@jrb12711 said:

I agree with that. He should have been giving more time. He shouldn't have been treated any different than any of us. But the fact of the matter is that he was. A lot of money goes a long way. It's not something for us as people to be proud of, but it's the truth. People who make a lot of money get preferential treatment. But Stallworth did the time that was appointed to him, he lost his driver's license for the rest of his life, and he has a boatload of community service hours to do. That's not what we would have gotten, but it's what he got. To say that he shouldn't be allowed to play football anymore because the judge gave him less time than was deserved is just bull, though. He did what was asked of him, now let him live his life.

@theclevelandsound said:

That's part of the problem. People are liking what he did as to whether he should be back.

@jrb12711 said:

Sounds like you have a beef with the media and social structure, not Stallworth. He's just playing his cards.

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

Don't let the amount of money he makes play into this. It's starting to sound like sour apples on your part.

you're playing into my point exactly. It should be no different if it was bill gates, donte stallworth, or you and I. I understand it will never be like this, but I certainly have a gripe that it isn't fair. I would of done the exact same thing he did if I were in his shoes. I don't blame the man for paying off the family and not serving serious jail time. My point is that it's ridiculous a sentence can be so radically different just because of what he does. To say it should be different because he has a unique skill is simply bullshit.

@jrb12711 said:

How is it fair that given the circumstances and the evidence that Stallworth should be given a gigantic second chance when you and I would not? No matter what part Reyes played in this, our lives would never be the same. We'd have to settle for less our entire lives. Yet because he catches a football well it's business as usual. What is fair in that?

Yes, he catches a football well. And guess what, there's a lack of people who can do that in this world. If he was some IT guy, sure, he'd get fired. Because anybody can be an IT guy. There's an abundance of people who can do that. There's not many people who can go out on Sundays and make plays.

Don't let the amount of money he makes play into this. It's starting to sound like sour apples on your part.

@thaak said:

Do you have examples that prove me wrong?

If so, lets hear them.

Otherwise, shut your trap.

Well from the suit I have on the guy that hit me I received upwards of 250,000 $ now he definitely did not have that in his insurance policy so they garnished wages and took his house.

@speedyd900rr said:

Tell me, what does loss of income mean?

Sure, I hear you. And I'm not an idiot. However, explain to me how someone who has literally nothing is going to pay out millions of dollars? Will a court demand they pay half their income in perpetuity to make up for it? Even if it leaves them a pauper and unable to pay their own bills, eventually lose their house, car, job, and livelihood, and then eventually not be able to make the payments anymore? If that's so, then that's a crime too.

Do you have examples that prove me wrong?

If so, lets hear them.

Otherwise, shut your trap.

@speedyd900rr said:

Really? I think what he did was ok as long as he serves his time? Is that what I really said?

What he did was make a poor decision. Someone died. He is paying the consequences of his poor decision. But chances are, if he didn't make a poor decision, Reyes dies anyways based on what Reyes did.

Just because the poor decision was not ok for Stallworth to make, does not mean that Stallworth has to keep paying for his mistake after he has served the time a court of law sentenced him with.

Tell me, what does loss of income mean?

@thaak said:

well i'm done bringing this up to you haha. If you can really feel me, a middle class American would get the same opportunity of a multimillion dollar athlete after being convicted of DUI manslaughter, well good for you i guess. I don't care the circumstances, the facts are the facts. You simulate the situation 1,000,000 million times, 999,999 of the people get a hefty jail sentence and their lives tarnished.

That's just common sense, to think otherwise is literally crazy.

@speedyd900rr said:

not so... have you ever looked at people who have nothing who are sued in civil court for more money than they can possibly afford? Do you know what actually happens in those situations?

If you do, educate me. I doubt it is as drastic as you claim.

But even if what you say is true, that doesn't mean they lose everything. They can still work, they can still make a living at what they do best.

What you are really bitter about, isn't the dumb choice that was made, but rather the fact that he has more wherewithall to handle the consequences. Don't hate the rich because they are rich.

Tell me, how many five million dollar insurance policies do you have?

@thaak said:

The money to the family was to stave off a civil suit.

So even if the average person did get off the hook, in civil court they would of lost everything they had, not to mention half they're paychecks would of went to this family for the rest of their life. So technically what I said is right, the average person would of lost everything.

@jrb12711 said:

Given the unique circumstances, I absolutely do believe so.

@speedyd900rr said:

They came to an agreement because he chose to take responsibility for his actions. If he truly tried to fight it or buy it off, he would have gotten off completely (maybe some probation) because of the circumstances.

The money to the family was to stave off a civil suit.

@jrb12711 said:

Maybe he means if we were in Donte's shoes. A rich football player with deep pockets. There is no way the average income person could of got off like he did. Sucks I accidentally clicked thanks when I ment to hit quote for his post lol.

@thaak said:

can you honestly, without any qualms, type back and say we would of gotten that same treatment? Honestly, do you even believe that for 1/100th of a second? Come on now, don't even pretend that's a possibility.

@theclevelandsound said:

We need him. He is a good play maker and we really lack a #2 reciever. Will Mangini and/or Holmgren put up with what has happened off the field?

I REALLY NEED SOME RESOLUTION HERE.

NO WAY!!!!!

@thaak said:

If he had a public defender I would agree with that. Im sure he hired the best that money can buy.