward cruelty.

Everything about Stallworth’s behavior in this case indicates just the opposite about Stallworth. And, frankly, from the description of events and without meaning to dismiss the tragedy of Mr. Reyes’ death, it sounds as if Mr. Reyes may have run out in front of Stallworth, possibly in a manner in which almost anyone might have hit him, with or without the alcohol, and that perhaps the only reason Stallworth was charged in the first place is because of his blood-alcohol level, which may not have even been a factor in hitting Mr. Reyes. Facts seem too unclear on that point to make a fair judgment at this time.

In the end, it sounds like a tragic situation that the family just wants to put behind them, and from which we must hope Stallworth learns a valuable lesson that he can translate into bettering his own life in some way. Justice is an elusive concept sometimes, if not always.

So much for equal justice under the law.

Just wondering... what do readers think would be the proper punishment if no alcohol was involved???

When I clicked on the title of the post, I intended to raise the Vick comparison. Thankfully, Spin Doctor already did that.

Rick Lucke, the piously devout atheist, is way off base in his moral calculus here. The loss of human life--even if accidental--is always a far greater tragedy than the loss of animal lives.

I don't think Stallworth necessarily "got off too easy" but I do contend that Vick's punishment went way above and beyond what was fair or necessary.

If nothing else, the two cases highlight the vastly differing sentencing philosophies utilized by different courts/jurisdictions throughout the country. In America, generally the primary deciding factor between 30 days and 4 years (or even life with a chance of parole and the death penalty) comes down to where a person happens to stand trial.

One- how many of us have ever crossed a busy street NOT on a crosswalk? Two-if you, myself or anyone else on OS that does not have the NFL Player's Association behind them hit someone while drunk, we'd be someone's bitch as I speak.

I loathe double standards. I hope he will really get hit where it can somewhat help the family in a Civil Court case with lots of 0's involved. It won't bring back the dead for sure, but that is where I believe he will pay. Sad outcome.
"Don't drink and drive, unless you're a superstar."

Edgar, my old friend, channeling the voice of "God" again, I see.

It's always interesting to me how devoutly confident you are in all of your judgments. Religiously so, I'd say.

I'm reluctant to admit it, but I think all the factors taken into account (not fleeing the scene, lack of past offenses) plus the fact that his driving and movements will be constricted for years, gives this particular victim more justice than I have seen for awhile.

In my neck of the woods I scratch my head at people who use guns to murder people. All they have to do is run them over with a car and they will have no worries. I have lived here for over 20 years, and I have never, ever, never even heard or read of a person even having charges filed against them for running over a pedestrian, whether they were killed or not. It's totally open season.

Rick, I don't think you're going to find too many people who will argue that a canine life is more important than a human one.

This post and comment thread is about Stallworth's sentence and how it contrasts with Vick's. We both agree that Stallworth was treated pretty close to fairly by the justice system. I contend that Vick wasn't. I see no "devoutly confident" or "religious" element to my opinion.

I heard a legal analyst on television say there were multiple problems/challenges with the prosecution's case. I don't know what they were, and I'm not a lawyer.

However, I think that it's unwarranted to jump to conclusions about money and justice without knowing in detail all the legal details behind the case.

Thanks to all for stopping by to weigh in

RW –

We are of like mind on this one

Rick –

I agree that Vick’s actions were premeditated, reprehensible and intentional. I have no issue with the sentence he received. The Stallworth incident was accidental and the pedestrian may have darted into the path of an on-coming vehicle. In spite of all of the mitigating circumstances the overriding factor was that Stallworth was legally drunk while driving his Bentley. His negligence resulted in a loss of life. I won’t hazard a guess as to how much jail time he should serve, but 30-days, even with all of the other stipulations, is a rather light sentence.

Bobbot –

It’s a money thing.

Noah –

If Stallworth isn’t drunk, he probably ends up not being charged at all.

Edgar –

Agreed, other whom I’ve spoken with concur that the jurisdiction plays a major role in the outcome.

Blue –

The family has already settled out of court for an undisclosed amount of cash. Stallworth’s attorney did an excellent job. Who knows how the judge would have ruled if the family members had appeared in court on the day of the sentencing to express their grief.

Flyover –

I don’t think Stallworth would have been charged if he wasn’t legally drunk.

Sammis –

Two facts that were established were Stallworth’s BAC and Reye’s death. Regardless of the extenuating circumstances, a motor vehicle in the hands of an intoxicated individual is a very dangerous thing. Until the courts decide to take a hard line against these types of offenses lives will continue to be lost and families will continue to be shattered.

Spin Doc,

I guess I'd have to say that there isn't really anything conclusive that proves "negligence" on the part of Stallworth. His alcohol level was over the legal limit, but we can't say conclusively that his driving was negligent based solely on that criterion. The law says he is responsible solely because of his blood contents, but we don't know with certainty how much impact that really had on the situation because the details are not clear. It is not uncommon for an individual to rush into traffic and get his by a driver who is not legally intoxicated. That's really my only consideration where Stallworth is concerned.

Ed,

As usual, your lack of logical connections corrupts your prespective and you resort to your staple debating technique – “Straw Man” argument. You wrote:

“Rick Lucke, the piously devout atheist, is way off base in his moral calculus here. The loss of human life--even if accidental--is always a far greater tragedy than the loss of animal lives.”

Your comment addresses nothing that I said. Nothing. I made no claim about whose life was more valuable; that, sir, is your judgment, and your judgment is clearly religiously based by virtue of your reference to my atheism.

You wrote, “I see no "devoutly confident" or "religious" element to my opinion.”

Your judgment in the first quote above regarding “moral calculus” is clearly your religiously based opinion, not something that can be put forth to a thinking person as some kind of universal cosmic truth, as you “believe”. While your religion places human life above all other forms even to the point of excusing abuse of those other life forms, there are other religions that do not. One religion is just as valid as the next, although some are more respectable than others. Your proclamation of your view as a truth is undeniably “devoutly confident” and “religiously so”.

You wrote, “We both agree that Stallworth was treated pretty close to fairly by the justice system.”

Again, you address something I did not say. I don’t say anything about whether Stallworth was treated fairly, or if Vick was treated unfairly. I address the differences in their behaviors, which I think is something worth considering. Most sociopaths begin with animal abuse. Beyond that I only suggest that there are details of the situation that are unclear regarding Stallworth’s situation.


It is sad to see what religion has done to you.

I don't like this either, but I see why the 30 days was given. Supposedly the victim's family settled out of court for a large sum. A 10 year or longer prison sentence would mean that Stallworth could not resume his football career. Thus, he would lose his chance to make the millions of dollars to pay the settlement. The judge realized that.

So don't blame the judge - blame the greediness of the victim's family which would rather become millionaires and let a killer out on the streets years sooner than necessary.

And blame the lawyers that allowed this to happen, too.

This from good ol Wikipedia: Sentencing for vehicular homicide/manslaughter

A study by professors at Dartmouth College and Harvard University found that those convicted of vehicular homicide are given, on average, shorter sentences than those found guilty of other types of homicide. The study found that the gender of the offender does not statistically affect the length of the sentence, but the race does. The identity of the victim is a more important predictor of sentencing length, with longer sentences given to offenders in cases where the victim was female and/or had no violent criminal record.

Some states, such as Minnesota, have statutes allowing for a charge of vehicular homicide if an unborn child is killed or injured by a motorist.

First, I guess 30 days isn't enough, but what would be enough under these circumstances? Two years? Ten years? Life?

Second, before we cry for Michael Vick, let's not forget that he lied to investigators, covered up evidence, protected his buddies and willingly and frequently killed dogs, sometimes just short of torture. He also only showed remorse AFTER he was caught.

As Noah pointed out, what would have happened if the scenario was the same bu Stallworth was not drunk? What if Stallworth took off, ditched his car in Miami Bay, called a cab, left the state and lied to police?

According to the police report, Reyes was in the far left lane of the MacArthur Causeway, a major roadway with a divider, suggesting that the he had run across the opposite lanes and hopped over the cement divider. That's a tough situation for any driver, drunk or otherwise.

And let's also not forget that with the family accepting not only his apology and his money, they accepted the plea agreement. Had they rejected it, the prosecution would have gone forward. Maybe the prosecution is to blame for the short sentence, too. They didn't have to offer or take any deal.

Rick –

By “negligence” I was referring to the operation of a motor vehicle while impaired beyond an established legal limit. I’m sure you would agree, that, in and of itself, is an irresponsible action.

I.C.

You make an excellent point. There is a huge upside (financially) for the family, if Stallworth is able to quickly resume his career. There is no doubt this was an influential factor in reaching a plea bargain.

Noah

Thanks for provide some statistical insight regarding vehicular homicide and sentencing.
It comes as no surprise to me that the scales of justice are not always balanced.

Aaron –

Thanks for providing additional detail from the police report. We will never know if Stallworth could have avoided “killing” Reyes. As for Mr. Vick, I will shed no tears for him. He is not a nice man.

And Ryan Leaf just got arrested crossing the border from Canada. He will probably "get the book thrown at him" when what he really needs is to somehow get his life on track. He's all messed up, has always been messed up and I'll just about guarantee that his sentence will be far more rigorous than Stallworth's.
Leaf's personna has now transitioned from arrogant a-hole to pathetic addict. I have far more sympathy for him.

Spin Doc,

You write, “By ‘negligence’ I was referring to the operation of a motor vehicle while impaired beyond an established legal limit. I’m sure you would agree, that, in and of itself, is an irresponsible action.”

I do agree Stallworth behaved irresponsibly within certain guidelines. And nothing I’m saying here is said to excuse Stallworth’s actions that night. Getting behind the wheel that night was a stupid thing for him to do.

IC writes:
"So don't blame the judge - blame the greediness of the victim's family which would rather become millionaires and let a killer out on the streets years sooner than necessary."
Really? First, it's pretty ridiculous to assume that Stallworth is going to "kill" again. While he was negligent and should be responsible, this was an accident.
How are you going to criticize this poor guys family for making the best of a tragic situation? Whats the alternative: their loved one is still dead, they get nothing, and Stallworth gets raped in jail for ten years instead of working to make reparations to his victim's family? Great. If I get run-over by a drunk millionaire, I give my family permission to take the money and spare the other guy's life.

I agree with your assessment -- some elements of society often put more importance on protecting animals than humans.

Believe it or not, PETA is all over the fly killing that occurred at the White House this week. Let's you and me start PETH-- People for the Ethical treatment of Humans.

Moses –

Thanks for your input.

Zen –

Where do I sign up!