Guest dog14787 Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 In the wake of the Marshawn Lynch fiasco many folks are questioning as to wether or not star athletes recieve preferential treatment. In my opinion, no they do not. A star athlete stands to lose much more then the normal every day citizen would and in some cases, they could lose everything. Take Michael Vick for instance, now I hear he will come up against State charges after he's finished doing time in a federal prison. Preferential treatment? I don't think so, and I'm not bringing this up because I feel sorry for Michael Vick ( even though I do a little ). I love animals and what he did was wrong, very wrong, but he did not get a light sentence because he's a star athlete, if anything, they made an example out of him. Michael Vick's life, all his hopes and dreams, up in smoke. Playing for an NFL team does not mean players are beyond the law, if anything their actions are much more scrutinized and a player stands to have much more to lose if convicted of a crime. Goes with the territory I suppose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kota Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 They might be to a certain extent. The reason why people think they do is because of the media. The media loves to print when a celebrity gets nailed with a DUI. Then they can't wait to state how easy they got off. The problem is that normal people everyday receive the same kind of judgments in court that someone like Mel Gibson received. People love to believe everything that is printed as fact. The problem with the media is the opinions of the writiers come into play. People take those opinions as facts and run with it. The media also has almost zero accountability for the most part. YOu really think that Star Magizine gets sued all the time? The amount of money they have to pay out in legal fees and settlements isn't even a drop in the bucket for the amount of money they receive from printing false information. people love misery so they love Star Magazine. It's to bad that single thought people can't think outside of the box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 dun feed the troll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dog14787 Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 They might be to a certain extent. The reason why people think they do is because of the media. The media loves to print when a celebrity gets nailed with a DUI. Then they can't wait to state how easy they got off. The problem is that normal people everyday receive the same kind of judgments in court that someone like Mel Gibson received. People love to believe everything that is printed as fact. The problem with the media is the opinions of the writiers come into play. People take those opinions as facts and run with it. The media also has almost zero accountability for the most part. YOu really think that Star Magizine gets sued all the time? The amount of money they have to pay out in legal fees and settlements isn't even a drop in the bucket for the amount of money they receive from printing false information. people love misery so they love Star Magazine. It's to bad that single thought people can't think outside of the box. Bad thing is, people don't care if the info is false or not. Like Bluefire calling me a troll, I was born in Buffalo and love the Buffalo Bills, but next thing you know, I'm a bad guy regardless of the couple thousand posts I have and almost all of them of a positive nature. Folks like to spread BS and thats the sad truth of the matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonInBuffalo Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 Vick certainly hasn't gotten any preferential treatment. I read recently that the Virginia DA decided to put off the state trial until Vick and his co-defendants are released from federal prison, because they can't afford the expense of transporting 3 prisoners from 3 different prisons to their courtroom. That's a real kick in the virtual balls to him, as it pretty much assures that he'll have no chance of returning to football for at least another year after being released from federal prison. Sometimes athletes have better results with the legal system compared to the average Joe, because they can afford to hire capable or even better attorneys. (at least those who have egos small enough to actually follow the attorney's advice) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 I don't think being a star athlete has anything to do with it. People with LOTS of MONEY do get preferential treatment under the law that is just a fact of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hit and marshawn Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 ive heard that he has been getting really special treatment in the shower................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dog14787 Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 I don't think being a star athlete has anything to do with it. People with LOTS of MONEY do get preferential treatment under the law that is just a fact of life. Then again, a retired NFL football star with lots of money might be able to get away with about anything, if it doesn't fit, you must acquit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 Its the golden rule, he who has the gold rules and one must be addled to not realize that there is a different standard of treatment for folks who have big bucks (in our case professional athletes) than those of lesser means. There are many reasons for this and some are good and some are bad but that these folks are treated differently is something is doubt anyone can supply compelling evidence this is not the case. For example: 1. The police and DA better have covered all the bases when they charge or arrest a rich person because rich folks have the resources to hire lawyers and investigators to get evidence of any investigatory missteps or