I was going to avoid this topic if I could, but listening to The Rise Guys this morning ramble on about what will come of the Donte' Stallworth situation I couldn't help but post my thoughts.
First, stop comparing Stallworth to Vick on a legal basis. The two have nothing to do with one another. If you want to debate the morality of their crimes, that is one thing. But to say "Why is Stallworth only getting 30 days for killing a person and Vick got 18 months for killing dogs?" is not a valid question. Stallworth is not getting 30 days, he is getting 25 months. House arrest, is still confinement.
Second, Michael Vick was not actually convicted of killing dogs. Vick was convicted of running an illegal inter-state dog fighting business. The Feds prosecuted that case as a tax and racketeering case, not as a cruelty to animals case. Had Vick pleaded guilty in Virginia to just killing the dogs, he probably would have gotten a much shorter sentence, instead he tried to save face and claim he never killed the dogs and therefore the Feds stepped in and he was punished for his other crimes.
Now to the Stallworth case. I found it interesting that there was a strong possibility that Stallworth could have walked away without any conviction other than the DUI. Florida law says that if the other party led to the 'causation' of the incident the DUI offender is not necessarily responsible. Since Mario Reyes was jaywalking across a major roadway when he was struck by Stallworth, there is enough question that a jury could have found reasonable doubt that Stallworth alone caused the accident and acquitted him of the manslaughter charge. He would have been convicted of DUI, probably would have had to pay a fine, do some community service and wait for a civil trial brought by the family.
So, based on his plea deal, Stallworth pleaded guilty to manslaughter (may not have gotten that at trial), will serve 30 days in jail (or that), 2 years house arrest (or that), 1,000 hours of community service (probably would have been half that), pay the family a large amount of money (saves court time/cost from civil trial), and lose his Florida drivers license for life (wouldn't have gotten that either). Personally, I'd say the Florida attorney took a look at the possibility of an acquittal and took what they could get. All things considered, from a legal standpoint, I'd say they did pretty good. Morally, that's a whole-nother story.
Now, what does the NFL do about this. This is where you could start to introduce the Vick scenario. Vick was suspended indefinitely by the NFL while he was in prison and under house arrest. Goodell has said he will wait until Vick's legal situation is resolved before he rules on his suspension. So really, Vick hasn't been suspended for a specific amount of time. Vick may only be suspended for a few games once he is actually released.
So what does that mean for Stallworth. If I am Goodell, I suspend him indefinitely too. Until he is able to participate freely in the NFL (that would probably be hard to do while under house arrest), I don't rule. If the Florida probation department says he can travel while under house arrest, then Goodell's hand is forced. Leonard Little got eight games for his DUI back in 1998, but that was a softer, gentler NFL. I don't see Goodell handing down any less than a one year suspension. And if I am Goodell, I use the house arrest as a starting point. Until Stallworth is free of his legal situation, he is suspended, i.e. two years. The union will appeal. Guess who they appeal to. That's right, Goodell. Maybe it gets lowered to eighteen months, or a year, either way, Goodell wins and a new precedent is set.
Wow. Now I see why I was trying to avoid this topic...
No comments:
Post a Comment