http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/other/sfl-dolphins-nfl-roundup-s061909sbjun19,0,7902533.story How long you guys think he will be suspended for?
I sure wouldn't want some one that drives drunk and kills some one on my team. Anyone stupid enough to drive drunk is stupid IMO.
Well the difference between him and the rest is he drove about 7 hours after he stopped drinking (his last drink was at midnight I believe) so I don't think it's fair to call him a P.O.S. drunk driver. Unfortunately he took a life away from someone, but that person also jaywalked on a busy street. Jaywalking is illegal for one and well, it's not like he was crossing an empty street. I feel for the man's family, but I also look at it like this... If I crossed a busy street, in Florida of all places, without using a crosswalk and I get hit... that's my own damn fault for not being smart enough to use a crosswalk. The ONLY and I mean ONLY reason why Stallworth is getting anything here is because his BAC was .14 so twice as much as it's suppose to be. Now if he was drinking and drove instantly after, then yes... call him what you want, stupid, idiotic, a moron... whatever. But six to seven hours after the fact? C'mon... America is a do as I say not as I do type country and if something like Stallworth's sentence pisses you off... I think it's time we look into our country's hypocritical mindset first.
Goodell is the downpressor man - I think he gets suspended until he's off his house arrest. That's 2 years, I believe.
Don't agree. I never called him a pos, just dumb. We know the laws, we know what driving while drunk can do, we know what just speeding can do. I used to drink, years ago. I drove, I'm ashamed to say. Never killed anyone, but, hey I knew what I was doing. Whether it was his fault or the jaywalker makes no difference. They were both wrong. But one lost their life. I'm not mad about it. And this country and laws have always been hypocritical. I'm not a hypocrit, IMO drinking and driving is wrong, no matter how people try to justify it.
I didn't mean to say you were any of those things, called him a POS, or anything, simply generalizing. Personally I feel that Stallworth had enough judgment to not flee the scene, not drive drunk directly after drinking, and admit he made a mistake and not deny it. I feel that Stallworth felt that 6-7 hours after drinking, he would be fine. Obviously he was wrong, simple mistake. I don't feel he was drinking and drive.... to be it's more... drinking.... then driving 6 to 7 hours after drinking. Stallworth is also ashamed, he's said it.. Stallworth was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time, that's all it amounts to IMO. EDIT: And for the record, I think Stallworth got a fair sentence for what happened... But if it were up to me considering the circumstances, I would have had him settle with the family, community service, and charge him with DUI.
I agree completely with your edit. There should be some compensation for the persons death. I just feel sometimes that if they have money or are famous, they don't get what the rest of us would. I always think of oj, robert blake and people like that. That basically just walk away. Where if it were one of us they'd bury us. I'm glad he manned up and I hope he is really sincere. I also agree with "the wrong place at the wrong time" too. But isn't that how any mistakes, crimes or whatever happen?
I think it depends on the circumstances. I mean, Mike Vick committed a crime but I don't think we can use the wrong place at the wrong time excuse. I mean, athletes like OJ... they got away with crap for being an athlete, yeah... But OJ intentionally killed a human... There is some good and some bad in having money. For having money, Stallworth may have gotten a lighter sentence, but he got a hell lot more dirty looks from society than any regular joe would get because of the media. Money is one of those things that work both ways, good and bad.
Why are you so sure that he waited 6-7 hours before driving? Actually I had read that his BAC was.126. Do you realize that if your BAC is .126 you are trashed? I'm talking slurred speech, staggering drunk. If you're that drunk you have no business getting behind the wheel - regardless of how long it's been since you had your last drink. And please do not believe he didn't know he was over the limit. If everything is spinning in front of you, then you know you're drunk. Additionally, you are right. The reason he's in trouble is because he was drunk. If you're driving and you are drunk you are in the wrong - period. You kill a pedestrian or commit any other crime you have aggravated the level of your transgression.
He finished his drink according to one of the first articles I read earlier this year at around midnight. You don't have to take my word, but I'm not some random chump saying this. 7 hours after his last drink the room isn't going to be spinning unless he was TRASHED. I've seen many people to the point to where they are trashed... I highly doubt Stallworth was to that point. Your BAC will be higher hours after your "drunkness" is gone than it was when you were slurring your words and laughing at everything. In fact, "12.6 BAC means you are trashed" is such a horrible generalization because you are not taking into account genetics, body type, gender, etc.
I can take your word that that is what you read. No problem there. However my question was - why are you so sure this is true? His lawyer made a statement before a toxocology report proved otherwise that Stallworth had not been drinking when this happened. If the information that you are going on was made during his attorney's initial statement then it may not be accurate. Why do you highly doubt Stallworth was to the point where he was slurring his words and staggering? His BAC was .126 (not 1.26 1.26 you would be long dead) As to your assertion that BAC goes up hours after you've stopped drinking you're mistaken. Saying you're are trashed with a BAC of .126 is true. It's not a horrible generalization. It's true. Sorry I almost forgot BAC is measured in terms of mass per volume which does take into consideration a person's size. If you're interested here is a link to a site that will tell you what you want to know about Blood Alcohol Content. Notice that the last paragraph on the welcome page specifically states.. " There is only thing that lowers your blood alcohol content – time".. In other words with the passing of time it decreases, not increases. http://www.bloodalcoholcontent.org/index.html
I suppose it seems believable to me. BAC is measured in mass per volume, yes... But you can't be serious that you think it means the same thing for every person. It's similar to someone's BMI in that there is no flexibility whatsoever, IMO.
No of course not, the only absolute is that we all die eventually. It doesn't take into account that a very heavy drinker needs more alcohol etc.. However, it's considered an accurate enough indicator that it's acceptable as evidence in a court of law. And I've got to say with all the watchdog agencies such as the ACLU and others, if there was a significant enough discrepancy then measuring BAC wouldn't be accepted as evidence.
I don't know that BAC is pretty high, I'd say he was pretty drunk. That in and of itself makes it hard to believe that he would have killed that man if he was sober. I think you're making a lot of assumptions here, they could be true or not but at the end of the day we know two things to be fact: -Stallworth drove with a BAC that was very high, high enough to assume he was pretty damn drunk -Someone died by being hit with his car while he was drunk I think the benefit of the doubt goes out the window for the most part there. If you or I hit someone, whether they were actually jaywalking or not, with a BAC that high we'd be doing some serious jailtime. He was able to settle with the family and that got him a pretty good plea deal. I do think you have to take intent into judging a crime, Stallworth certainly didn't get into a car with the intent of harming anyone which to me does make it a little more sympathetic than someone like Vick choosing to murder animals. However driving that drunk and causing someone's death deserves a very long suspension by Goodell, if I was him I'd suspend him for a minimum of a year possibly two.
wow, vehicular manslaughter in florida only gets you 30 days in the can? regarding the talk though, it is a "do as i say, not as i do mentality", youre right GIK. but people just keep on killing folks when they get behind the wheel after drinking. id be surprised if in a few years, they outlawed having a single drink and driving. i just dont get the verdict though. a different person for the same charge could get 15 years in some states.
The fact that the person was jaywalking on a busy highway had something to do with it, IMO. I still don't understand how some sit here and act as if he drank a 12 pack and then directly got into his vehicle. From my knowledge that just isn't the case. I mean, most of you can honestly say you go out for a night of drinking, quit at midnight or so... wake up at 7AM and say that you don't feel a thing... but your BAC says you do. I'm not saying what he did was right by any means, just trying to justify a decent reason why Stallworth should be categorized with 95% of the 'drunk drivers' out there.
95% of drunk/impaired drivers dont end up killing people. his bac, was double the limit. him stopping drinking at midnight is heresay. i highly doubt he drank, had a good nights sleep to sleep it off, then drove home. he was partying all night and slowed down at a pace that just was not good enough. he's lucky he's not going away for years. many people do, despite thier intentions. this isnt 1973. if you go out AT ALL, and plan on having so much as 2 glasses of wine, you shouldnt consider driving. some people cant handle it, make even the slightest errors in judgement, and folks end up dead. so all people basically need to be held accountable and stop doing it.
I dont understand if he waited 7 hours how he would know he was still over the legal limit. I know if I drank I'd drive 7 hours after without thinking twice.
A friend of mine was killed last night because of a drunk driver. It made me realize something... Drunk driving happens way to frequently... Harsher punishments need to be issued. I for one hope Stallworth never plays another down in the NFL again. There no excuse for what he has done...The person's life he took is over, yet after a few years or so his life gets back to normal. Soon he will be done with his probation, and everything else, and can live his life...I don't see the justice in that...
I'm sorry for your loss JT. However it doesn't look as if the facts of the case show him to be negligent at all. He waited SEVEN hours after drinking, thought he was okay, and the person who died was also doing something illegal because it is DANGEROUS and puts them in position to be hurt/killed.
He was till over the legal limit. He must of had a lot to drink to still be drunk after seven hours, You are an NFL player making millions, call a cab... Be responsible. If you drink that much, then just don't drive, don't take a chance, even if you are fine. This risk is not worth it
Yeah but you don't have to feel drunk to be over the limit. He most likely felt perfectly fine, maybe he should have one of those personal breath tester things that would have possibly made a difference, and I think anyone who drinks often should have one. But even after he hit the guy he showed very good judgement in staying on the scene, cooperating, things a drunk person might not do. I don't think theres any question he was over the limit, but at the same time I don't think he was falling over/slurred talking/blurred vision drunk. Theres really no way to know whether his drinking actually had anything to do with the death, seeing as the other guy was also in the fault. Sadly he has to pay for a small crime with his life.
sorry for your loss JT. the truth is, theres no one right, consistent way with drinking an driving. one night, you expel the booze no problem in 4 hours, the next it stays in your system for 12. one night, it takes you 2 beverages to get intoxicated, the next its 8. its a totally imperfect science, and people are simply going to go out and screw up...and it happens all the damn time. theres no room for *****-footing, because some a-hole will be on the crap end of luck, killing another person...unintentionally. and because of those few who go out and kill people, like stallworth, we should just not permit drinking and driving. if theres any trace of booze in your blood, its a crime. it takes all the guess work out of it for those who's guesses ended up killing other people. and we throw the blanket over society. wheher you can handle your booze or not, think you know your system, whatever. bottom line is less will people die.
No, not really. If a guy is going 100 MPH over the speed limit I know it has something to do with his drinking. If a guy is driving on the wrong side of the road, I know it's because of his drinking. I havent seen anything that says Stallworth was driving poorly or unsafely. The only thing that could have been down slightly is reaction time, and we can't say that would have saved this person.
The person who died would have been a lot safer if Stallworth was not drunk. They have a legal limit for a reason. If your over the limit you should not be driving. He was and it cost someone his life.
and that certainly is enough to be the difference between life and death. you slam on the phenomenal brakes of a bentley, if you are alert, and it could mean the difference between life and death. when sober, it takes milliseconds to create an accident. its dangerous enough straight, let alone being tired, high or drunk
exactly. There is a good chance that if Stallworth was sober the man would still be alive, and if he never drove that night because he drank to much, he would still be alive
And if the victim wasn't late for work or decided to not be in a rush and jaywalk across a busy street... things would be different too. We can play these what if games, but both did illegal things and one shouldn't just automatically cancel the other out.
First of all I want to say this: His BAC was reportedly .126. That being the case is enough to make the statement that he was driving poorly and/or unsafely. At that level, you are slurring your words, staggering and your reaction time has slowed. In addition it was also reported that he didn't brake when he saw the guy - he started flashing his lights instead. That tells me that his judgment was impaired. If you have time to flash your lights you could have used your brakes instead. Why do you say he most likely felt fine? Because he got behind the wheel drunk? This is something that an awful lot of people do every single day. They're drunk. They know they're drunk and they drive anyway hoping they'll get to their destination without any problems. BAC is measured either as a percentage by mass, or by mass per volume. For example, a BAC of 0.20% means 2 grams of alcohol per 1000 grams of an individual's blood. Stallworth had just over 1 gram of alcohol per 1000 grams of blood in his system. Yeah he felt fine, but he didn't feel sober. And that is a very safe assumption on my part. Now once you stop drinking your BAC will begin to decrease. A person excretes the alcohol through their pores and urine. With this in mind is it really all that plausible to believe that Stallworth waited 7 hours after his last drink before driving his car? You also mentioned that maybe he should have used a breathalyzer on himself before he drove. Maybe...but myself I doubt that would have stopped him. If you're old enough to drink then you're old enough to know your limits. In fact the responsible thing to do is to err on the side of caution. My wife's family tends to drink quite a bit at family gatherings. She also tends to drink when she goes out with her friends. My wife is also a nurse and she knows that if she gets a DUI she jeopardizes her nursing license. When she's had more that a couple, guess what? I drive - we agree on that and she expects it. I've gone and picked her up more than once when she's been out with her friends, too. Plain and simple there are no excuses for DUI. If you're legally able to drink you're expected to be responsible.
That he was impaired and driving automatically puts him in the wrong. Think in terms of driving with no insurance. If you're in an accident and you have no auto insurance you are automatically at fault. It's the law. So it is with DUI. IMO the fact that the guy was jay walking probably was a mitigating factor in this case. People keep referring to the civil settlement with the family. But again, the fact that the guy who was killed, crossed against traffic points to him putting himself at risk. And that may have kept Stallworth from getting years instead of 4 weeks.
for goodness sake, Plaxico is looking at 2 years in prison for shooting himself in the leg. he shot himself in the LEG...oh yeah, it was an accident btw. stallworth killed another person while driving under the influence. also an accident. 30 days. is something not wrong with this picture?