something like police brutality. This sometimes gets reflected in a case like Lynch's where the powers that be are more likely to wait on an arrest until they are sure they can make it stick rather if they throw east side Willie into the slammer he is likely going to have to wait until some overburdened and poorly trained public defender gets to his case with little budget to do his own testing and work, 2. Rich folk are often less of a flight risk. True they are more likely to have the bucks to leave the country and set up shop elsewhere. However, this is a big jump to leave your hometown, your comfy couch and all your business dealing to instead live life on the lam. A poor guy may get arrested sooner because he may simply leave town since he has little to leave, but a rich guy (particularly a Lynch is not going anywhere so if there is uncertainty and a unintentionally violent crime there is less of an immediate need to arrest. 3. Celebrities in particular are less of a flight risk because where are they gonna go and not be recognized. 4. Rich people tend to get believed and poor people need to prove themselves often rather than be given the benefit of the doubt. This is unfortunate because liars or honest folks can be rich or poor, but the simple case is there are stereotypes we all have otherwise we would have to figure every little thing out and if we are busy we make assumptions. Richer folks wearing nicer clothes, speaking in a more educated manner or simply not exuding the lack pf self-confidence which can often come with not being a business or financial success can be reflected in whether someone is believed or not. 5. Celebrity can create bias. This is not true all the time, but we have all heard of stories where a celeb is asked for autographs by authorities. Part of law enforcement involves training and constant reminders not to be dazzled by celebrity but it actually takes work to do this which is why there are constant reminders to be professional. Etc, Come on now. If you had a choice to be rich and in trouble with the law or poor and in trouble with the law which would you choose. Would you actually say this makes no difference. It does not determine all things and rich folk can get canned by the courts but it seems obvious to me that there is a difference often with this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 I don't think being a star athlete has anything to do with it. People with LOTS of MONEY do get preferential treatment under the law that is just a fact of life. That's it in a nutshell right there. People with money get out of alot of things. Look at O.J. , Snoop Dog, T.I., DMX, Ray Lewis, Paris Hilton, Lindsey Lohan, and countless others who've all been in the news over the years. I'm only naming the first few that popped into my head. I'm sure that if I sat here and really thought about it, I could come up with a heck of alot more. Now there are cases where the case against some one is so strong that they choose to try and make an example of that person and this is what is taking place with Vick. But if the evidence has any chance of being disproven, for the most part, the person with money will win out. Or, they get the biggest slap-on-the-wrist plea deal that you will ever see. For example, there is a strip club owner here in Richmond, VA with the last name of Moore. He owns and lives over top of "Velvet". The cops raided his place and caught him with a sex-tape of him with a 17 year old girl. She's under age. If me or you get caught with that tape, we get nailed to the wall with all kinds of charges. This guy pleas to a 30 day jail sentence that is likely to be commuted to "work release" and or "community service". Money. A Nascar driver gets a DUI here in VA and gets his charge reduced to wreckless driving, even though he FAILED the breathalizer and a field sobriety test. He doesn't have to pay any of the hefty fines, attend ASAP, AA classes, or any form of counseling like anyone else. He also doesn't even lose his license for a year like anyone else. Money. That's all this world really revolves around is money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 Was it Lindsey Lohan or Paris Hilton that literally served 10 minutes in jail and was released for time served ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 Also the court of public opinion can have a bearing on treatment. In Vick's case he is killing and fighting dogs, people love dogs therefore harsh treatment. Traffic accident, no big deal, everyone has a fender bender. Hit a person and leave the scene, most people can't relate to the human injustice or lack of compassion of hitting someone and leaving them without helping. Rape is another crime that rarely gets a pass in the court of opinion. Even when it's a hooker, see the Duke scandal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 In the wake of the Marshawn Lynch fiasco many folks are questioning as to wether or not star athletes recieve preferential treatment. In my opinion, no they do not. A star athlete stands to lose much more then the normal every day citizen would and in some cases, they could lose everything. Take Michael Vick for instance, now I hear he will come up against State charges after he's finished doing time in a federal prison. Preferential treatment? I don't think so, and I'm not bringing this up because I feel sorry for Michael Vick ( even though I do a little ). I love animals and what he did was wrong, very wrong, but he did not get a light sentence because he's a star athlete, if anything, they made an example out of him. Michael Vick's life, all his hopes and dreams, up in smoke. Playing for an NFL team does not mean players are beyond the law, if anything their actions are much more scrutinized and a player stands to have much more to lose if convicted of a crime. Goes with the territory I suppose Middle class or poor people don't lose everything too? Why should a person's sentence have any