Personal foul... Leonard Little... killing innocent people

[ENDelt260]

.

[dirk digler]

F*ck that guy. It pisses me off to hear his name on TV.


I agree totally. I fuggin hate that guy and I think that it is a disgrace that he can be convicted of drunk driving and manslaugter and yet the NFL does nothing. Then he goes out and gets caught again drunk driving. He is a worthless piece of shit IMO.

[Deberg_1990]

I concur...ive said enough about him already in the past....he gets no more attention in any thread from me.....worthless POS.......The fans of the Rams should be outraged!

[Baby Lee]

I'd trade him straight up for the Rams' choice of any 5 players on our D.
Any 8, if they throw in a plate of toasted ravioli.

[2bikemike]

Yeah he should be rotting in a prison cell. I can't imagine how the family of his victim feels.

[dirk digler]

I'd trade him straight up for the Rams' choice of any 5 players on our D.
Any 8, if they throw in a plate of toasted ravioli.

No way I want that POS on our team.

[Rain Man]

He should be chasing down people in prison.

[Baby Lee]

The only difference between him and Warfield is;
1. Warfield was lucky he didn't kill anyone.
and
2. Little actually plays football.

[dirk digler]

The only difference between him and Warfield is;
1. Warfield was lucky he didn't kill anyone.



That is a huge difference Baby Lee. You can't possibly be defending this guy can you?

[Baby Lee]

That is a huge difference Baby Lee. You can't possibly be defending this guy can you?
It's a difference of consequence, not of culpability. Both of them got behind the wheel impaired in their ability to drive. It is now left to luck what the consequences are, unless you are under the impression that Little purposely collided with the woman who died.
And I'm not so much defending him as saying he's a great player who made a huge mistake, which he's paid for [whether you agree with the payment or not, it was not out of line with what other's similarly situate have gotten]. And compared to the pile of sh!t we have on our D right now [who aren't all angels either], I can forgive that mistake.

[Baby Lee]

As am I. I think Warfield's an idiot for continuing to drive drunk after getting popped once. Hell, I was an idiot for driving drunk as many times as I did. But, a stint in jail cured me of that. If I had killed someone, I'd have a hard time picking up a drink again, much less driving afterwards.

Little has shown a complete disregard for the lives of others. He killed someone, and continued his reckless behavior that directly led to that tragedy.

F*ck him.
You see, I see the only difference between you, Little, and Warfield, is consequence. You admit Warfield is a PoS. You admit that you've been jailed for DUI. I know you've had a drink since then. I assume when you [and Warfield] took a swig, whether the first time or the last, you were aware that people have died in DUI accidents. Intoxication takes away your faculties AND YOUR JUDGMENT, and the consequences of that is entirely up to chance.

[dirk digler]

It's a difference of consequence, not of culpability. Both of them got behind the wheel impaired in their ability to drive. It is now left to luck what the consequences are, unless you are under the impression that Little purposely collided with the woman who died.
And I'm not so much defending him as saying he's a great player who made a huge mistake, which he's paid for [whether you agree with the payment or not, it was not out of line with what other's similarly situate have gotten]. And compared to the pile of sh!t we have on our D right now [who aren't all angels either], I can forgive that mistake.

I can forgive a mistake we all make them but for him to go out after killing someone and making the same mistake again is unforgivable IMO. He needs his ass to rot in jail.

[2bikemike]

It's a question of the response to consequence, in my mind.

I'm not, in any way, defending Warfield. But a man who kills someone while driving drunk, and continues to drive drunk, is a POS. I don't want him associated with anything other than hell.

No shit. You would think that such a fugging tragedy would have cured the guy from that type of behavior. Obviously he didn't recieve enough punishment to make him regret his actions.

[Sure-Oz]

I heard that the victims husband is a photographer at every rams home game, he doesn't take any pictures of Little during the game or even look his way. I wonder how he can do that every game, i'd just want to pop him everytime I saw him, esp after he made that same stupid mistake twice.

[Baby Lee]

Luckily for me, no one was hurt. I spent some time in the clink. I learned my lesson.
I take it from that comment that you have never since driven with the legal level of intoxication. If so, congratulations.

And FTR, to date it remains a charge of DUI.

[2bikemike]

I heard that the victims husband is a photographer at every rams home game, he doesn't take any pictures of Little during the game or even look his way. I wonder how he can do that every game, i'd just want to pop him everytime I saw him, esp after he made that same stupid mistake twice.

Yeah I would be rigging the camera to shoot like a damn gun. Just point and shoot.

[Braincase]

But Martz says he fits their profile...

[Baby Lee]

I've typed numerous responses to this and deleted them.

Fact of the matter is. Baby Lee's right. I'm a hypocrite.
It's a tough question for all involved. Because at the heart of our criminal justice system is a sense that malice is more culpable than negligence, which is in turn more culpable than accident. And intoxication has the two pronged, and very divergent, effect of reducing our culpability while increasing the danger we are to others. Ironically, many of the things you'd get in trouble for sober [assault, murder, etc] are excused or at least mitigated by intoxication, so long as you are not behind the wheel.

[Braincase]

It's a tough question for all involved. Because at the heart of our criminal justice system is a sense that malice is more culpable than negligence, which is in turn more culpable than accident. And intoxication has the two pronged, and very divergent, effect of reducing our culpability while increasing the danger we are to others. Ironically, many of the things you'd get in trouble for sober [assault, murder, etc] are excused or at least mitigated by intoxication, so long as you are not behind the wheel.

Can I get a translation from Iowanian or MOHillbilly please?

[Baby Lee]

Can I get a translation from Iowanian or MOHillbilly please?
In our courts;
Things you do on purpose are worse than things that happen because you were fvcking around.
And things that happen when you are fvcking around are worse than things that happen by accident.
Alcohol makes us a more dangerous person, especially behind the wheel. But it also reduces our actions to accidents, because we aren't thinking clearly.
It is ironic that, when we are not behind the wheel, our intoxication would actually excuse us if we hit someone, at least partially.

[dirk digler]

It's a tough question for all involved. Because at the heart of our criminal justice system is a sense that malice is more culpable than negligence, which is in turn more culpable than accident. And intoxication has the two pronged, and very divergent, effect of reducing our culpability while increasing the danger we are to others. Ironically, many of the things you'd get in trouble for sober [assault, murder, etc] are excused or at least mitigated by intoxication, so long as you are not behind the wheel.


While I agree with your premise I would have to disagree with you on your last sentenced about being intoxicated and comitting crimes. In fact most people who commit murder are intoxicated with either drugs or alcohol or both. It doesn't excuse them and the judicial system doesn't take that in effect when deciding such cases. If you are an adult you are responsible for your actions and being intoxicated is not a defense.

[Baby Lee]

While I agree with your premise I would have to disagree with you on your last sentenced about being intoxicated and comitting crimes. In fact most people who commit murder are intoxicated with either drugs or alcohol or both. It doesn't excuse them and the judicial system doesn't take that in effect when deciding such cases. If you are an adult you are responsible for your actions and being intoxicated is not a defense.
Trust me, in some cases it mitigates the crime, in rare cases it excuses it [a version of not guilty by mental defect].
Mitigation is a reduction. Say someone kills someone while clear headed and filled with malice. Murder One.
Say someone gets drunk and takes a swing at someone with a bottle and the person dies. Manslaughter.
Say someone is so drunk that he is in a black out state. He swings wildly, not even knowing someone is in range of his fists, and that person dies. Possibly not guilty by mental defect.

[dirk digler]

Trust me, in some cases it mitigates the crime, in rare cases it excuses it [a version of not guilty by mental defect].
Mitigation is a reduction. Say someone kills someone while clear headed and filled with malice. Murder One.
Say someone gets drunk and takes a swing at someone with a bottle and the person dies. Manslaughter.
Say someone is so drunk that he is in a black out state. He swings wildly, not even knowing someone is in range of his fists, and that person dies. Possibly not guilty by mental defect.


You're right especially about the bar fight example.

But say for example a guy gets intoxicated and go robs a liquor store and kills the clerk. He will be convicted for felony murder 2, and in some states murder 1 but his intoxication will not be used as a defense.

Anyway I just believe that Little should be sitting in jail for the rest of his pathetic life not for committing manslaughter but for getting caught drinking and driving again.

Just my .02 cents.

[dirk digler]

oooh, this brings up an unrelated question for me... handy that Baby Lee's around. I was always under the impression that Murder 1 was pre-meditated. Is this correct?

The question popped into my head a couple weeks ago when watching Boston Legal and a guy got convicted of murder 1 for shooting someone when he panicked. Part of me said, "Well, it's a TV show. It's not necessarily accurate." But, I wondered if I was just misinformed as well.

First Degree Felony Murder - A killing that happens during the course of the commission of a felony, even if the death is accidental, will be considered "felony murder" by most states. However, if the killing happens during certain felonies, again determined by state, it will be considered "first degree felony murder". The felonies most often included in this category are arson, robbery, burglary, rape, mayhem and kidnapping.

My first college degree was Criminal Justice and one of the first cases we learned was say if you go and do a simple burglary but when you enter the house and a person is there and you scare them and they die of a heart attack you probably will get charged with 1st degree murder because someone died in the act of you committing a felony.