30 Days In Prison For Drunk-Driving Death

[FSTargetDrone]

Awhile back there was some brief discussion in OT's most recent Superbowl thread about an professional American Football player named Donte' Stallworth who struck and killed a man while he (Stallworth) was allegedly driving while intoxicated.

Well, Stallworth plead guilty to DUI manslaughter and received a sentence of 30 days in prison:

Browns' Stallworth pleads guilty and gets 30 days

By CURT ANDERSON – 45 minutes ago

MIAMI (AP) — Cleveland Browns wide receiver Donte' Stallworth took full responsibility for killing a pedestrian while driving drunk in Florida and began serving a 30-day jail sentence Tuesday after he pleaded guilty to DUI manslaughter.

Stallworth also reached a confidential financial settlement to avoid a potential lawsuit from the family of 59-year-old Mario Reyes, according to Stallworth attorney Christopher Lyons. Reyes was struck and killed March 14 by Stallworth, who was driving his black 2005 Bentley after a night drinking at a swanky hotel bar.

Stallworth, 28, told Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Dennis Murphy that he hopes to get involved in drunken driving education programs.

"I accept full responsibility for this horrible tragedy," said Stallworth, who was accompanied at the hearing by his parents, siblings and other supporters. "I will bear this burden for the rest of my life."

Stallworth faced 15 years in prison. After his release from jail, Stallworth must serve two years of house arrest and spend eight years on probation.

The NFL has said it will review the matter for possible disciplinary action. Lyons said the plea agreement will allow Stallworth to resume his football career.

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.

Miami-Dade State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle cited Stallworth's lack of previous criminal record, cooperation with police and willingness to accept responsibility as factors in the plea deal. Rundle also said the Reyes family — particularly the victim's 15-year-old daughter — wanted the case resolved to avoid any more pain.

"For all of these reasons, a just resolution of this case has been reached," Rundle said.

None of the Reyes family attended the hearing. Their attorney, Rodolfo Suarez, read a statement saying the family wants to "bring closure to this emotional and tragic event." Suarez was not immediately available to comment after the hearing.

After a night drinking at a bar in Miami Beach's Fountainebleau hotel, police said Stallworth hit Reyes, a construction crane operator who was rushing to catch a bus after finishing his shift around 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 signed a seven-year, $35 million contract with the Browns before last season but was injured much of the year. The California native and University of Tennessee college star has also played in the NFL for New England, Philadelphia and New Orleans.

The night before the crash, Stallworth earned a $4.5 million roster bonus from the Browns.

David Cornwell, a Stallworth attorney handling the NFL situation, said he has kept top league officials apprised of the case.

"Whenever it is appropriate to do so, we are prepared to discuss the circumstances under which Donte' will resume his career," Cornwell said.

30 days of hard time for killing someone while driving drunk. Look at the blood-alcohol levels he had after the accident. He can flash all the lights he wants and yes the guy crossing the street may not have been in a crosswalk, but 30 days? Something about that seems grossly insufficient.

[chitoryu12]

Who the fuck cares if he flashed his lights? Didn't he hear about, you know, the BRAKES? Flashing the lights doesn't give you carte blanche to run over whoever the fuck you want while speeding drunk.

But of course, he was drunk, and therefore not totally responsible, right?

Can't believe I've heard that fucking excuse before.

[Sea Skimmer]

30 days is too low, it should be a couple years, but many factors are at work here. He blew .126, and Florida has a tiered system under which the really major penalties don’t kick in until you blow .15 or higher, which is typical for most states. Its not like most states ever wanted a .08 limit in the first place, but MADD blackmailed enough congressmen to get congress to blackmail all the states into lower it. So everyone lowered it, and then introduced tiers as a big fuck you. Combined that with the guy actually stopping, and confessing out of hand and he was already setup for a reduced sentence long before lawyers got involved. Add in the victims family wanting quick closure and this is what you get.

He’s also losing his drivers license for life, which to me is far more meaningful then any prison sentence. Two years of house arrest after that too, which yeah, no great burden on him if he has millions of dollars to enjoy at home but it still is punishment, and more importantly, Florida is broke and can’t afford to incarcerated anymore people for long sentences at the moment. Expect to see much more of this in the future.

[Havok]

So Stallworth gets 30 days for killing a man, and Vick got almost two years for killing some dogs.

[Sea Skimmer]

Well that’s what we get for having a legal system based on lawyers rather then law. DUI lawyers can pull off almost anything if you can pony up the money and it’s a first offense.

[Death from the Sea]

Well that’s what we get for having a legal system based on lawyers rather then law. DUI lawyers can pull off almost anything if you can pony up the money and it’s a first offense.

you are 100% correct on that. DWI lawyers are now up there with the "personal injury attorneys" for advertising on radio and tv.

[Sea Skimmer]

Cool Florida is nice enough to put its DUI laws online in detail
http://www.flhsmv.gov/ddl/duilaws.html

DUI/Manslaughter: Second Degree Felony (not more than $10,000 fine and/or 15 years imprisonment).

[Dark Flame]

So Stallworth gets 30 days for killing a man, and Vick got almost two years for killing some dogs.

Except one has intent and malice involved, the other has stupidity and negligence. To me, having intent is a big deal. Vick needed punished because he willfully did something to maim and kill. Stallworth is an idiot, but he never intended to kill anyone. He was also cooperative with police, he was remorseful, and he took full responsibility.

All of this despite the fact that he might have been able to get out of the charges. The guy wasn't in a crosswalk and was (reportedly) running into the intersection. If he had fought this, he might have gotten off without anything. Instead, he manned up and took his punishment. As mentioned before, he's got two years of house arrest, his driver's license is gone, he has 8 years of probation, and 1000 hours of community service. Imagine, instead of locking up a remorseful man, we put him to work in society! He's also said he wants to contribute to drunk-driving education.

I think this is the right thing to do.

[Kamakazie Sith]

30 days is too low, it should be a couple years, but many factors are at work here. He blew .126, and Florida has a tiered system under which the really major penalties don’t kick in until you blow .15 or higher, which is typical for most states. Its not like most states ever wanted a .08 limit in the first place, but MADD blackmailed enough congressmen to get congress to blackmail all the states into lower it. So everyone lowered it, and then introduced tiers as a big fuck you. Combined that with the guy actually stopping, and confessing out of hand and he was already setup for a reduced sentence long before lawyers got involved. Add in the victims family wanting quick closure and this is what you get.

He’s also losing his drivers license for life, which to me is far more meaningful then any prison sentence. Two years of house arrest after that too, which yeah, no great burden on him if he has millions of dollars to enjoy at home but it still is punishment, and more importantly, Florida is broke and can’t afford to incarcerated anymore people for long sentences at the moment. Expect to see much more of this in the future.

Eh I think taking someones drivers license is a slap on the wrist. In this case his car should become the property of the state and it auctioned off with the proceeds going to some sort of victims fund. That would get peoples attention real quick with DUIs.

[Sea Skimmer]

Eh I think taking someones drivers license is a slap on the wrist. In this case his car should become the property of the state and it auctioned off with the proceeds going to some sort of victims fund. That would get peoples attention real quick with DUIs.

New York City does that, except they pocket the money. Couple other places do too, and even more have mandatory impoundment times (usually 30 days) for any car from a DUI that gets towed. 75 bucks daily storage for 30 days is a couple grand out of hand. And for all that, not much sign such measures have any affect at all on DUI rates. That shouldn’t be surprising either, because if someone thought ahead enough to think hey, driving drunk might mean I might lose my car… well that person is already probably also already thinking ahead enough not to be driving drunk anyway.

I mean hell, you are already deciding you don’t care that much about your own life or the chance of wrecking your car, or of killing someone else or going to jail, or having to pay big fines (you can bet this guy got fines, you can never escape thousands of dollars in fines even for a first offense) or anything like that. If you ignore all that why is the government possibly seizing your car going to be that big a deal?

[PeZook]

That's par de course here. You can get 6 months to 8 years for vehicular manslaughter over here, the minimum sentence is upped to 9 months is you're drunk. Since he stopped and owned up to everything, it's not particularly horrible.

Heck, in Poland the legal blood level is 0.2 promiles, so in here, he technically wouldn't be drunk

[LaCroix]

What I can't understand is whay he was charged with DUI?
You could get that alcohol levels (0.12 promille) with an bad apple! Drinking an half litre of beer(5% alc) gives you .2 to .3 promille, so he had not even a full glass of beer!

In my opinion, he weaseled himself out of a proper manslaughter/murder conviction by claiming to be under influence. At 0.12, you are NOT that affected that you aren't able to drive! Medical studies were made and found that light influence starts around .3 %o

Also, in my opinion, UI charges should be always higher than normal charges. If you're stupid enough to get drunk, you shouldn't be able to use that as an excuse for the stupid things you do WHILE you're drunk.

[Dark Lord of the Bith]

What I can't understand is whay he was charged with DUI?
You could get that alcohol levels (0.12 promille) with an bad apple! Drinking an half litre of beer(5% alc) gives you .2 to .3 promille, so he had not even a full glass of beer!

In my opinion, he weaseled himself out of a proper manslaughter/murder conviction by claiming to be under influence. At 0.12, you are NOT that affected that you aren't able to drive! Medical studies were made and found that light influence starts around .3 %o

Also, in my opinion, UI charges should be always higher than normal charges. If you're stupid enough to get drunk, you shouldn't be able to use that as an excuse for the stupid things you do WHILE you're drunk.

That's .126 per cent, which is certainly enough to compromise your abilities to drive. You're off by an order of magnitude.

[Mr. Coffee]

Heck, in Poland the legal blood level is 0.2 promiles, so in here, he technically wouldn't be drunk

I guess you're talking about a different scale then Blood Alcohol Content. According to Wiki the BAC limit for Poland is 0.02%. Here in the US it's 0.08%. So this guy having a 0.126% BAC puts him well above the legal limit.

What I can't understand is whay he was charged with DUI?
You could get that alcohol levels (0.12 promille) with an bad apple! Drinking an half litre of beer(5% alc) gives you .2 to .3 promille, so he had not even a full glass of beer!

Yeah, you're definitely talking about a different scale then we are. A BAC of .3% or higher is reaching into potentially lethal alcohol poisoning levels. Anything more than 0.4% is generally enough to kill most people.

[LaCroix]

Oh, my bad. It's usual practice here that promille values are stated in correllation to DUI. Thank you for pointing that out.

I stand corrected. 1.2 %o is real DUI. But I still stand by my last statement. Influence should not be an excuse, it should be an aggravation.

[Wing Commander MAD]

Havok, when Stallworth goes and pits people in gladiatorial matches you can get back to comparing the sentences for killing animals and killing people.

Anyway, I am actually impressed that he lost his license permanently. Here's a question though, since states issue drivers licenses here in the U.S. does this mean he can never get one in another state? I would assume it would be common practice that if your license was revoked that other states wouldn't give you one as well, but hypothetically could say Georgia give him a license? This would seem to be one of those murky areas where having a national regulation of an activity that easily transends state borders would make sense, though I am not really aware of any kind of federal level regulation of this sort.

[Mr. Coffee]

Anyway, I am actually impressed that he lost his license permanently. Here's a question though, since states issue drivers licenses here in the U.S. does this mean he can never get one in another state? I would assume it would be common practice that if your license was revoked that other states wouldn't give you one as well, but hypothetically could say Georgia give him a license? This would seem to be one of those murky areas where having a national regulation of an activity that easily transends state borders would make sense, though I am not really aware of any kind of federal level regulation of this sort.

As far as I know he can't go to another state and get his license. Last time I checked all the states are tied together as far as DUI and drivers licensing information goes, so even if he moved to ass end of Alaska he'd still be unable to obtain a license for at least five years (at which time he can aplly for a hardship license to go to and from work).

[PeZook]

I guess you're talking about a different scale then Blood Alcohol Content. According to Wiki the BAC limit for Poland is 0.02%. Here in the US it's 0.08%. So this guy having a 0.126% BAC puts him well above the legal limit.

Same measure, different unit, yeah. We use promilles, which is why I assumed the article does, too, and was shocked and amazed at the incredibly strict BAC regulations in Florida

Yeah, re-reading that, 0.126 PERCENT is rather high, well into "impaired" category, which I think is pretty self-evident, anyway: he was flashing his lights, yet did not think to brake...

Yeah, you're definitely talking about a different scale then we are. A BAC of .3% or higher is reaching into potentially lethal alcohol poisoning levels. Anything more than 0.4% is generally enough to kill most people.

Yup, the scale in Europe is moved by one zero. Seems to be a very common trend

[Kamakazie Sith]

Eh I think taking someones drivers license is a slap on the wrist. In this case his car should become the property of the state and it auctioned off with the proceeds going to some sort of victims fund. That would get peoples attention real quick with DUIs.

New York City does that, except they pocket the money. Couple other places do too, and even more have mandatory impoundment times (usually 30 days) for any car from a DUI that gets towed. 75 bucks daily storage for 30 days is a couple grand out of hand. And for all that, not much sign such measures have any affect at all on DUI rates. That shouldn’t be surprising either, because if someone thought ahead enough to think hey, driving drunk might mean I might lose my car… well that person is already probably also already thinking ahead enough not to be driving drunk anyway.

I mean hell, you are already deciding you don’t care that much about your own life or the chance of wrecking your car, or of killing someone else or going to jail, or having to pay big fines (you can bet this guy got fines, you can never escape thousands of dollars in fines even for a first offense) or anything like that. If you ignore all that why is the government possibly seizing your car going to be that big a deal?

I don't care if it's a big deal to them or not. It means they'll have to buy another car if they want to drive again. Which is a hell of a lot more effective in preventing repeat offenders than simply revoking their license and allowing them to get their car back out of impound.

[FSTargetDrone]

Until I see somewhere that witnesses saw him flash his lights, we just have his word for that.

In any case, what difference does it make? He chose to drink and then he chose to get behind the wheel in an impaired state. He should know full well that driving in that condition means reaction times are slowed. He killed someone after leaving the bar and he now gets to cool his heels in jail for a whole month. Yeah, it's nice and all that he feels bad about it, but that shouldn't get him out of having to serve more time. I don't know how much is "enough" and yes, intent is important, but it seems this is too small a penalty given that he killed someone.

The losing his license doesn't impress me because he is a man of means and can afford to have someone drive him around for the rest of his life.

[Havok]

So Stallworth gets 30 days for killing a man, and Vick got almost two years for killing some dogs.

Except one has intent and malice involved, the other has stupidity and negligence. To me, having intent is a big deal. Vick needed punished because he willfully did something to maim and kill. Stallworth is an idiot, but he never intended to kill anyone. He was also cooperative with police, he was remorseful, and he took full responsibility.

Bull and shit. Stallworth knew he was going to be drinking and knew he was going to be driving. "Oh officer, I just shot my gun at random. I never intended to kill anyone."

Havok, when Stallworth goes and pits people in gladiatorial matches you can get back to comparing the sentences for killing animals and killing people.

Do you honestly think those are even remotely comparable? You are a fucking idiot.

[Darth Wong]

Until I see somewhere that witnesses saw him flash his lights, we just have his word for that.

Even if he did, it sounds pretty fishy. If he had time to flash his lights, he had time to hit the brakes.

However, it's also entirely possible that the guy just stepped out into the road right in front of his car, and he flashed his lights because he wanted to keep the guy from stepping into the road. I didn't bother following this case.

I've seen people before who just walk right into traffic. I saw one woman talking on a cell-phone just march right through a red light as if it wasn't there, and she almost caused an accident. Sometimes, you'll see someone walking toward an intersection like that and you'll assume right till the last moment that they will behave normally and stop before stepping into traffic.

Having said all that, I'm not particularly inclined to give this guy the benefit of the doubt because he was driving drunk. Even if we will never know precisely what happened that night, we do know that the guy was sufficiently apathetic toward the safety of other human beings that he drove drunk, and should be punished accordingly.

[Darth Wong]

So Stallworth gets 30 days for killing a man, and Vick got almost two years for killing some dogs.

Generally speaking, negligence is given less harsh punishment than cruelty. I don't think it's meant to be a statement on the relative value we place on human life and canine life. If he had run over someone's dog while driving drunk, he wouldn't be getting even this much punishment.

[Havok]

So Stallworth gets 30 days for killing a man, and Vick got almost two years for killing some dogs.

Generally speaking, negligence is given less harsh punishment than cruelty. I don't think it's meant to be a statement on the relative value we place on human life and canine life. If he had run over someone's dog while driving drunk, he wouldn't be getting even this much punishment.

I don't think it's meant to be a statement either, but it sure comes off as one. Not necessarily on lives and value, but on what we find acceptable.
"Drunk driving and killing someone? Oh that is an accident and it could happen to me one day while I am drinking and driving. Fighting and killing dogs? Despicable! I would never do that!"

[lance]

It might be worth noting that it is entirely possible for him to not have gotten any jail time at all, and only a fine with how Florida's laws are