bearing on how much they stand to lose financially? They might be to a certain extent. The reason why people think they do is because of the media. The media loves to print when a celebrity gets nailed with a DUI. Then they can't wait to state how easy they got off. The problem is that normal people everyday receive the same kind of judgments in court that someone like Mel Gibson received. People love to believe everything that is printed as fact. The problem with the media is the opinions of the writiers come into play. People take those opinions as facts and run with it. The media also has almost zero accountability for the most part. YOu really think that Star Magizine gets sued all the time? The amount of money they have to pay out in legal fees and settlements isn't even a drop in the bucket for the amount of money they receive from printing false information. people love misery so they love Star Magazine. It's to bad that single thought people can't think outside of the box. If I were king of the world a newspaper or magazine would have to print a person's acquittal in the same size type face and in the same position the story appeared in the periodical when the first allegations were made. I don't think being a star athlete has anything to do with it. People with LOTS of MONEY do get preferential treatment under the law that is just a fact of life. The main reason Alan Dershowitz took on the Klaus Von Bulow appeal is because Sunny's kids hired a private detective to conduct his own investigation and that evidence was allowed in court. Much of it very sloppy work. Dershowitz was concerned that if this was allowed to happen then the wealthy would have a huge advantage in their prosecutions. Its the golden rule, he who has the gold rules and one must be addled to not realize that there is a different standard of treatment for folks who have big bucks (in our case professional athletes) than those of lesser means.* There are many reasons for this and some are good and some are bad but that these folks are treated differently is something is doubt anyone can supply compelling evidence this is not the case. For example: 1. The police and DA better have covered all the bases when they charge or arrest a rich person because rich folks have the resources to hire lawyers and investigators to get evidence of any investigatory missteps or something like police brutality.** This sometimes gets reflected in a case like Lynch's where the powers that be are more likely to wait on an arrest until they are sure they can make it stick rather if they throw east side Willie into the slammer he is likely going to have to wait until some overburdened and poorly trained public defender gets to his case with little budget to do his own testing and work, 2. Rich folk are often less of a flight risk.*** True they are more likely to have the bucks to leave the country and set up shop elsewhere. However, this is a big jump to leave your hometown, your comfy couch and all your business dealing to instead live life on the lam. A poor guy may get arrested sooner because he may simply leave town since he has little to leave, but a rich guy (particularly a Lynch is not going anywhere so if there is uncertainty and a unintentionally violent crime there is less of an immediate need to arrest. 3. Celebrities in particular are less of a flight risk because where are they gonna go and not be recognized. 4. Rich people tend to get believed and poor people need to prove themselves often rather than be given the benefit of the doubt. This is unfortunate because liars or honest folks can be rich or poor, but the simple case is there are stereotypes we all have otherwise we would have to figure every little thing out and if we are busy we make assumptions.**** Richer folks wearing nicer clothes, speaking in a more educated manner or simply not exuding the lack pf self-confidence which can often come with not being a business or financial success can be reflected in whether someone is believed or not.***** 5. Celebrity can create bias. This is not true all the time, but we have all heard of stories where a celeb is asked for autographs by authorities. Part of law enforcement involves training and constant reminders not to be dazzled by celebrity but it actually takes work to do this which is why there are constant reminders to be professional. Etc, Come on now. If you had a choice to be rich and in trouble with the law or poor and in trouble with the law which would you choose. Would you actually say this makes no difference. It does not determine all things and rich folk can get canned by the courts but it seems obvious to me that there is a difference often with this point.****** * It's a blessing and curse. If a high profile person does get convicted their sentences can sometimes be harsher in order to make an example of them and to quash any ideas that they were getting special treatment. ** Exactly, well stated. *** I disagree. I believe they are a much greater flight risk especially if they already have foreign bank accounts. **** Well stated. ***** Look at the team OJ could put together and your point is proven for at least one case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dog14787 Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 Social status is very important to some people and sometimes what you have can be greatly determined by how you are percieved in the public's eye. Being convicted of a crime could cause you to lose, fans, endorsements, future contracts, elections if your in public office, the list goes on and on. The type of things normaly middle class and poor folk aren't as worrried about, so yes, the more you have, the more you could stand to lose financially when convicted of a crime. Especially if it severly damages your image. A homless person on the other hand could rob some poor elderly lady of all her cash, have a big night on the town, then have his living quarters upgraded by paying a visit to the county jail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cody Posted June 16, 2008 Share Posted June 16, 2008 I think it is getting to be the opposite. With Micheal Vick, it looked as though the police were giving others deals in order to go after Vick. With Lynch, it looks like the bigwigs are paying extra attention to a misdemeanor because it involves an athlete. If this was you or me, it would already be over, even if we did not talk to the cops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dog14787 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 I think it is getting to be the opposite. With Micheal Vick, it looked as though the police were giving others deals in order to go after Vick. With Lynch, it looks like the bigwigs are paying extra attention to a misdemeanor because it involves an athlete. If this was you or me, it would already be over, even if we did not talk to the cops. Running over folks and then leaving the scene may deserve some extra attention. James Hardy : " Was that a speed bump Marshawn, cuz it looked like a pedestrian just bounced off your van" Marshawn Lynch : " Nawww James, you must be seeing things" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 I think it is getting to be the opposite. With Micheal Vick, it looked as though the police were giving others deals in order to go after Vick. With Lynch, it looks like the bigwigs are paying extra attention to a misdemeanor because it involves an athlete. If this was you or me, it would already be over, even if we did not talk to the cops. I think the main thing that is incorrect with some of views expressed is that some want to treat is as though there is one rule or one trend which governs all. The difficult thing is that in some cases being rich or being famous is a key to allowing you to skate and in other cases it will result in the law being even heavier on you than the average. The key seems to me to identify whether a specific case is gonna fall into the skate case or the hand 'em high case. Vick was a perfect example where many of the factors put this one beyond the tipping point for harsh treatment: 1. Vick was not a likable person at all (race played a role here but not THE role by far as Vick was simply a jerk). 2. Vick had tons of exposed resources which could be taken. 3. The prime victims were doggies. Lynch however has several items which should help him skate: 1. The victim was not killed (or permanently hurt from all I have heard but we will see what reality is). 2. A lot of other people are dependent upon him playing for us. 3. The significant legal help he can afford is playing his hand and are skating close to the edge but not overplaying it yet (again we will see what reality is). Celebrity and money from being a great athlete gives the potential felon options that normal folk do not have. These options can be used well or used poorly. These options can be enough to win a case or not nearly enough (ala Vick) I think there is no trend her besides money is good when you get in trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dog14787 Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 I think the main thing that is incorrect with some of views expressed is that some want to treat is as though there is one rule or one trend which governs all. The difficult thing is that in some cases being rich or being famous is a key to allowing you to skate and in other cases it will result in the law being even heavier on you than the average. The key seems to me to identify whether a specific case is gonna fall into the skate case or the hand 'em high case. Vick was a perfect example where many of the factors put this one beyond the tipping point for harsh treatment: 1. Vick was not a likable person at all (race played a role here but not THE role by far as Vick was simply a jerk). 2. Vick had tons of exposed resources which could be taken. 3. The prime victims were doggies. Lynch however has several items which should help him skate: 1. The victim was not killed (or permanently hurt from all I have heard but we will see what reality is). 2. A lot of other people are dependent upon him playing for us. 3. The significant legal help he can afford is playing his hand and are skating close to the edge but not overplaying it yet (again we will see what reality is). Celebrity and money from being a great athlete gives the potential felon options that normal folk do not have. These options can be used well or used poorly. These options can be enough to win a case or not nearly enough (ala Vick) I think there is no trend her besides money is good when you get in trouble. Good post I have to agree, money is very beneficial when you get in trouble in less of course your money was obtained illegaly and has a direct bearing on your guilt. Celebrity status may or may not help depending on the crime and is greatly dependant upon whether or not the celebrity is well liked in the community. Take Mike Tyson for instance, Tyson is not a well liked citizen ( by many ) so his celebrity status probably does more harm then good. Depending on whether or not you have money, a good attorney ( probably the biggest determining factor), a likable character that people will feel sympathy for, and how your actions are percieved in the publics eye after the crime was commited are all key elements in determining the outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 1. Vick was not a likable person at all (race played a role here but not THE role by far as Vick was simply a jerk). Do you draw this conclusion based on your numerous interactions with Vick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 Do you draw this conclusion based on your numerous interactions with Vick? Ahhh, havent seen you in your typical "vick defender" role in a long time. I suppose it was his coach's, WR's, and OC's fault that he is in prison for dogfighting, too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts