• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

AP sources: Browns' Stallworth will be charged with DUI manslaughter

T

Tucker Case

Matthew 16:3
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
45,596
Reaction score
22,536
Location
Everywhere and nowhere
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
MIAMI -- Cleveland Browns wide receiver Donte Stallworth will be charged Wednesday with killing a pedestrian last month while driving drunk in Miami, according to people familiar with the case.
Donte Stallworth, WR
Cleveland Browns

Career Statistics
Receptions: 296
Yards: 4,383
Touchdowns: 32

Two people said an arrest warrant charging Stallworth, 28, with DUI manslaughter will be filed Wednesday in the March 14 accident that killed 59-year-old Mario Reyes. The people requested anonymity because the charges haven't been announced.
Click to expand...

Full story here: AP sources: Browns' Stallworth will be charged with DUI manslaughter

I'm wondering if this will get the same amount of uproar that Mike Vick killing dogs did?
 
Considering its been known for a while now that he was drunk when he got in that accident, I would say no. Its not going to be nearly the story Michael Vick was.
 
WI Crippler said:
Considering its been known for a while now that he was drunk when he got in that accident, I would say no. Its not going to be nearly the story Michael Vick was.
Click to expand...

That's sad to me. It's just like Leonard Little killing a woman in a DUI accident and then a few years later getting another DUI, but there was nothing. But god forbid someone kills a dog.

This is exactly why this country is falling apart. People care more about animals than they do people.
 
Gibberish said:
Perhaps if he was running a DUI ring of other Drunk drivers who all commit manslaughter while driving this would be up there with Vick.
Click to expand...

So your saying a dog fighting ring is morally worse than killing a human being?
 
Tucker Case said:
Full story here: AP sources: Browns' Stallworth will be charged with DUI manslaughter

I'm wondering if this will get the same amount of uproar that Mike Vick killing dogs did?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say "killing someone" is morally better than killing dogs. However, I think someone who purposefully and routinely tortures or oversees the torture of some kind of being while subjecting said things to undue amounts of punishment for the perverse pleasure of others and for his own financial well being is morally worse than someone that got drunk, made an extremely bad decision, and ended up with extremely sad consequences.

I think in general DUI manslaughter should carry a stiffer penalty than gambling charges. I think morally, Mike Vick is the worse person.

So more to the point, running an illegal dog fighting ring is morally worse than accidently killing someone (manslaughter) but significantly less morally offensive than actual murder.
 
Last edited:
Zyphlin said:
So more to the point, running an illegal dog fighting ring is morally worse than accidently killing someone (manslaughter) but significantly less morally offensive than actual murder.
Click to expand...

I was just about to type in the same thing.
 
Tucker Case said:
So your saying a dog fighting ring is morally worse than killing a human being?
Click to expand...

No, I am saying someone consciously breaking the law through months or years of funding an illegal fighting rings is criminally worse than someone who drunkenly kills another human being in a car accident.

One is a decided and thought out criminal activity, the other is a stupid mistake.
 
It will be less of a story because Stallworth is not a household name or idol to as many kids as Vick was.
 
Tucker Case said:
I'm wondering if this will get the same amount of uproar that Mike Vick killing dogs did?
Click to expand...

To answer you main question though.

No, for a variety of reasons.

Donte Stallworth is not nearly the big name that Mike Vick was. Vick was one of the NFL's top 10 names if not top 5 at the time of his issue.

Donte Stallworth did not have the history of extremely questionable behavior Mike Vick had (marijuana use, flicking off the fans, etc)

Donte Stallworth wasn't on TV prior to it say no matter what "everybody gonna still love Donte Stallworth" and claiming his innocence over and over.

Donte Stallworth doesn't have the amount of endorsements to lose that Mike Vick had.

MADD is generally not as high profile of an organization for making a big news blitz as Peta is.

To my knowledge, this was a one time seeming occurance for Stallworth (though I do doubt its his only time driving drunk), where as Mike Vicks crime seemed to be doing on for years.

Sadly, many people in this country have driven before at some point of intoxication. Few have financially backed the fighting to the death of two dogs or oversaw/participated in the electricuting or beating to death of a canine.

"Person killed by Drunk Driving" is simply not as "sexy" (it pains me to need to use that work to describe this) of a news story as "Illegal dog fighting gamblign ring".

So for those, and likely other reasons, no. This will not be made as big of a deal as Mike Vick.
 
Tucker Case said:
Full story here: AP sources: Browns' Stallworth will be charged with DUI manslaughter

I'm wondering if this will get the same amount of uproar that Mike Vick killing dogs did?
Click to expand...
Why would it? No, he shouldn't have been driving drunk but, the incident itself was an accident. Michael Vick's dogfighting operation was deliberate.

Driving drunk is a moronic thing to do, and he should pay dearly for the life he took, but a DUI does not earn nearly the moral opprobrium of a dogfighting operation.
 
Tucker Case said:
That's sad to me. It's just like Leonard Little killing a woman in a DUI accident and then a few years later getting another DUI, but there was nothing. But god forbid someone kills a dog.

This is exactly why this country is falling apart. People care more about animals than they do people.
Click to expand...

Mike Florio is an attorney who also happens to own ProFootballTalk.com.

He sums up the comparison you made quite nicely here:

ProFootballTalk.com - Lovie Smith Supports Vick’s Return
 
celticlord said:
Driving drunk is a moronic thing to do, and he should pay dearly for the life he took, but a DUI does not earn nearly the moral opprobrium of a dogfighting operation.
Click to expand...

What type of punishment do you think he deserves? I'm curious to see people's opinions here.
 
Middleground said:
What type of punishment do you think he deserves? I'm curious to see people's opinions here.
Click to expand...
Personally, I'd say he should provide for the guy's family....the money won't replace the man, but having him shoulder some of the man's responsibilities is definitely moving in the direction of justice.
 
Here's the thing, Mike Vick could've intentionally killed a million dogs. He could've butt-raped an Emu, or caused the extinction of the Polar Bear for all I care and it wouldn't be nearly as bad as what happened here.

They are ANIMALS. Intentionally killing them is, well, it's basically HUNTING. the only reason we treat Vick like a criminal in this case is because we have an irrational love for dogs.

Should we ban mousetraps, or even better, prosecute people for setting them? Well it is the premeditated TORTURE of another creature, isn't it? Why is it OK to snap the spine of a mouse, but not drown a dog?

I say what Mike Vick did was nothing by comparison. He could come out of jail and start doing it all again, and I think that THEN he would deserve to get the punishment that he originally received. Then the uproar that ocured from the first incident would actually be warranted.

But if Dante Stalworth ever gets another DUI after this, as Leonard Little did after HIS fatal DUI accident (Noticed that little tidbit of info was missing from that Lawyers post, Gotta Hurt) I think he should never walk free again.


My issue is that there is almost nothing about this.

While Dante Stallworth is not as big of a name as Vick is, that should really be irrelevant.

Because Mario Reyes is a much bigger name that Fido or Spot.

That's the real issue. Vick engaged in what really amounts to an almost victimless crime.
 
Gibberish said:
No, I am saying someone consciously breaking the law through months or years of funding an illegal fighting rings is criminally worse than someone who drunkenly kills another human being in a car accident.

One is a decided and thought out criminal activity, the other is a stupid mistake.
Click to expand...

At .126, it's a thought out criminal activity. If his BAC were higher or lower, I'd buy that it was just a mistake as the impairment would be greater enough or low enough to make the wrong decision by "mistake", but .126 is right at the level where a person is impaired enough to know not to drive, but not so impaired that they are completely beyond making a conscious decision.
 
Tucker Case said:
At .126, it's a thought out criminal activity. If his BAC were higher or lower, I'd buy that it was just a mistake as the impairment would be greater enough or low enough to make the wrong decision by "mistake", but .126 is right at the level where a person is impaired enough to know not to drive, but not so impaired that they are completely beyond making a conscious decision.
Click to expand...
So your taking the stance that he pre-meditated the murder by knowingly drinking and driving?

Your conclusion on impairment is pure speculation. You have no idea what his impairment level was. The fact is after a single drink your decisions and reflexes go down hill and continue to drop the more your drink.
 
Tucker Case said:
At .126, it's a thought out criminal activity. If his BAC were higher or lower, I'd buy that it was just a mistake as the impairment would be greater enough or low enough to make the wrong decision by "mistake", but .126 is right at the level where a person is impaired enough to know not to drive, but not so impaired that they are completely beyond making a conscious decision.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. This is ridiculous. It's like charging road rage-ers with 1st degree murder. Absolutely not, miscarriage of justice if it happens. There is no premeditated murder, there is not intent to kill or even harm. Killing someone while drunk driving is manslaughter and absolutely no form of murder. Ok, maybe not absolutely. Maybe someone wanted to kill someone, and got drunk then mowed them down in a car. Then you could have murder. But under almost all DUI circumstances, it's manslaughter at most.
 
Gibberish said:
So your taking the stance that he pre-meditated the murder by knowingly drinking and driving?
Click to expand...

No. I'm saying the criminal activity (driving drunk) that led to the manslaughter was pre-meditated. It's not a stupid mistake, or "just an accident". It's engaging in a criminal activity that led to the death of others. He's being charged appropriately for his crime.

Your conclusion on impairment is pure speculation. You have no idea what his impairment level was. The fact is after a single drink your decisions and reflexes go down hill and continue to drop the more your drink.
Click to expand...

He was aware enough to be helpful on the scene. I'm not speculating at all.
 
Ikari said:
Absolutely not. This is ridiculous. It's like charging road rage-ers with 1st degree murder. Absolutely not, miscarriage of justice if it happens. There is no premeditated murder, there is not intent to kill or even harm. Killing someone while drunk driving is manslaughter and absolutely no form of murder. Ok, maybe not absolutely. Maybe someone wanted to kill someone, and got drunk then mowed them down in a car. Then you could have murder. But under almost all DUI circumstances, it's manslaughter at most.
Click to expand...

What the **** are you on about? When did I ever say he should be charged with premeditated murder?

I say he willingly committed a crime. And he did. He drove drunk. Did everyone forget that DUI is a ****ing crime?

While he was in the ACT of committing that WILLFUL crime, he killed someone. Is it your contention that he did not willfully drive drunk?

That would be the ridiculous comment, not mine.
 
Tucker Case said:
No. I'm saying the criminal activity (driving drunk) that led to the manslaughter was pre-meditated. It's not a stupid mistake, or "just an accident". It's engaging in a criminal activity that led to the death of others. He's being charged appropriately for his crime.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing against that. He broke the law and someone died because of it. He should be charged fully.

Actually I don't know what we are arguing about any more? lol
 
Gibberish said:
I'm not arguing against that. He broke the law and someone died because of it. He should be charged fully.

Actually I don't know what we are arguing about any more? lol
Click to expand...

I've been arguing that what Stalworth did is much, much worse than what Vick did, but there is no concerted uproar and calls for his head as there were for Vick.

I find that tremendously distrubing.

Edit: And you had said "The other is just a stupid mistake" A DUI killing is not "just a stupid mistake". It's a thought-out criminal mistake.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom