PDA

View Full Version : ***Burress Agrees to 2 Years***



Pages : [1] 2

Judico
08-20-2009, 11:33 AM
Waiting for a link but ESPN just stated that Burress had agreed to plead guilty to weapons charge and receive a 2 year prison term.

ny06
08-20-2009, 11:34 AM
good bye nfl career

Jint Fan 73
08-20-2009, 11:34 AM
wow - that was unexpected

I'm guessing he goes in asap and gets out in 9 months for good behavior or something like that???

Mo Carthon
08-20-2009, 11:35 AM
Plax and his lawyer played this all wrong. Sucks for him. I'm fairly certain, if he acted sooner, he could've easily got 1 year. Glad we cut him before this happened.</P>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 11:36 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.

Judico
08-20-2009, 11:36 AM
Here's the link

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4411373

GameTime
08-20-2009, 11:39 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


???</P>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</P>

Sundown
08-20-2009, 11:40 AM
Plax and his lawyer played this all wrong. Sucks for him. I'm fairly certain, if he acted sooner, he could've easily got 1 year. Glad we cut him before this happened.</P>


</P>


My father always told me, if you wait to fix a mistake, your consequnces increase two fold. Bad move by Plax and his lawyers, another great move be Reese &amp; Co.</P>

GameTime
08-20-2009, 11:41 AM
Plax and his lawyer played this all wrong. Sucks for him. I'm fairly certain, if he acted sooner, he could've easily got 1 year. Glad we cut him before this happened.</P>


</P>


he was offered two years from the start. he and his lawyer refused the plea. now they accept it. going to trial may have resulted in more time</P>

dezzzR
08-20-2009, 11:44 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


i highly agree. **** bloomburg.</P>


Every american has a right to defend themselves regardless if its registered</P>


if he shot someone trying to break into his home with the same gunhe still would of been charged. this country is *** backwards. </P>


hes still an idiot for rocking a glock in his sweatpants and hes an idiot for not getting it registered, but still 2 years?!?</P>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 11:45 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</p>


???</p>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</p>

The VAST majority of average joes who get charged with this get ZERO jail time, over 90% I think the statistic showed.

TynesCarney
08-20-2009, 11:45 AM
http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/Sports/images/plaxico-burress-on-phone.jpg</P>


</P>


"Yes One express flight to Canada."</P>


</P>


Looks like Burress aint gonna playing Football this year, actually hell be playing football 4 the jail team.</P>


</P>


Charles Manson Deep to Burress Intercetped by John Markov. Tackle made by Drew peterson. </P>


Charles Manson Hands off to O.J Simpson Touchdown Flying Felons</P>

GameTime
08-20-2009, 11:46 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


???</P>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</P>




The VAST majority of average joes who get charged with this get ZERO jail time, over 90% I think the statistic showed.
</P>


gotta link for that</P>

Jint Fan 73
08-20-2009, 11:48 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</p>


???</p>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</p>

The VAST majority of average joes who get charged with this get ZERO jail time, over 90% I think the statistic showed.

Does that stat apply to people charged or people who were found / pled guilty?

big difference

TynesCarney
08-20-2009, 11:48 AM
http://www.tmz.com/2009/08/20/plaxico-burress-pleads-guilty-gets-two-years/</P>


</P>


<FONT size=6>LINK ALERT</FONT></P>

peerless
08-20-2009, 11:49 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


i agree most of us on here would have gotten a slap on the wrist for this one....but i dont think its so much the gun charge put that the gun went off</P>


bottom line is the idiot could have gotten 3 months or somethign adn turned the plea down cuz he didnt want to go to jail dumb ***</P>

Sundown
08-20-2009, 11:49 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


i highly agree. **** bloomburg.</P>


<FONT size=6>Every american has a right to defend themselves regardless if its registered</FONT></P>


if he shot someone trying to break into his home with the same gunhe still would of been charged. this country is *** backwards. </P>


hes still an idiot for rocking a glock in his sweatpants and hes an idiot for not getting it registered, but still 2 years?!?</P>


</P>


I disagree w/that commment. After being on these boards one should know theres some stupid mofos that shouldnt be allowed to own a gun. At the very least a person can do is get trained and show compentancy w/a fire arm, something Plax lacked serverly.</P>

shocknaweny
08-20-2009, 11:50 AM
theres no way he deserved as much time as Vick.

BigBlue1971
08-20-2009, 11:50 AM
he got what he deserved for ruining himself and the G-men. lets move on!

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 11:51 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</p>


???</p>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</p>




The VAST majority of average joes who get charged with this get ZERO jail time, over 90% I think the statistic showed.
</p>


gotta link for that</p>

I look for it, but it was posted on the forums numerous times when this first happened forever ago.

TuckYou
08-20-2009, 11:52 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


i highly agree. **** bloomburg.</P>


Every american has a right to defend themselves regardless if its registered</P>


if he shot someone trying to break into his home with the same gunhe still would of been charged. this country is *** backwards. </P>


hes still an idiot for rocking a glock in his sweatpants and hes an idiot for not getting it registered, but still 2 years?!?</P>


</P>


He didnt get harsher treatment because of his fame. He got time off because of his fame. His crime was real, and if me or you had committed it, it REQUIRES a 3.5 year minimum sentence. He has the right to defend himself and carry a pistol, but it is required by law to have it registred and not be toting it in a club in your sweatpants which can put others in dirrect physical harm. </P>


Plax will be out in a year and a half if he has good behaviour. His next football year will be 2012, if he comes back which I doubt. </P>


He gets what he deserves. Maybe it is a little harsh but that is the law. How different would everyones opinion be if that bullet hit and killed Pierce instead of wounding Plax. It was a matter of inches im sure. </P>

Morehead State
08-20-2009, 11:53 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


This is pure crap.</P>

TynesCarney
08-20-2009, 11:53 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


i highly agree. **** bloomburg.</P>


<FONT size=6>Every american has a right to defend themselves regardless if its registered</FONT></P>


if he shot someone trying to break into his home with the same gunhe still would of been charged. this country is *** backwards. </P>


hes still an idiot for rocking a glock in his sweatpants and hes an idiot for not getting it registered, but still 2 years?!?</P>


</P>


I disagree w/that commment. After being on these boards one should know theres some stupid mofos that shouldnt be allowed to own a gun. At the very least a person can do is get trained and show compentancy w/a fire arm, something Plax lacked serverly.</P>


</P>


</P>


1st, IT HAS TO BE ****ING REGISTERED!</P>


2nd You want idiots like the robber down the street to be able to carry a gun?</P>


3rd If Plax's gun was legal There would not be any trouble!</P>

SIMMS5611
08-20-2009, 11:55 AM
He threw it all away trying to be a "gangsta"...</P>


Was that BS street cred worth the millions of dollars you flushed away?</P>


Was maintaining that homie image worth being locked away from your kids for 2 years?</P>


The sentence is harsh, but if you can't do the time, don't do the crime...</P>


...and don't drop the soap.</P>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 11:56 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</p>


???</p>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</p>

The VAST majority of average joes who get charged with this get ZERO jail time, over 90% I think the statistic showed.

Does that stat apply to people charged or people who were found / pled guilty?

big difference

No but that's the point, normally they ALLOW these people to plea to different charges, kinda like when you get a speeding ticket and plead guilty to a seatbelt fine or whatever...I'm sure everyone's done that before, (It's happened to me 4 times now)

They had an entire article (multiple articles) with statistics on this exactly and they talked about how over 90% of the people in 2006 or something plead to lesser charges.

they didn't ALLOW Plax to do that...because Bloomberg stepped out, and because he was famous.

Morehead State
08-20-2009, 11:56 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


???</P>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</P>




The VAST majority of average joes who get charged with this get ZERO jail time, over 90% I think the statistic showed.
</P>


Discharging an unregistered gun, with no permit to carry,in a crowded nightclub?</P>


You are dilusional, Daven. 2 years is a slap on the wrist.</P>

TuckYou
08-20-2009, 11:56 AM
Some of you guys are wack. He broke the law and was given a break on the sentense.</P>


And this isnt the first time Plax was in trouble with the law. </P>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 11:57 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</p>


This is pure crap.</p>

Morehead there where articles from registered lawyers all over the place saying exactly the same thing with statistics to prove it....it was so long ago I'm having trouble finding it, but this is proven.

dezzzR
08-20-2009, 11:57 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


???</P>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</P>




The VAST majority of average joes who get charged with this get ZERO jail time, over 90% I think the statistic showed.
</P>


thats rediculous</P>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 11:58 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</p>


???</p>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</p>




The VAST majority of average joes who get charged with this get ZERO jail time, over 90% I think the statistic showed.
</p>


Discharging an unregistered gun, with no permit to carry,in a crowded nightclub?</p>


You are dilusional, Daven. 2 years is a slap on the wrist.</p>

It's the facts Morehead, unless the lawyers who all agreed and wrote articles saying this are all delusional too morehead...sorry I trust Lawyers when it comes to the Law over you....it's usually very complicated.

Jint Fan 73
08-20-2009, 11:58 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</p>


???</p>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</p>

The VAST majority of average joes who get charged with this get ZERO jail time, over 90% I think the statistic showed.


wrong

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2008/12/06/2008-12-06_plaxico_burress_faces_tough_gun_laws_in_.html

About 22% of Manhattan defendants get convicted on that charge,
according to a News analysis of state Division of Criminal Justice data
from 2003 to 2007<div id="TixyyLink" style="border: medium none ; overflow: hidden; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">

<font size="4">so 22% get 3 and a half years</font>

In all five boroughs, most have the charges knocked down to less
serious crimes or see them dismissed. If Burress pleads to the lesser
charge of third-degree criminal possession of a weapon - the crime has
no mandatory sentence - he could still do some time. Last year, 60% of
the men and women convicted of third-degree possession served time,
state officials said. <div id="TixyyLink" style="border: medium none ; overflow: hidden; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">
<font size="4">So even those who pled down to a lesser charge - most did time</font>

<font size="4">and how many provided an open and shut case for the DA?</font>
</div>
</div>

TynesCarney
08-20-2009, 11:59 AM
He threw it all away trying to be a "gangsta"...</P>


Was that BS street cred worth the millions of dollars you flushed away?</P>


Was maintaining that homie image worth being locked away from your kids for 2 years?</P>


The sentence is harsh, but if you can't do the time, don't do the crime...</P>


...and don't drop the soap.</P>


</P>


</P>


HAHA Thats my location on my profile, it look at my name next to this post it says Plax..Dont drop the soap.</P>

GameTime
08-20-2009, 11:59 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


i highly agree. **** bloomburg.</P>


<FONT size=6>Every american has a right to defend themselves regardless if its registered</FONT></P>


if he shot someone trying to break into his home with the same gunhe still would of been charged. this country is *** backwards. </P>


hes still an idiot for rocking a glock in his sweatpants and hes an idiot for not getting it registered, but still 2 years?!?</P>


</P>


I disagree w/that commment. After being on these boards one should know theres some stupid mofos that shouldnt be allowed to own a gun. At the very least a person can do is get trained and show compentancy w/a fire arm, something Plax lacked serverly.</P>


</P>


</P>


1st, IT HAS TO BE ****ING REGISTERED!</P>


2nd You want idiots like the robber down the street to be able to carry a gun?</P>


<FONT color=#0000ff size=5>3rd If Plax's gun was legal There would not be any trouble!</FONT></P>


</P>


your last statement is 100% wrong. First he was in NY and lives in NJ. The gun would have had have been registered in both states AND thats still not enough. Just because you have a registered hand gun does notmean you can carry it CONCEALED or otherwiseinto a public place. He effed himself in so many ways that night. </P>

Sundown
08-20-2009, 12:00 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


i highly agree. **** bloomburg.</P>


<FONT size=6>Every american has a right to defend themselves regardless if its registered</FONT></P>


if he shot someone trying to break into his home with the same gunhe still would of been charged. this country is *** backwards. </P>


hes still an idiot for rocking a glock in his sweatpants and hes an idiot for not getting it registered, but still 2 years?!?</P>


</P>


I disagree w/that commment. After being on these boards one should know theres some stupid mofos that shouldnt be allowed to own a gun. At the very least a person can do is get trained and show compentancy w/a fire arm, something Plax lacked serverly.</P>


</P>


</P>


1st, IT HAS TO BE ****ING REGISTERED!</P>


2nd You want idiots like the robber down the street to be able to carry a gun?</P>


3rd If Plax's gun was legal There would not be any trouble!</P>


</P>


You cant control a robber getting a gun on the black market hence why the law in NY is so strict. I dont agree w/him getting so much time but he broke the law. He could have easily got a license.</P>

Jiffy Jeff
08-20-2009, 12:01 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


???</P>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</P>



HE WAS GOING TO GET ONE YEAR.

Morehead State
08-20-2009, 12:01 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


???</P>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</P>




The VAST majority of average joes who get charged with this get ZERO jail time, over 90% I think the statistic showed.
</P>


Discharging an unregistered gun, with no permit to carry,in a crowded nightclub?</P>


You are dilusional, Daven. 2 years is a slap on the wrist.</P>




It's the facts Morehead, unless the lawyers who all agreed and wrote articles saying this are all delusional too morehead...sorry I trust Lawyers when it comes to the Law over you....it's usually very complicated.
</P>


If he had been carrying only, I would agree. But the gun discharged in a crowded room. All bets are off at that point. Thats wreckless endangerment. He's damn lucky he wasn't charged with a lot more.</P>


If my daughter was in that bar, I would have been screaming bloody friggin murder for this guys head.</P>

etw926
08-20-2009, 12:01 PM
BWAAAAAAHAAAAAAHAAAAAA!!!!!!!! wait wait wait......ok BWAAAAHAAAAAAHAAAAA!!!!!!!

Mo Carthon
08-20-2009, 12:02 PM
Two years seems harsh, but that's the law. Problems with it have to be taken upstairs to Mr. B. </P>


Someone said he would've got 2 years had he pled guilty months ago, but I don't believe that for a second. He and his lawyer gambled that he wouldn't get indicted -- and he lost. Now he gets more time. Probably about a year more or so. Too bad, but he took the risk and lost.</P>

TuckYou
08-20-2009, 12:03 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


i highly agree. **** bloomburg.</P>


<FONT size=5>Every american has a right to defend themselves regardless if its registered</FONT></P>


if he shot someone trying to break into his home with the same gunhe still would of been charged. this country is *** backwards. </P>


hes still an idiot for rocking a glock in his sweatpants and hes an idiot for not getting it registered, but still 2 years?!?</P>


</P>


So with that train of thought, you can say every american has the right to sell drugs to make money for his family and provide a better life for them. Who cares if its illeagal, its for the better of his/her family. It's putting food on the table and buying them lavish materials. </P>

GameTime
08-20-2009, 12:03 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


???</P>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</P>


HE WAS GOING TO GET ONE YEAR.</P>


they siad during the grand jury statements that he refused a 2 year plea right from the start. I never heard the 1 year. if thats the case then he is as stupid as he seems</P>

dezzzR
08-20-2009, 12:03 PM
Some of you guys are wack. He broke the law and was given a break on the sentense.</P>


And this isnt the first time Plax was in trouble with the law. </P>shut up

buddy33
08-20-2009, 12:04 PM
I think Burress is paying the price for not only his actions, but also for what P-Diddy did. When he walked away clean the Mayor was going to make sure it didn't happen again. </P>


Defending yourself is one thing. Going out to a place where you need to carry a gun is another thing. The NFL will send an armed escort out with these players if they request one. After Smith was robbed, Burress could have easily called the NFL and had an armed escort. Or he could have just not gone somewhere that you would need a gun. Lets face it. Calling an armed escort for protection wouldn't give him street cred.</P>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 12:04 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</p>


???</p>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</p>

The VAST majority of average joes who get charged with this get ZERO jail time, over 90% I think the statistic showed.


wrong

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2008/12/06/2008-12-06_plaxico_burress_faces_tough_gun_laws_in_.html

About 22% of Manhattan defendants get convicted on that charge,
according to a News analysis of state Division of Criminal Justice data
from 2003 to 2007<div id="TixyyLink" style="border: medium none ; overflow: hidden; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">

<font size="4">so 22% get 3 and a half years</font>

In all five boroughs, most have the charges knocked down to less
serious crimes or see them dismissed. If Burress pleads to the lesser
charge of third-degree criminal possession of a weapon - the crime has
no mandatory sentence - he could still do some time. Last year, 60% of
the men and women convicted of third-degree possession served time,
state officials said. <div id="TixyyLink" style="border: medium none ; overflow: hidden; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">
<font size="4">So even those who pled down to a lesser charge - most did time</font>

<font size="4">and how many provided an open and shut case for the DA?</font>
</div>
</div>


Dude, that's it that proves MY point Jints.

<font color="#0000ff">bout 22% of Manhattan defendants get convicted on that charge,
according to a News analysis of state Division of Criminal Justice data
from 2003 to 2007. The conviction rate hovered around 10% in three
other boroughs: 9% in Staten Island (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Staten+Island), 10% in the Bronx (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/The+Bronx) and 12% in Queens (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Queens+County). Brooklyn (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Brooklyn) had the lowest conviction rate at 7%. </font><div id="TixyyLink" style="border: medium none ; overflow: hidden; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2008/12/06/2008-12-06_plaxico_burress_faces_tough_gun_laws_in_.html#i xzz0OjfXyLQ0

80% of the people charged with the Crime in Manhattan plead to lesser charges, in other area's its closer to 90%....

an Average joe would have plead to a lesser charge....but since it's plax, and since bloomberg interfered, he didn't get a fair shake, and that's a shame.
</div>

(Edit: I may have been wrong about ZERO jail time, but Plax clearly didn't get a fair shake)

Morehead State
08-20-2009, 12:07 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


???</P>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</P>

The VAST majority of average joes who get charged with this get ZERO jail time, over 90% I think the statistic showed.


wrong

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2008/12/06/2008-12-06_plaxico_burress_faces_tough_gun_laws_in_.html

About 22% of Manhattan defendants get convicted on that charge, according to a News analysis of state Division of Criminal Justice data from 2003 to 2007
<DIV style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; TEXT-ALIGN: left; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); OVERFLOW: hidden; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; TEXT-DECORATION: none" id=TixyyLink>

<FONT size=4>so 22% get 3 and a half years</FONT>

In all five boroughs, most have the charges knocked down to less serious crimes or see them dismissed. If Burress pleads to the lesser charge of third-degree criminal possession of a weapon - the crime has no mandatory sentence - he could still do some time. Last year, 60% of the men and women convicted of third-degree possession served time, state officials said.
<DIV style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; TEXT-ALIGN: left; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); OVERFLOW: hidden; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; TEXT-DECORATION: none" id=TixyyLink>
<FONT size=4>So even those who pled down to a lesser charge - most did time</FONT>

<FONT size=4>and how many provided an open and shut case for the DA?</FONT>
</DIV>
</DIV>


Dude, that's it that proves MY point Jints.

<FONT color=#0000ff>bout 22% of Manhattan defendants get convicted on that charge, according to a News analysis of state Division of Criminal Justice data from 2003 to 2007. The conviction rate hovered around 10% in three other boroughs: 9% in Staten Island (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Staten+Island), 10% in the Bronx (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/The+Bronx) and 12% in Queens (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Queens+County). Brooklyn (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Brooklyn) had the lowest conviction rate at 7%. </FONT>
<DIV style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; TEXT-ALIGN: left; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); OVERFLOW: hidden; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; TEXT-DECORATION: none" id=TixyyLink>
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2008/12/06/2008-12-06_plaxico_burress_faces_tough_gun_laws_in_.html#i xzz0OjfXyLQ0

80% of the people charged with the Crime in Manhattan plead to lesser charges, in other area's its closer to 90%....

an Average joe would have plead to a lesser charge....but since it's plax, and since bloomberg interfered, he didn't get a fair shake, and that's a shame.
</DIV>



</P>


He pleaded it down.</P>


How many of "that charge" as described in the article represented a guy carrying an unregistered hand gun into a crowded room and DISCHARGING it?</P>


Your little stats may be quite different.</P>

G-Men Surg.
08-20-2009, 12:07 PM
Its a crying shame but life in the end always bites you back when you go against the grain ...

Mo Carthon
08-20-2009, 12:08 PM
I find it very hard to believe that the DA refused to offer anything less than 2 years before Plax was indicted.

MOOK3456
08-20-2009, 12:08 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</p>


i highly agree. **** bloomburg.</p>


Every american has a right to defend themselves regardless if its registered</p>


if he shot someone trying to break into his home with the same gunhe still would of been charged. this country is *** backwards. </p>


hes still an idiot for rocking a glock in his sweatpants and hes an idiot for not getting it registered, but still 2 years?!?</p>

Yes everyone has the right to defend themselves... It doesn't take much effort to obtain a permit. Thats 100% Plax's fault, nobody elses. (Edit: just caught the end of your post...) Also if someone broke into his home and he shot them with "that" gun, yes, he'd still be screwed. Thats why you keep a shotgun at home, not a handgun.

It's not entirely Bloomburg that got him 2 years. It's very much his own doing. If he went in with an attitude of "yes, I know it was wrong but this is why I carried it and I'm truly sorry, I've shot myself, endangered everyone around me and irreparably damaged my career " I'm sure they would have seen fit to grant some leniency.

But nope...Plax wanted to play the high profile star with the high priced lawyer route of "I'm gettin off, I'm rich and you're all just out to get me" bs attitude so they made an example out of him. So be it. It's common sense, apparently he has none.

Enjoy your stay dummy.

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 12:08 PM
How many of "that charge" as described in the article represented a guy carying an unregistered hand gun into a crowded room and DISCHARGED it?</p>


Your little stats may be quite different.</p>

that's not what he was CHARGED with Morehead, the law doesn't work that way, it's not about the "situation" it's about the "Charge" he wasn't charged with the illegal discharge of a gun, he was charged with the exact same crime those statistics are from.

Jint Fan 73
08-20-2009, 12:10 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</p>


???</p>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</p>

The VAST majority of average joes who get charged with this get ZERO jail time, over 90% I think the statistic showed.


wrong

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2008/12/06/2008-12-06_plaxico_burress_faces_tough_gun_laws_in_.html

About 22% of Manhattan defendants get convicted on that charge,
according to a News analysis of state Division of Criminal Justice data
from 2003 to 2007<div id="TixyyLink" style="border: medium none ; overflow: hidden; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">

<font size="4">so 22% get 3 and a half years</font>

In all five boroughs, most have the charges knocked down to less
serious crimes or see them dismissed. If Burress pleads to the lesser
charge of third-degree criminal possession of a weapon - the crime has
no mandatory sentence - he could still do some time. Last year, 60% of
the men and women convicted of third-degree possession served time,
state officials said. <div id="TixyyLink" style="border: medium none ; overflow: hidden; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">
<font size="4">So even those who pled down to a lesser charge - most did time</font>

<font size="4">and how many provided an open and shut case for the DA?</font>
</div>
</div>


Dude, that's it that proves MY point Jints.

<font color="#0000ff">bout 22% of Manhattan defendants get convicted on that charge,
according to a News analysis of state Division of Criminal Justice data
from 2003 to 2007. The conviction rate hovered around 10% in three
other boroughs: 9% in Staten Island (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Staten+Island), 10% in the Bronx (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/The+Bronx) and 12% in Queens (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Queens+County). Brooklyn (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Brooklyn) had the lowest conviction rate at 7%. </font><div id="TixyyLink" style="border: medium none ; overflow: hidden; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2008/12/06/2008-12-06_plaxico_burress_faces_tough_gun_laws_in_.html#i xzz0OjfXyLQ0

80% of the people charged with the Crime in Manhattan plead to lesser charges, in other area's its closer to 90%....

an Average joe would have plead to a lesser charge....but since it's plax, and since bloomberg interfered, he didn't get a fair shake, and that's a shame.
</div>

(Edit: I may have been wrong about ZERO jail time, but Plax clearly didn't get a fair shake)


did it ever occur to you that some of those people were innocent - that's why they didn't get convicted?

Plax clearly wasn't innocent

so 20% got convicterd - they got jail

of the rest some were innocent and some pled down

Those that pled down - most still got jail time

I fail so see how someone who is clearly guilty of the crime got treated unfairly

Morehead State
08-20-2009, 12:10 PM
How many of "that charge" as described in the article represented a guy carying an unregistered hand gun into a crowded room and DISCHARGED it?</P>


Your little stats may be quite different.</P>




that's not what he was CHARGED with Morehead, the law doesn't work that way, it's not about the "situation" it's about the "Charge" he wasn't charged with the illegal discharge of a gun, he was charged with the exact same crime those statistics are from.
</P>


If not, He should have been.</P>


His celebrity probably saved him from that!</P>

tonyt830
08-20-2009, 12:10 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
DavenIII you forgot the red font--LOL!!

BastianEagles
08-20-2009, 12:11 PM
Waiting for a link but ESPN just stated that Burress had agreed to plead guilty to weapons charge and receive a 2 year prison term. 2 years just for shooting his own leg? WTF?!! Stallworth got 24 days for "accidentally" killing someone. Vick got 18 mon for torturing dogs. And plax gets 2 yrs for almost castrating himself....something is wrong with the justice system folks

GMENAGAIN
08-20-2009, 12:11 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


???</P>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</P>

The VAST majority of average joes who get charged with this get ZERO jail time, over 90% I think the statistic showed.


wrong

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2008/12/06/2008-12-06_plaxico_burress_faces_tough_gun_laws_in_.html

About 22% of Manhattan defendants get convicted on that charge, according to a News analysis of state Division of Criminal Justice data from 2003 to 2007
<DIV id=TixyyLink style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-TOP: medium none; OVERFLOW: hidden; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; TEXT-ALIGN: left; TEXT-DECORATION: none">

<FONT size=4>so 22% get 3 and a half years</FONT>

In all five boroughs, most have the charges knocked down to less serious crimes or see them dismissed. If Burress pleads to the lesser charge of third-degree criminal possession of a weapon - the crime has no mandatory sentence - he could still do some time. Last year, 60% of the men and women convicted of third-degree possession served time, state officials said.
<DIV id=TixyyLink style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-TOP: medium none; OVERFLOW: hidden; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; TEXT-ALIGN: left; TEXT-DECORATION: none">
<FONT size=4>So even those who pled down to a lesser charge - most did time</FONT>

<FONT size=4>and how many provided an open and shut case for the DA?</FONT>
</DIV>
</DIV>


Dude, that's it that proves MY point Jints.

<FONT color=#0000ff>bout 22% of Manhattan defendants get convicted on that charge, according to a News analysis of state Division of Criminal Justice data from 2003 to 2007. The conviction rate hovered around 10% in three other boroughs: 9% in Staten Island (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Staten+Island), 10% in the Bronx (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/The+Bronx) and 12% in Queens (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Queens+County). Brooklyn (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Brooklyn) had the lowest conviction rate at 7%. </FONT>
<DIV id=TixyyLink style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-TOP: medium none; OVERFLOW: hidden; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; TEXT-ALIGN: left; TEXT-DECORATION: none">
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2008/12/06/2008-12-06_plaxico_burress_faces_tough_gun_laws_in_.html#i xzz0OjfXyLQ0

80% of the people charged with the Crime in Manhattan plead to lesser charges, in other area's its closer to 90%....

an Average joe would have plead to a lesser charge....but since it's plax, and since bloomberg interfered, he didn't get a fair shake, and that's a shame.
</DIV>




(Edit: I may have been wrong about ZERO jail time, but Plax clearly didn't get a fair shake)
</P>


These stats are also misleading because most people commit this crime in connection with another more serious crime (robbery, assual, murder, etc.) In those cases, the defendant pleads guilty to the more serious charge and the less serious charge (the gun charge) is reduced or dismissed, since the sentences would run concurrently anyway. </P>


</P>


</P>

dezzzR
08-20-2009, 12:12 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


i highly agree. **** bloomburg.</P>


<FONT size=5>Every american has a right to defend themselves regardless if its registered</FONT></P>


if he shot someone trying to break into his home with the same gunhe still would of been charged. this country is *** backwards. </P>


hes still an idiot for rocking a glock in his sweatpants and hes an idiot for not getting it registered, but still 2 years?!?</P>


</P>


So with that train of thought, you can say every american has the right to sell drugs to make money for his family and provide a better life for them. Who cares if its illeagal, its for the better of his/her family. It's putting food on the table and buying them lavish materials. </P>


no *******. thats not what i said at all. i said its stupid that if someone breaks into your home and the closest weapon to you is an unregistered weapon and you use it on the intruder and kill him theres a good chance your going to jail. if every family in america had a registered weapon burglaries and robberies would drop dramatically.</P>


just look at last weeks newspaper with that old man with the convience store in harlem. 4 guys try robbing the place, one starts pistol wipping an employee and the 74 year old owner grabs his shotgun and gets all of em killing 2. it will be a loooong time before any "gangsta" tries that **** again to that store. guaranteed</P>


</P>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 12:12 PM
If not, He should have been.</p>


His celebrity probably saved him from that!</p>

No, in this case, it's clear, Plax's fame hurt him in this case, he was not treated the same way you or I would have been, we would have gotten less time....but them's the breaks I guess, If your famous I suppose you need to be better then those who aren't or face stricter consequences.

Morehead State
08-20-2009, 12:13 PM
And another thing Daven. In how many of those cited cases were the facts NOT IN DISPUTE, as indicated by Plaxico's own lawyer.</P>


Plaxico was guilty of the actions he was accused of, admitted by his own lawyer. They just argued some mitigating factors ( like it was registered in FL) which they knew were BS since they pleaded it out.</P>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 12:14 PM
These stats are also misleading because most people commit this crime in connection with another more serious crime (robbery, assual, murder, etc.) In those cases, the defendant pleads guilty to the more serious charge and the less serious charge (the gun charge) is reduced or dismissed, since the sentences would run concurrently anyway. </p>


</p>

It says in the article Jint posted that....</p>

<font color="#0000ff">In all five boroughs, most have the charges knocked down to less serious crimes or see them dismissed.</font></p>

<font color="#0000ff"><font color="#000000">So I think your wrong.</font>
</font> </p>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 12:16 PM
And another thing Daven. In how many of those cited cases were the facts NOT IN DISPUTE, as indicated by Plaxico's own lawyer.</p>


Plaxico was guilty of the actions he was accused of, admitted by his own lawyer. They just argued some mitigating factors ( like it was registered in FL) which they knew were BS since they pleaded it out.</p>

Neither of us know the answer to that question, but the statistics have been shown now, so I rest my case, the vast majority of average joes did get off easier then Plax did in this case, Plax wasn't treated fairly, when the MAYOR comes out and puts pressure on the DA to prosecute to the fullest extent of the law you can't say he got a fair trail.

Morehead State
08-20-2009, 12:16 PM
Waiting for a link but ESPN just stated that Burress had agreed to plead guilty to weapons charge and receive a 2 year prison term. 2 years just for shooting his own leg? WTF?!! Stallworth got 24 days for "accidentally" killing someone. Vick got 18 mon for torturing dogs. And plax gets 2 yrs for almost castrating himself....something is wrong with the justice system folks</P>


It had nothing to do with shooting himself in the leg. It was carrying an uregistered weapon, without a permit to carry into a crowded nightclub and wrecklessly discharging it. Risking the lives of every one in that bar.</P>

dezzzR
08-20-2009, 12:17 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


i highly agree. **** bloomburg.</P>


<FONT size=6>Every american has a right to defend themselves regardless if its registered</FONT></P>


if he shot someone trying to break into his home with the same gunhe still would of been charged. this country is *** backwards. </P>


hes still an idiot for rocking a glock in his sweatpants and hes an idiot for not getting it registered, but still 2 years?!?</P>


</P>


I disagree w/that commment. After being on these boards one should know theres some stupid mofos that shouldnt be allowed to own a gun. At the very least a person can do is get trained and show compentancy w/a fire arm, something Plax lacked serverly.</P>and i disagree with your disagreeing.lolevery american has the right to own a weapon. registered of course. but the punishment for an unregistered is a bit to much.

Jiffy Jeff
08-20-2009, 12:18 PM
Waiting for a link but ESPN just stated that Burress had agreed to plead guilty to weapons charge and receive a 2 year prison term. 2 years just for shooting his own leg? WTF?!! Stallworth got 24 days for "accidentally" killing someone. Vick got 18 mon for torturing dogs. And plax gets 2 yrs for almost castrating himself....something is wrong with the justice system folks


Halleleujah.

Morehead State
08-20-2009, 12:18 PM
And another thing Daven. In how many of those cited cases were the facts NOT IN DISPUTE, as indicated by Plaxico's own lawyer.</P>


Plaxico was guilty of the actions he was accused of, admitted by his own lawyer. They just argued some mitigating factors ( like it was registered in FL) which they knew were BS since they pleaded it out.</P>




Neither of us know the answer to that question.
</P>


My point exactly, wich makes your stats meaningless. Every case has its own set of individual circumstances. Unless all those circumstances are exactly the same, one case can't be compared equally to another.</P>


I would say that rarely are the facts not in dispute as this case.</P>

joeybagadonutz23
08-20-2009, 12:21 PM
GOOD RIDDANCE.

Jint Fan 73
08-20-2009, 12:21 PM
These stats are also misleading because most people commit this crime in connection with another more serious crime (robbery, assual, murder, etc.) In those cases, the defendant pleads guilty to the more serious charge and the less serious charge (the gun charge) is reduced or dismissed, since the sentences would run concurrently anyway. </p>


</p>

It says in the article Jint posted that....</p>

<font color="#0000ff">In all five boroughs, most have the charges knocked down to less serious crimes or see them dismissed.</font></p>

<font color="#0000ff"><font color="#000000">So I think your wrong.</font>
</font> </p>

why?

Why can't they dismiss the gun charge and convict on another more serious charge?

Also - Plax didn't get the min 3.5 year sentence - so he is included in that "plea down to lesser charge" category.

dezzzR
08-20-2009, 12:22 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


???</P>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</P>




The VAST majority of average joes who get charged with this get ZERO jail time, over 90% I think the statistic showed.
</P>


Discharging an unregistered gun, with no permit to carry,in a crowded nightclub?</P>


You are dilusional, Daven. 2 years is a slap on the wrist.</P>




It's the facts Morehead, unless the lawyers who all agreed and wrote articles saying this are all delusional too morehead...sorry I trust Lawyers when it comes to the Law over you....it's usually very complicated.
cant believe im saying this but i agree with daven. bloomburg had it out for plax from the get-go. he even said so. he put pressure on the DA. again plax is a ****in moron and hes responsible for getting his gun registered, but like daven just said, the average joe that commits this crime rarely goes to jail. </P>


stallworth is getting the slap on the wrists....</P>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 12:22 PM
My point exactly, wich makes your stats meaningless.

No it doesn't, it doesn't make them "Meaningless" it makes them not a slam dunk, it means I'm not 100% right only like 90% at this point...you've provided NOTHING besides questions, what if 100% of the cases were like plaxs or worse, we don't know, I've (Jints) provided something you've provided nothing.


Every case has its own set of individual circumstances. Unless all those circumstances are exactly the same, one case can't be compared equally to another.

we aren't comparing ONE case to another, we are comparing ALL cases on this charge.




I would say that rarely are the facts not in dispute as this case.</p>

and I would say you have no clue and are just saying that because you have nothing else to back up your opinion with.
</p>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 12:23 PM
These stats are also misleading because most people commit this crime in connection with another more serious crime (robbery, assual, murder, etc.) In those cases, the defendant pleads guilty to the more serious charge and the less serious charge (the gun charge) is reduced or dismissed, since the sentences would run concurrently anyway. </p>


</p>

It says in the article Jint posted that....</p>

<font color="#0000ff">In all five boroughs, most have the charges knocked down to less serious crimes or see them dismissed.</font></p>

<font color="#0000ff"><font color="#000000">So I think your wrong.</font>
</font> </p>

why?

Why can't they dismiss the gun charge and convict on another more serious charge?

Oh, the can, of course, BUT in YOUR article, it says "Most" have the charges knocked down......

GMENAGAIN
08-20-2009, 12:23 PM
These stats are also misleading because most people commit this crime in connection with another more serious crime (robbery, assual, murder, etc.) In those cases, the defendant pleads guilty to the more serious charge and the less serious charge (the gun charge) is reduced or dismissed, since the sentences would run concurrently anyway. </P>



</P>


It says in the article Jint posted that....</P>


<FONT color=#0000ff>In all five boroughs, most have the charges knocked down to less serious crimes or see them dismissed.</FONT></P>


<FONT color=#0000ff><FONT color=#000000>So I think your wrong.</FONT>
</FONT></P>


</P>


No, I'm exactly right. What I am telling you is that many times the REASONthe chargeis dismissed or "knocked down"is because the person committed a more serious crime with the unregistered gun and pleads guilty to the more serious crime, which carries more jail time. In other words, if Plax robbed someone with an unregistered gun, he wouldbe charged with armed robbery and the gun charge. In that scenario, the prosecution many times will agree to dismiss the lesser gun charge if the defendant pleads guilty to the more serious robbery charge, since the gun charge will not result in any additional jail time over and above what the defendant will get for the serious charge(usually the sentences would be concurrent). </P>


So when statistics show that many cases are dismissed or "knocked down" itdoesn't mean that the defendant was allowed to just get off Scott-free. </P>

Mo Carthon
08-20-2009, 12:24 PM
Thanks for the Green Bay game, the Super Bowl winning catch, and a lot of great other games that season and other seasons. Plax was one of the most important players contributing to the miracle playoff run.

tonyt830
08-20-2009, 12:25 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


???</P>


he plea bargin 2 instead of 3 1/2......don't get what you mean</P>




The VAST majority of average joes who get charged with this get ZERO jail time, over 90% I think the statistic showed.
</P>


Discharging an unregistered gun, with no permit to carry,in a crowded nightclub?</P>


You are dilusional, Daven. 2 years is a slap on the wrist.</P>




It's the facts Morehead, unless the lawyers who all agreed and wrote articles saying this are all delusional too morehead...sorry I trust Lawyers when it comes to the Law over you....it's usually very complicated.
I'm no lawyer or paralegal, but even if the gun was legally registered in the state of NY, he carried it over thestate line plus he took it into a place that serves alcohol(Latin Quarter). So isn't it against the law in NY state to bring a loaded gun, even if registered, into a bar or nightclub?</P>


Plus on top of that, he was apparently notproperly trained on how to use a handgun or check the safety.</P>

TuckYou
08-20-2009, 12:26 PM
Some of you guys are wack. He broke the law and was given a break on the sentense.</P>


And this isnt the first time Plax was in trouble with the law. </P>


shut up</P>


um, no. </P>


What if you were at the nightclub with your significant other. Plax bullet goes right through his leg and into your gf/wife whatever. Now what? That could have easily happened. He got busted with a unregistered gun in a public area. </P>


Game Over. </P>


I do think 2 years is a lot but 3.5 is the law. </P>


DONT DO THE CRIME IF YOU CANT DO THE TIME</P>


Also, thats what happens when you F with the GMEN. Ask Tiki or Shockey. Everysince they left their lives have been significantly worse off.</P>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 12:27 PM
These stats are also misleading because most people commit this crime in connection with another more serious crime (robbery, assual, murder, etc.) In those cases, the defendant pleads guilty to the more serious charge and the less serious charge (the gun charge) is reduced or dismissed, since the sentences would run concurrently anyway. </p>



</p>


It says in the article Jint posted that....</p>


<font color="#0000ff">In all five boroughs, most have the charges knocked down to less serious crimes or see them dismissed.</font></p>


<font color="#0000ff"><font color="#000000">So I think your wrong.</font>
</font></p>


</p>


No, I'm exactly right.</p>

Article disagrees with you, it says most have the charges knocked down to LESS SERIOUS crimes, you are saying they are dropped for a plead to MORE serious crimes, just like My speeding tickets being dropped from 85 in a 55 to a seatbelt ticket and a taillight out, works for everyone, I get 0 points on my license for pleaing to less serious crimes, they get more money, in fines.
</p>

Out of Exile
08-20-2009, 12:27 PM
Don't know how or why people defend him.

Plax did not have a PERMIT to carry a handgun ON HIM...period (registration in FL that is expired means JACK SHIOT).

NY has stiff gun laws.

He could have easily hurt someone else.

Maybe his safety should have been on.

Case Closed.

And for the record I was a HUGE Plax fan but as soon as this went down I knew he was going to jail.

Stop defending this guy like he did nothing wrong. I believe in armed protection but you have to COVER YOUR ARSE and have the permits and what not needed.

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 12:29 PM
Don't know how or why people defend him.

Not defending Plax, I'm angry about a Justice system that does not treat everyone equally.

Jint Fan 73
08-20-2009, 12:31 PM
These stats are also misleading because most people commit this crime in connection with another more serious crime (robbery, assual, murder, etc.) In those cases, the defendant pleads guilty to the more serious charge and the less serious charge (the gun charge) is reduced or dismissed, since the sentences would run concurrently anyway. </p>



</p>


It says in the article Jint posted that....</p>


<font color="#0000ff">In all five boroughs, most have the charges knocked down to less serious crimes or see them dismissed.</font></p>


<font color="#0000ff"><font color="#000000">So I think your wrong.</font>
</font></p>


</p>


No, I'm exactly right.</p>

Article disagrees with you, it says most have the charges knocked down to LESS SERIOUS crimes, you are saying they are dropped for a plead to MORE serious crimes, just like My speeding tickets being dropped from 85 in a 55 to a seatbelt ticket and a taillight out, works for everyone, I get 0 points on my license for pleaing to less serious crimes, they get more money, in fines.
</p>

man you can be thick

No it would be like you get cherged with speeding AND DWI

The convict on the DWI and throw out the speeding

TuckYou
08-20-2009, 12:31 PM
Don't know how or why people defend him.

Not defending Plax, I'm angry about a Justice system that does not treat everyone equally.
</P>


well duh. OJ Simpson.</P>

dezzzR
08-20-2009, 12:32 PM
Some of you guys are wack. He broke the law and was given a break on the sentense.</P>


And this isnt the first time Plax was in trouble with the law. </P>


shut up</P>


um, no. </P>


What if you were at the nightclub with your significant other. Plax bullet goes right through his leg and into your gf/wife whatever. Now what? That could have easily happened. He got busted with a unregistered gun in a public area. </P>


Game Over. </P>


I do think 2 years is a lot but 3.5 is the law. </P>


DONT DO THE CRIME IF YOU CANT DO THE TIME</P>but it didnt happen. game over.

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 12:33 PM
man you can be thick

No it would be like you get cherged with speeding AND DWI

The convict on the DWI and throw out the speeding


Actually I had to pay all my tickets when I got my DWI...BUT I know what he MEANS, I'm telling him he's wrong, if that were the case it would have said in the article, Most have the charges knocked down our dropped in exchange for plea's to MORE SERIOUS crimes, it doesn't say that....

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 12:33 PM
Don't know how or why people defend him.

Not defending Plax, I'm angry about a Justice system that does not treat everyone equally.
</p>


well duh. OJ Simpson.</p>

wasn't happy about that one either [:P]

TuckYou
08-20-2009, 12:35 PM
Some of you guys are wack. He broke the law and was given a break on the sentense.</P>


And this isnt the first time Plax was in trouble with the law. </P>


shut up</P>


um, no. </P>


What if you were at the nightclub with your significant other. Plax bullet goes right through his leg and into your gf/wife whatever. Now what? That could have easily happened. He got busted with a unregistered gun in a public area. </P>


Game Over. </P>


I do think 2 years is a lot but 3.5 is the law. </P>


DONT DO THE CRIME IF YOU CANT DO THE TIME</P>


but it didnt happen. game over.</P>


Go bring a gun to a club then man, have fun with your freedom to bear arms.</P>

GMENAGAIN
08-20-2009, 12:36 PM
These stats are also misleading because most people commit this crime in connection with another more serious crime (robbery, assual, murder, etc.) In those cases, the defendant pleads guilty to the more serious charge and the less serious charge (the gun charge) is reduced or dismissed, since the sentences would run concurrently anyway. </P>



</P>


It says in the article Jint posted that....</P>


<FONT color=#0000ff>In all five boroughs, most have the charges knocked down to less serious crimes or see them dismissed.</FONT></P>


<FONT color=#0000ff><FONT color=#000000>So I think your wrong.</FONT>
</FONT></P>


</P>


No, I'm exactly right.</P>


Article disagrees with you, it says most have the charges knocked down to LESS SERIOUS crimes, you are saying they are dropped for a plead to MORE serious crimes, just like My speeding tickets being dropped from 85 in a 55 to a seatbelt ticket and a taillight out, works for everyone, I get 0 points on my license for pleaing to less serious crimes, they get more money, in fines.
</P>


</P>


You're not getting it. </P>


I am not saying that the gun charge gets upgraded to a more serious offense. The situation that I am taking about is whensomeone gets charged with two crimes involving the use of a gun, and the lesser crime is the gun charge. In that scenario, the gun charge would bea "lesser included offense."</P>


If you got caught for DWI, they would also charge you with illegal lane change, careless driving, etc. If you plead to the DWI, they usually drop or significantly reduce the other charges, because they are considered lesser included offenses. </P>


What you and/or the article are saying is not inconsistent with what I am saying. </P>


</P>

Jint Fan 73
08-20-2009, 12:37 PM
man you can be thick

No it would be like you get cherged with speeding AND DWI

The convict on the DWI and throw out the speeding


Actually I had to pay all my tickets when I got my DWI...BUT I know what he MEANS, I'm telling him he's wrong, if that were the case it would have said in the article, Most have the charges knocked down our dropped in exchange for plea's to MORE SERIOUS crimes, it doesn't say that....


the article is looking at stats for the one specific charge.

not looking at anything else...not charges in conjection with the gun charge...just the data on the gun charge.

why is that so hard to understand?

dezzzR
08-20-2009, 12:37 PM
Don't know how or why people defend him. Plax did not have a PERMIT to carry a handgun ON HIM...period (registration in FL that is expired means JACK SHIOT). NY has stiff gun laws. He could have easily hurt someone else. Maybe his safety should have been on. Case Closed. And for the record I was a HUGE Plax fan but as soon as this went down I knew he was going to jail. Stop defending this guy like he did nothing wrong. I believe in armed protection but you have to COVER YOUR ARSE and have the permits and what not needed.</P>


im not defending him. im just saying the justice system is *** backwards. you have stallworth getting a month for "accidently" killing someone and you have plax getting 2 yearswith an unregistered weapon. </P>


kinda stupid no?</P>

dezzzR
08-20-2009, 12:38 PM
Some of you guys are wack. He broke the law and was given a break on the sentense.</P>


And this isnt the first time Plax was in trouble with the law. </P>


shut up</P>


um, no. </P>


What if you were at the nightclub with your significant other. Plax bullet goes right through his leg and into your gf/wife whatever. Now what? That could have easily happened. He got busted with a unregistered gun in a public area. </P>


Game Over. </P>


I do think 2 years is a lot but 3.5 is the law. </P>


DONT DO THE CRIME IF YOU CANT DO THE TIME</P>


but it didnt happen. game over.</P>


Go bring a gun to a club then man, have fun with your freedom to bear arms.</P>lol...........ok

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 12:39 PM
You're not getting it. </p>

No man, I really am getting what your saying, I'm telling you you are wrong, the article would have mentioned the fact that these charges were dropped in exchange for a plea of guilty for more serious crimes if that were the case, it is the case though.

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 12:40 PM
the article is looking at stats for the one specific charge.

not looking at anything else...not charges in conjection with the gun charge...just the data on the gun charge.

why is that so hard to understand?

then it would have said nothing about them being plead to less serious crimes, it would have just said, only 22% of people in Manhattan are convicted...PERIOD end story....but it doesn't it goes on to tell you that the charges are plead down to LESS serious crimes.

loaded30
08-20-2009, 12:41 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
Its a shame isn't it. </P>


I'll tell you one thing I believe, Mr. Bloomburg was just trying to make a name for himself. I live in LA and I didn't have a clue who Bloomburg was. But now I know.</P>


Get my point. Its all abouta individual like Bloomburg to feed off someone else's fame.</P>


You look at what Stallworth got off with,he was guilty andKILLED someone else. Just doesn't make sense to me.</P>

Jint Fan 73
08-20-2009, 12:41 PM
You're not getting it. </p>

No man, I really am getting what your saying, I'm telling you you are wrong, the article would have mentioned the fact that these charges were dropped in exchange for a plea of guilty for more serious crimes if that were the case, it is the case though.


why?
how do you know that data is even available?

Jint Fan 73
08-20-2009, 12:47 PM
the article is looking at stats for the one specific charge.

not looking at anything else...not charges in conjection with the gun charge...just the data on the gun charge.

why is that so hard to understand?

then it would have said nothing about them being plead to less serious crimes, it would have just said, only 22% of people in Manhattan are convicted...PERIOD end story....but it doesn't it goes on to tell you that the charges are plead down to LESS serious crimes.


man - its like talking to a brick wall

when you get charged three things can happen

Guilty
Not guilty (thrown out or found innocent)
Plea down

the article talks about to of the possible outcomes for this one specific charge.

22% guilty
78 percent - either not guilty or plea down - doesn't indicate the breakdown
of the plea down - 60% get jail time.

which all refute your claim that Plax get treated unfairly because 90% don't get jail time.

we know that at least 22% get jail time - maybe even up to 65% get time

And plax did plea down because he didn't get the min 3.5 year sentence.

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 12:47 PM
why?
how do you know that data is even available?


If it wasn't avalible they wouldn't have talked about it would they have.

like I said, if they didn't know, or if what GMEN said WAS the case, they would not have gone on with the discussion, they would have just said, 22% are convicted period end of story....it's a article about how Plax isn't getting a fair shake.

tonyt830
08-20-2009, 12:49 PM
I agree that the justice system is messed up. And I can agree with Daven to a point that not all people are treated fairly when it comes to crimes etc. But there is nothing we can do about it. Plax is gone and now has to serve his time. </P>


Like another poster mentioned, if you can't do the time, then don't do the crime. We have all made mistakes, and luckily most of us have not spent time in jail. </P>


As for the justice system being unequal in reference to Stallworth, Vick and Plaxico---every state has different laws, some more strict than others, regarding sentences and fines etc. I know it doesn't sound fair but thats life---its not always fair!</P>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 12:50 PM
man - its like talking to a brick wall

when you get charged three things can happen

Guilty
Not guilty (thrown out or found innocent)
Plea down

the article talks about to of the possible outcomes for this one specific charge.

22% guilty
78 percent - either not guilty or plea down - doesn't indicate the breakdown
of the plea down - 60% get jail time.

which all refute your claim that Plax get treated unfairly because 90% don't get jail time.


I backed down from the 90% didn't get jail time, the statistic I remembered was 90% of people plea down...that said, none of your stats refute anything I've said about him not getting a fair deal.

GMENAGAIN
08-20-2009, 12:50 PM
why?
how do you know that data is even available?


If it wasn't avalible they wouldn't have talked about it would they have.

like I said, if they didn't know, or if what GMEN said WAS the case, they would not have gone on with the discussion, they would have just said, 22% are convicted period end of story....it's a article about how Plax isn't getting a fair shake.
</P>


I give up. Jint Fan 73, he's all yours!</P>

njsean
08-20-2009, 12:52 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
Its a shame isn't it. </P>


I'll tell you one thing I believe, Mr. Bloomburg was just trying to make a name for himself. I live in LA and I didn't have a clue who Bloomburg was. But now I know.*</P>


Get my point. Its all about*a individual like Bloomburg to feed off someone else's fame.</P>


You look at what Stallworth got off with,*he was guilty and*KILLED someone else. Just doesn't make sense to me.*</P>

Yes, I look at Stallworth and I saw a contrite man, who owned up to everything he did right away and apologized, and when he looked for mercy from the court - he found some.

I don't remember seeing ANY of that from Plax.

Jint Fan 73
08-20-2009, 12:52 PM
why?
how do you know that data is even available?


If it wasn't avalible they wouldn't have talked about it would they have.

like I said, if they didn't know, or if what GMEN said WAS the case, they would not have gone on with the discussion, they would have just said, 22% are convicted period end of story....it's a article about how Plax isn't getting a fair shake.


what GMEN is talking about is SEPERATE CHARGES - the article talk about what happens for this ONE SPECIFIC CHARGE!!!

and the article is not about how plax isn't getting a fair shake - its about how tough the laws are and how hard it will be for him to avoid jail time.

Meaning he got treated like everyone else.

Jint Fan 73
08-20-2009, 12:56 PM
man - its like talking to a brick wall

when you get charged three things can happen

Guilty
Not guilty (thrown out or found innocent)
Plea down

the article talks about to of the possible outcomes for this one specific charge.

22% guilty
78 percent - either not guilty or plea down - doesn't indicate the breakdown
of the plea down - 60% get jail time.

which all refute your claim that Plax get treated unfairly because 90% don't get jail time.


I backed down from the 90% didn't get jail time, the statistic I remembered was 90% of people plea down...that said, none of your stats refute anything I've said about him not getting a fair deal.


OK answer these two simple questions.

1)Was he guilty of the crime as it stands on the books?

2) was he sentenced to the minimum sentence of 3.5 years?

I don't see how getting under the minimum sentence for a crime you are clearly guilty of is not getting a fair shake

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 12:57 PM
what GMEN is talking about is SEPERATE CHARGES


Ok, let me give you an example of what you are talking about so you understand that I understand, you are saying a guy is going to court for aggravated robbery AND illegal possession of a gun, you are saying they drop the gun charge in exchange for the guilty plea to the aggravated robbery...I understand that's what you are saying, but if that WERE the case the article would not say what it does, apparantly you are reading the article incorrectly, because it mentions most are plead down to lesser charges...if what you were saying were true it would say, that most are plead down to lesser charges BECAUSE OF GUILTY PLEA'S TO MORE SERIOUS CHARGES

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 12:59 PM
I don't see how getting under the minimum sentence for a crime you are clearly guilty of is not getting a fair shake

Because nearly EVERYONE gets under the minimum for the crime they clearly committed, but none of those guys have the mayor putting pressure on the DA to prosecute you to the maximum.

It's not about the whats on the books, it's about what you or me would get...and it'd be less then 2 years.

Jint Fan 73
08-20-2009, 01:04 PM
what GMEN is talking about is SEPERATE CHARGES


Ok, let me give you an example of what you are talking about so you understand that I understand, you are saying a guy is going to court for aggravated robbery AND illegal possession of a gun, you are saying they drop the gun charge in exchange for the guilty plea to the aggravated robbery...I understand that's what you are saying, but if that WERE the case the article would not say what it does, apparantly you are reading the article incorrectly, because it mentions most are plead down to lesser charges...if what you were saying were true it would say, that most are plead down to lesser charges BECAUSE OF GUILTY PLEA'S TO MORE SERIOUS CHARGES



the artice is talking about data collected in regards to specific weapons charge.

in your example they would record that as:
Gun charge - thown out
Burglery - convicted

they might not link the two

I'm saying they either don't have the data or didn't care to reference it because it didn't apply to the subject of the article.

doesn't matter anyway because Plax pled down

meaning he got treated like everyone else

etw926
08-20-2009, 01:06 PM
I hope he gets his *** cheeks blown out in prison while wearing a giants bandana.

NYG_inul
08-20-2009, 01:08 PM
http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8120484f&amp;template=without-video-with-comments&amp;confirm=true

crazy. justice is served

Roosevelt
08-20-2009, 01:09 PM
I can't help but think that with the support of the Giant organization behind him the outcome would have much different.

What a fool.

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 01:10 PM
I'm saying they either don't have the data or didn't care to reference it because it didn't apply to the subject of the article.

If that's the case the wording of the article is irresponsible, because it sure makes it seem like they DO have the data and have chosen to tell you that what you two are saying is not the case.

Jint Fan 73
08-20-2009, 01:10 PM
I don't see how getting under the minimum sentence for a crime you are clearly guilty of is not getting a fair shake

Because nearly EVERYONE gets under the minimum for the crime they clearly committed, but none of those guys have the mayor putting pressure on the DA to prosecute you to the maximum.

It's not about the whats on the books, it's about what you or me would get...and it'd be less then 2 years.


you are telling me you have data on all the cases and know exactly of those cases who was cleary guilty and who wasn't? And what each person got sentenced to?

why didn't you share that - would have ended this right away.

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 01:14 PM
you are telling me you have data on all the cases and know exactly of those cases who was cleary guilty and who wasn't? And what each person got sentenced to?

why didn't you share that - would have ended this right away.

Nope, but I have second hand experience after hearing what many lawyers have said on the topic on talk radio and having discussed this previously with 3 friends of mine (separately) that are also lawyers, I also have the fact that the wording in your article seems to imply that what I've said is the case.

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 01:14 PM
dp

Jint Fan 73
08-20-2009, 01:14 PM
I'm saying they either don't have the data or didn't care to reference it because it didn't apply to the subject of the article.

If that's the case the wording of the article is irresponsible, because it sure makes it seem like they DO have the data and have chosen to tell you that what you two are saying is not the case.




The point of the article is how HIGH the conviction rate is under the new tough laws and how tough it will be for Plax to avoid time. The data they present supports that.

You might not think 20% is high but apparently it is




The conviction rate on Burress' gun charge citywide is on the rise,
climbing to more than 15% from about 9% between 2006 and 2007 - its
highest rate in five years. </p>


That's due in part to changes to the law enacted in 2006 that toughened sentencing for second-degree gun possession, said Anthony Schepis (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Anthony+Schepis),
Bronx executive assistant district attorney. Under the old law, the
offense was a class D felony and judges could find mitigating
circumstances for penalties other than jail. "We had one judge who gave
89% probation under the old law," Schepis said. </p><div id="TixyyLink" style="border: medium none ; overflow: hidden; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: transparent; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2008/12/06/2008-12-06_plaxico_burress_faces_tough_gun_laws_in_.html#i xzz0OjxT7KNg
</div>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 01:16 PM
You might not think 20% is high but apparently it is

Actually I do think it's high, I've sat in court probably, 20+ times now, almost noone gets convicted of the crimes they actually committed, unless they are super serious.

keyofgmen
08-20-2009, 01:25 PM
Well, it's just sad that he is part of one of the great moments in Giant history and now a prisoner. Sadder still is the always forgotten family of this man. Here is to hopes he turns this, ultimately, in a positive direction for them.

LT Where R U
08-20-2009, 01:30 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


i highly agree. **** bloomburg.</P>


Every american has a right to defend themselves regardless if its registered</P>


if he shot someone trying to break into his home with the same gunhe still would of been charged. this country is *** backwards. </P>


hes still an idiot for rocking a glock in his sweatpants and hes an idiot for not getting it registered, but still 2 years?!?</P>

TuckYou
08-20-2009, 01:38 PM
Seriously, Plax cost us another SB run last year. He can rot for 2 years to learn from that.

BigBlu397
08-20-2009, 01:38 PM
I havent had time to read all 5 pages of this thread, so I dont know if this point was already brought up. Plax was already offered a deal for only 3 MONTHS in jail along with1,500 community service hours and he declined because he didnt want to go to jail. So because he declined it and let thins drag out, they treated it as a regular case and sentenced him to what they should have in the first place. How much more stupid could you be????

Jint Fan 73
08-20-2009, 01:42 PM
I havent had time to read all 5 pages of this thread, so I dont know if this point was already brought up. Plax was already offered a deal for only 3 MONTHS in jail along with1,500 community service hours and he declined because he didnt want to go to jail. So because he declined it and let thins drag out, they treated it as a regular case and sentenced him to what they should have in the first place. How much more stupid could you be????

I don't this that offer was ever on the table.

Sundown
08-20-2009, 01:44 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


i highly agree. **** bloomburg.</P>


<FONT size=6>Every american has a right to defend themselves regardless if its registered</FONT></P>


if he shot someone trying to break into his home with the same gunhe still would of been charged. this country is *** backwards. </P>


hes still an idiot for rocking a glock in his sweatpants and hes an idiot for not getting it registered, but still 2 years?!?</P>


</P>


I disagree w/that commment. After being on these boards one should know theres some stupid mofos that shouldnt be allowed to own a gun. At the very least a person can do is get trained and show compentancy w/a fire arm, something Plax lacked serverly.</P>


and i disagree with your disagreeing.lolevery american has the right to own a weapon. registered of course. but the punishment for an unregistered is a bit to much.</P>


LOL Id agree w/you if Plax was at home or was just arrested w/the gun on him, but when you go into a crowded club w/a gun tucked into your sweat pants of all things you prove to be negligent. The gun went off and it barely missed an innocent person. He got what he deserved.</P>

BigBlue1971
08-20-2009, 01:52 PM
Seriously, Plax cost us another SB run last year. He can rot for 2 years to learn from that.</P>


</P>


my sentiments exactly! let this moron go to jail, serve his time come out and get into more trouble. hes a thug and will never change. forget him, hes not even a giant anymore. </P>

BigBlu397
08-20-2009, 01:52 PM
I havent had time to read all 5 pages of this thread, so I dont know if this point was already brought up. Plax was already offered a deal for only 3 MONTHS in jail along with1,500 community service hours and he declined because he didnt want to go to jail. So because he declined it and let thins drag out, they treated it as a regular case and sentenced him to what they should have in the first place. How much more stupid could you be????

I don't this that offer was ever on the table.

</P>


Ya it was, lol. Right before they post poned his first court appearance.</P>

TuckYou
08-20-2009, 01:53 PM
I havent had time to read all 5 pages of this thread, so I dont know if this point was already brought up. Plax was already offered a deal for only 3 MONTHS in jail along with1,500 community service hours and he declined because he didnt want to go to jail. So because he declined it and let thins drag out, they treated it as a regular case and sentenced him to what they should have in the first place. How much more stupid could you be????

I don't this that offer was ever on the table.

</P>


Ya it was, lol. Right before they post poned his first court appearance.</P>


</P>


I dont recall that either, ever.</P>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 02:03 PM
I havent had time to read all 5 pages of this thread, so I dont know if this point was already brought up. Plax was already offered a deal for only 3 MONTHS in jail along with1,500 community service hours and he declined because he didnt want to go to jail. So because he declined it and let thins drag out, they treated it as a regular case and sentenced him to what they should have in the first place. How much more stupid could you be????

I don't this that offer was ever on the table.

</p>


Ya it was, lol. Right before they post poned his first court appearance.</p>

well, then that's more like what you or I would have gotten, if he denied it then it's his fault and his lawyers fault.

Mo Carthon
08-20-2009, 02:06 PM
I havent had time to read all 5 pages of this thread, so I dont know if this point was already brought up. Plax was already offered a deal for only 3 MONTHS in jail along with1,500 community service hours and he declined because he didnt want to go to jail. So because he declined it and let thins drag out, they treated it as a regular case and sentenced him to what they should have in the first place. How much more stupid could you be????

I don't this that offer was ever on the table.

</P>


Ya it was, lol. Right before they post poned his first court appearance.</P>


</P>


I dont recall that either, ever.</P>


</P>


There was an article about the 3-month offer in the Star Ledger -- Garofolo I assume -- several months ago that talked about it.</P>

Jint Fan 73
08-20-2009, 02:19 PM
I stand corrected..

And Davenill is flat out wrong [:P]

http://www.silive.com/sports/index.ssf/2009/05/report_plaxico_burress_shoots.html

nakis
08-20-2009, 02:25 PM
I remember an article that stated Plaxico was offered around 8 months of jail time and he refused it, against his lawyer’s recommendation to take the deal. Plaxico did not want to serve any time and that is what did him in, he showed no REMORSE
, that is why he got two years and not because he was famous.

Tolduso
08-20-2009, 02:28 PM
I feem and feel bad for Plax I work in the prison system and see repeated offenders with gun charges get released on programs! He got shafted but its off the Gmen and between him and Favre ill have to wait another week to hear about football.

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 02:34 PM
I stand corrected..

And Davenill is flat out wrong [:P]

http://www.silive.com/sports/index.ssf/2009/05/report_plaxico_burress_shoots.html


well there you go, I'm wrong, Plax was treated the same then, he just got greedy...and stupid, and thought he'd be able to get off with "nothing" he lost.

pino
08-20-2009, 02:36 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


"Quit breaking the law, *&amp;%hole!"-- Jim Carrey in "Liar Liar".</P>

dezzzR
08-20-2009, 02:54 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


i highly agree. **** bloomburg.</P>


Every american has a right to defend themselves regardless if its registered</P>


if he shot someone trying to break into his home with the same gunhe still would of been charged. this country is *** backwards. </P>


hes still an idiot for rocking a glock in his sweatpants and hes an idiot for not getting it registered, but still 2 years?!?</P>is that you blt??!?!?!lol

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 03:15 PM
Legal Annalist on Micheal Kay's show atm.

pino
08-20-2009, 03:16 PM
I can't help but think that with the support of the Giant organization behind him the outcome would have much different.

What a fool.


</P>


Yes I think so too. It seems like the Giants was willing to give him a second chance, too. He could have been out of jail by now, still a Giant, and ready to turn his life around. </P>


Now he'll most likely miss 2 seasons, be out of football shape, looking for a team, and possibly suspended.</P>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 03:21 PM
Roger Cosek a legal analyst who was just on the Micheal Kay show said the penalty was harsh.

now, the 3 month thing aside, 2 year's is apparently a "Harsh" penalty for carrying a gun illegally in NY...I'm glad that's been made clear finally, I though it was the case but I like hearing it from experts.

nakis
08-20-2009, 03:26 PM
John Mara's comments

Mara believes the district attorney, as well as New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, wanted to send a strong message to everyone.

"The laws in New York are pretty strict for this type of offense and rightfully so," Mara said. "I think, had this been Joe the Plumber, would he have gotten two years? I'm not so sure of that."

http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2009/08/former_ny_giants_teammates_rea.html

Roosevelt
08-20-2009, 03:53 PM
I can't help but think that with the support of the Giant organization behind him the outcome would have much different.

What a fool.


</p>


Yes I think so too. It seems like the Giants was willing to give him a second chance, too. He could have been out of jail by now, still a Giant, and ready to turn his life around. </p>


Now he'll most likely miss 2 seasons, be out of football shape, looking for a team, and possibly suspended.</p>

I can't imagine Goodell suspending him. That would be pretty harsh. I think he'll have suffered enough.

It will be interesting to see if he tries to make it back when he gets out of prison. He'll probably be about 34.

rocky325
08-20-2009, 04:01 PM
The whole thing is a mess. Look at Stallworth's sentence for DWI manslaughter, then Burress ends up getting 2 years for shooting himself in leg. He'll do as much time as Vick for actually killing live animals and a heck of a lot more that Stallworth for an accidental death of a human being.

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 04:09 PM
I can't help but think that with the support of the Giant organization behind him the outcome would have much different.

What a fool.


</p>


Yes I think so too. It seems like the Giants was willing to give him a second chance, too. He could have been out of jail by now, still a Giant, and ready to turn his life around. </p>


Now he'll most likely miss 2 seasons, be out of football shape, looking for a team, and possibly suspended.</p>

he's likely only going 20 months, and Vick is suspended, I don't see why you think Plax would get different treatment.
I can't imagine Goodell suspending him. That would be pretty harsh. I think he'll have suffered enough.

It will be interesting to see if he tries to make it back when he gets out of prison. He'll probably be about 34.

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 04:09 PM
I can't help but think that with the support of the Giant organization behind him the outcome would have much different.

What a fool.


</p>


Yes I think so too. It seems like the Giants was willing to give him a second chance, too. He could have been out of jail by now, still a Giant, and ready to turn his life around. </p>


Now he'll most likely miss 2 seasons, be out of football shape, looking for a team, and possibly suspended.</p>

I can't imagine Goodell suspending him. That would be pretty harsh. I think he'll have suffered enough.

It will be interesting to see if he tries to make it back when he gets out of prison. He'll probably be about 34.



he's likely only going 20 months, and Vick is suspended, I don't see why you think Plax would get different treatment.

byron
08-20-2009, 04:13 PM
I can't help but think that with the support of the Giant organization behind him the outcome would have much different.

What a fool.


</P>


Yes I think so too. It seems like the Giants was willing to give him a second chance, too. He could have been out of jail by now, still a Giant, and ready to turn his life around. </P>


Now he'll most likely miss 2 seasons, be out of football shape, looking for a team, and possibly suspended.</P> I'm with you guys he blew his chance when he turned downthat deal months ago... sorry guys.. but talk about shooting yourself in the foot...sad

redjersies
08-20-2009, 04:17 PM
The whole thing is a mess. Look at Stallworth's sentence for DWI manslaughter, then Burress ends up getting 2 years for shooting himself in leg. He'll do as much time as Vick for actually killing live animals and a heck of a lot more that Stallworth for an accidental death of a human being.</P>


I agree. To me, it is a bigger crime to take away 2 years of someone's life than for a person to have a gun on him. I think he should get a fine, and that's all--and not a huge fine at that. He only hurt himself.</P>


Isn't speeding just as endangering to other people's lives? But the real heavy punishments don't come unless you actually crash and hurt someone. I think this is in the same category.</P>

BlueBlitzer
08-20-2009, 04:23 PM
I only hope the good voters of NY remember, who instead of letting the law take its course. Decided to have a Photo-op with the press, Damning the man, and poisening any jury, while demanding a mandatory prison sentence. Before the man was even charged. I hope that Benedict Arnold ( He ran as a Republican when Rudy was popular, and then switched party lines Independant/Democrat when the war was unpopular) gets His But booted out of Gracie Mansion.

napier23
08-20-2009, 04:39 PM
Isnt it true that just weeks ago Plax and his lawyer turned down a plea deal for a 2-3 month prison term because they wanted to avoid jail time all together? If so that sucks, now he's doing 2 yrs?

Roosevelt
08-20-2009, 04:41 PM
I can't help but think that with the support of the Giant organization behind him the outcome would have much different.

What a fool.


</p>


Yes I think so too. It seems like the Giants was willing to give him a second chance, too. He could have been out of jail by now, still a Giant, and ready to turn his life around. </p>


Now he'll most likely miss 2 seasons, be out of football shape, looking for a team, and possibly suspended.</p>

I can't imagine Goodell suspending him. That would be pretty harsh. I think he'll have suffered enough.

It will be interesting to see if he tries to make it back when he gets out of prison. He'll probably be about 34.



he's likely only going 20 months, and Vick is suspended, I don't see why you think Plax would get different treatment.


I think Goodell well believe that the 20 month jail time along with the suspension he already served with the Giants will be sufficient.

PS - Good to see you stepping up and admitting when your wrong. I hope it continues. [;)]

n420p69
08-20-2009, 04:43 PM
Zero sympathy for him and its sad because I should have it for him considering without him in 2007 we probably wouldn't have even made the playoffs much less win the SB. But last year he screwed us big time and then demanded to be released claiming he never wanted to play for us again. So now I could care less about what he does. He got what he deserved.

rocky325
08-20-2009, 04:49 PM
The whole thing is a mess. Look at Stallworth's sentence for DWI manslaughter, then Burress ends up getting 2 years for shooting himself in leg. He'll do as much time as Vick for actually killing live animals and a heck of a lot more that Stallworth for an accidental death of a human being.</P>


I agree.* To me, it is a bigger crime to take away 2 years of someone's life than for a person to have a gun on him.** I think he should get a fine, and that's all--and not a huge fine at that.* He only hurt himself.*</P>


Isn't speeding just as endangering to other people's lives?* *But the real heavy punishments don't come unless you actually crash and hurt someone.* I think this is in the same category.</P>


This is just a senseless tragedy for all concerned....Plax, his wife, his son, the Giants, Giant fans.


This guy is coming off a SB season and makes an incredibly stupid personal decision that almost puts Pierce in jeopardy as well. All the arguements, pro and con regarding his behavior have long since come and gone.


To actually be sentenced to 2 years is very sobering and a sad moment for this guy and his family. To see Stallworth get 30 days for vehicular manslaughter is comical. Under Florida law it was the best he could do. I've seen posters comment on threads that he didn't get off easy...he got house arrest, his driver's license suspended forever, and he paid the victim's family a huge sum of money. Does this mean that Plax should get 30 days, house arrest, never allowed to have a gun again, and pay himself a huge fine....since he shot himself, he is technically the only victim?


Sadly that's not the case. Every State has different laws as does the federal government in Vick's instance. The sentence should fit the crime, but that's not how life works.


My main concern is the truth behind the statements that he turned down a plea deal for 3 months. For a first time offender who ended up only harming himself, that would have been a great, great deal considering Plaxico's celebrity and the mayor among others calling for his head the day after the crime was committed. I do smell a bit rat here. Either the reports of a plea deal are false or he hired the most inept criminal lawyer in the NY Bar!

Mo Carthon
08-20-2009, 04:54 PM
The whole thing is a mess. Look at Stallworth's sentence for DWI manslaughter, then Burress ends up getting 2 years for shooting himself in leg. He'll do as much time as Vick for actually killing live animals and a heck of a lot more that Stallworth for an accidental death of a human being.</P>


I agree. To me, it is a bigger crime to take away 2 years of someone's life than for a person to have a gun on him. I think he should get a fine, and that's all--and not a huge fine at that. He only hurt himself.</P>


Isn't speeding just as endangering to other people's lives? But the real heavy punishments don't come unless you actually crash and hurt someone. I think this is in the same category.</P>


This is just a senseless tragedy for all concerned....Plax, his wife, his son, the Giants, Giant fans. This guy is coming off a SB season and makes an incredibly stupid personal decision that almost puts Pierce in jeopardy as well. All the arguements, pro and con regarding his behavior have long since come and gone. To actually be sentenced to 2 years is very sobering and a sad moment for this guy and his family. To see Stallworth get 30 days for vehicular manslaughter is comical. Under Florida law it was the best he could do. I've seen posters comment on threads that he didn't get off easy...he got house arrest, his driver's license suspended forever, and he paid the victim's family a huge sum of money. Does this mean that Plax should get 30 days, house arrest, never allowed to have a gun again, and pay himself a huge fine....since he shot himself, he is technically the only victim? Sadly that's not the case. Every State has different laws as does the federal government in Vick's instance. The sentence should fit the crime, but that's not how life works. My main concern is the truth behind the statements that he turned down a plea deal for 3 months. For a first time offender who ended up only harming himself, that would have been a great, great deal considering Plaxico's celebrity and the mayor among others calling for his head the day after the crime was committed. I do smell a bit rat here. Either the reports of a plea deal are false or he hired the most inept criminal lawyer in the NY Bar!</P>


The 3-month offer comes from Bob Papa, and I suspect it's true. It really fits Plaxico's personality, as far as I can tell, for him to have thought that he could do better than what was then offered. Here's another article about it: http://www.faniq.com/blog/Plaxico-Burress-Turned-Down-Deal-For-3-Months-In-Prison-In-May-Whoops-Blog-28192</P>

tonyt830
08-20-2009, 04:55 PM
I stand corrected..

And Davenill is flat out wrong [:P]

http://www.silive.com/sports/index.ssf/2009/05/report_plaxico_burress_shoots.html
thanks Jint Fan 73! I tried listening and reading all of the media attention on the Plax incident since day 1, but after the Giants released him I got tired of the same ole same ole.</P>


But after reading that article, i think Plax is an even bigger dummy for not taking that offer in May. He could be out or almost out by now, depending on when he would have started his sentence. And even if Godell would have gave him a Vick-like suspension, some team may have taken a chance on him this coming season.</P>


But now it looks like his career will be over after serving 2 years or 20 months on good behavior. </P>


And I would have to agree with the posters who mentioned that Bloomberg was trying to make an example of Plax. But its over with now. We have moved on. i wish him the best, we all make mistakes. But Plax now has 20 months to think about those mistakes and the money he won't be making!</P>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 04:57 PM
Good to see you stepping up and admitting when your wrong. I hope it continues. [;)]


It's really not so unusual, I am wrong sometimes, and when someone can show me actual proof of that I Always admit it, I usually don't get involved in arguments where I can be proven wrong though, in this case, IF Plax was offered a 3 month deal (which the article says he was) then I think he WAS treated fairly so my claim that he wasn't is wrong.....that's very different then saying I'm wrong about Shockey or Brandon Marshell making our team better, there is no possible way you can "Prove" me wrong about that.

rocky325
08-20-2009, 05:01 PM
The whole thing is a mess. Look at Stallworth's sentence for DWI manslaughter, then Burress ends up getting 2 years for shooting himself in leg. He'll do as much time as Vick for actually killing live animals and a heck of a lot more that Stallworth for an accidental death of a human being.</P>


I agree.* To me, it is a bigger crime to take away 2 years of someone's life than for a person to have a gun on him.** I think he should get a fine, and that's all--and not a huge fine at that.* He only hurt himself.*</P>


Isn't speeding just as endangering to other people's lives?* *But the real heavy punishments don't come unless you actually crash and hurt someone.* I think this is in the same category.</P>


This is just a senseless tragedy for all concerned....Plax, his wife, his son, the Giants, Giant fans. This guy is coming off a SB season and makes an incredibly stupid personal decision that almost puts Pierce in jeopardy as well. All the arguements, pro and con regarding his behavior have long since come and gone. To actually be sentenced to 2 years is very sobering and a sad moment for this guy and his family. To see Stallworth get 30 days for vehicular manslaughter is comical. Under Florida law it was the best he could do. I've seen posters comment on threads that he didn't get off easy...he got house arrest, his driver's license suspended forever, and he paid the victim's family a huge sum of money. Does this mean that Plax should get 30 days, house arrest, never allowed to have a gun again, and pay himself a huge fine....since he shot himself, he is technically the only victim? Sadly that's not the case. Every State has different laws as does the federal government in Vick's instance. The sentence should fit the crime, but that's not how life works. My main concern is the truth behind the statements that he turned down a plea deal for 3 months. For a first time offender who ended up only harming himself, that would have been a great, great deal considering Plaxico's celebrity and the mayor among others calling for his head the day after the crime was committed. I do smell a bit rat here. Either the reports of a plea deal are false or he hired the most inept criminal lawyer in the NY Bar!</P>


The 3-month offer comes from Bob Papa, and I suspect it's true.* It really fits Plaxico's personality, as far as I can tell, for him to have thought that he could do better than what was then offered.* Here's another article about it:* http://www.faniq.com/blog/Plaxico-Burress-Turned-Down-Deal-For-3-Months-In-Prison-In-May-Whoops-Blog-28192</P>



Agreed. It sure does fit Plax's personal MO. Whether it was off the field problems or just skipping team meetings, he always seems to walk to his own beat. Perhaps that's why I find it so hard to believe that he was actually offered 3 months and ended up with a sentence of 24. Either his lawyer is inept or he's just the same ols stubborn Plax who doesn't take well to anyone's counsel

Morehead State
08-20-2009, 05:03 PM
You are all learning the futility of arguing with Daven.</P>


You can have all the facts, absolute proof and he will NEVER admit he's wrong. He will tell you that he is open to other views, but he's not.</P>

jakegibbs
08-20-2009, 05:04 PM
The whole thing is a mess. Look at Stallworth's sentence for DWI manslaughter, then Burress ends up getting 2 years for shooting himself in leg. He'll do as much time as Vick for actually killing live animals and a heck of a lot more that Stallworth for an accidental death of a human being.</P>


I agree. To me, it is a bigger crime to take away 2 years of someone's life than for a person to have a gun on him. I think he should get a fine, and that's all--and not a huge fine at that. He only hurt himself.</P>


Isn't speeding just as endangering to other people's lives? But the real heavy punishments don't come unless you actually crash and hurt someone. I think this is in the same category.</P>


This is just a senseless tragedy for all concerned....Plax, his wife, his son, the Giants, Giant fans. This guy is coming off a SB season and makes an incredibly stupid personal decision that almost puts Pierce in jeopardy as well. All the arguements, pro and con regarding his behavior have long since come and gone. To actually be sentenced to 2 years is very sobering and a sad moment for this guy and his family. To see Stallworth get 30 days for vehicular manslaughter is comical. Under Florida law it was the best he could do. I've seen posters comment on threads that he didn't get off easy...he got house arrest, his driver's license suspended forever, and he paid the victim's family a huge sum of money. Does this mean that Plax should get 30 days, house arrest, never allowed to have a gun again, and pay himself a huge fine....since he shot himself, he is technically the only victim? Sadly that's not the case. Every State has different laws as does the federal government in Vick's instance. The sentence should fit the crime, but that's not how life works. My main concern is the truth behind the statements that he turned down a plea deal for 3 months. For a first time offender who ended up only harming himself, that would have been a great, great deal considering Plaxico's celebrity and the mayor among others calling for his head the day after the crime was committed. I do smell a bit rat here. Either the reports of a plea deal are false or he hired the most inept criminal lawyer in the NY Bar!</P>


Don't get on Florida for their laws. The lawput blame on both parties. The fellow that got killed walked out into on comingtraffic so he boreequalblame. If Stallworth had been so drunk that he ran off the road &amp; struck the deceased while walking off the road they would have thrown the book at him. That's the way their law is written using common sense. NYC or NY State law is also very clear I guess. You carry a gun in a nightclub you're going to jail for at least 2 years up to 3.5 right? I hope you all still have the right to bear arms up there in NY State. If you don't then shame on you.</P>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 05:05 PM
You are all learning the futility of arguing with Daven.</p>


You can have all the facts, absolute proof and he will NEVER admit he's wrong. He will tell you that he is open to other views, but he's not.</p>

????

I already admitted I was wrong, you are showing your true self again, refusing to read anything I write and just trolling everytime you see a post with my avatar again aren't you.

Morehead State
08-20-2009, 05:11 PM
You are all learning the futility of arguing with Daven.</P>


You can have all the facts, absolute proof and he will NEVER admit he's wrong. He will tell you that he is open to other views, but he's not.</P>




????

I already admitted I was wrong, you are showing your true self again, refusing to read anything I write and just trolling everytime you see a post with my avatar again aren't you.
</P>


Daven, I have a short attention span so I haven't gone through the posts here while I was gone. If you give me the page on this thread I will find it. If you actually did admit you were wrong (it has to be on a big point) I will apologize without condition.</P>

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 05:15 PM
I stand corrected..

And Davenill is flat out wrong [:P]

http://www.silive.com/sports/index.ssf/2009/05/report_plaxico_burress_shoots.html


well there you go, I'm wrong, Plax was treated the same then, he just got greedy...and stupid, and thought he'd be able to get off with "nothing" he lost.


there you go Morehead....and it's a major point cause it's pretty much been my only point all thread, that he was treated unfairly...if he was offered a 3 month plea...which seems pretty fair to me, then I was wrong.

Morehead State
08-20-2009, 05:16 PM
No need, I found it. </P>


Daven, may I say that I was completely wrong about your unwillingness to admit error. I apologize without condition to you and your family.</P>


This is a very life affirming moment for me. My belief in the human condition is validated.</P>

derekunion28
08-20-2009, 05:37 PM
now vick can have him , so sad

appletree943
08-20-2009, 05:39 PM
and we complain celebs get off easy............dang

Roosevelt
08-20-2009, 05:43 PM
Good to see you stepping up and admitting when your wrong. I hope it continues. [;)]


It's really not so unusual, I am wrong sometimes, and when someone can show me actual proof of that I Always admit it, I usually don't get involved in arguments where I can be proven wrong though, in this case, IF Plax was offered a 3 month deal (which the article says he was) then I think he WAS treated fairly so my claim that he wasn't is wrong.....that's very different then saying I'm wrong about Shockey or Brandon Marshell making our team better, there is no possible way you can "Prove" me wrong about that.


Speaking of Shockey, what kind of year do expect from him?

I was reading on the Saints board that he hasn't had a good camp - looks like he's going through the motions out there.

I also read in SI that his fantasy stock has dropped way down. I think they put him at #26, while Boss is at #8.

What do you think?

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 05:49 PM
Speaking of Shockey, what kind of year do expect from him?

I was reading on the Saints board that he hasn't had a good camp - looks like he's going through the motions out there.

I also read in SI that his fantasy stock has dropped way down. I think they put him at #26, while Boss is at #8.

What do you think?


I think he'll be a top 10 receiving TE in terms of production.

Jint Fan 73
08-20-2009, 05:52 PM
Speaking of Shockey, what kind of year do expect from him?

I was reading on the Saints board that he hasn't had a good camp - looks like he's going through the motions out there.

I also read in SI that his fantasy stock has dropped way down. I think they put him at #26, while Boss is at #8.

What do you think?


I think he'll be a top 10 receiving TE in terms of production.


Given what you have seen so far of Sintim (and Bomar) vs what you think Shockey's production will be,
Do you think the trade was a better deal fro the Saints or for the Giants.

DavenIII
08-20-2009, 05:55 PM
Given what you have seen so far of Sintim (and Bomar) vs what you think Shockey's production will be,
Do you think the trade was a better deal fro the Saints or for the Giants.


I'd like to point out before I answer this, that I always specified that we would have been a better team in 2008 specifically (meaning I said THIS YEAR a lot) so regardless of whether we will get the better deal out of this or not...in 2008 we would have been better with shockey, then without shockey and two picks next year.

but....

to answer the question.

Sintim looks promising, Bomar is meh...Eli's got a long contract and Bomar is pretty useless for our team imho....

It's still to early for this year...I think the Saints still have the better end of the deal

Out of Exile
08-20-2009, 07:38 PM
Good to see you stepping up and admitting when your wrong.* I hope it continues.* [;)]


It's really not so unusual, I am wrong sometimes, and when someone can show me actual proof of that I Always admit it, I usually don't get involved in arguments where I can be proven wrong though, in this case, IF Plax was offered a 3 month deal (which the article says he was) then I think he WAS treated fairly so my claim that he wasn't is wrong.....that's very different then saying I'm wrong about Shockey or Brandon Marshell making our team better, there is no possible way you can "Prove" me wrong about that.


Speaking of Shockey, what kind of year do expect from him?

I was reading on the Saints board that he hasn't had a good camp - looks like he's going through the motions out there.

I also read in SI that his fantasy stock has dropped way down.* I think they put him at #26, while Boss is at #8.

What do you think?


Didn't he have like 60 yards and a TD the other night? I will take that from my TE anyday.

loaded30
08-20-2009, 08:52 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
Its a shame isn't it. </P>


I'll tell you one thing I believe, Mr. Bloomburg was just trying to make a name for himself. I live in LA and I didn't have a clue who Bloomburg was. But now I know.</P>


Get my point. Its all abouta individual like Bloomburg to feed off someone else's fame.</P>


You look at what Stallworth got off with,he was guilty andKILLED someone else. Just doesn't make sense to me.</P>


Yes, I look at Stallworth and I saw a contrite man, who owned up to everything he did right away and apologized, and when he looked for mercy from the court - he found some. I don't remember seeing ANY of that from Plax.</P>


I understand what your saying, but he killed a man and was under the influence. Last time I checked thats breaking the law. </P>


All I'm saying isBloomburg &amp; the courts made an example out of him. I guess its all about the city. I guess if you feel like commiting a crime and getting away with it, means you just have to stay out of NY &amp; LA. I really feel bad for Plax even though he aint a giant anymore.</P>


Plax's fault, but i really feel he had no bad intensions and thats what burns.</P>

stircrazy581
08-20-2009, 08:59 PM
Waiting for a link but ESPN just stated that Burress had agreed to plead guilty to weapons charge and receive a 2 year prison term.

</P>


HOW MUCH YOU THINK HIS SIGNING BONUS IS GOING TO BE? AHHHHHHHHHHH</P>

ShockeyTime
08-20-2009, 09:19 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.
</P>


i highly agree. **** bloomburg.</P>


Every american has a right to defend themselves regardless if its registered</P>


if he shot someone trying to break into his home with the same gunhe still would of been charged. this country is *** backwards. </P>


hes still an idiot for rocking a glock in his sweatpants and hes an idiot for not getting it registered, but still 2 years?!?</P>


</P>


&gt;</P>


You say one thing then another. Fact is Moronixico, Brought a Loaded Glock handgun INTO a frigging nightclub!!!!! Add in it was'nt registered in NY - If you wanna try n be a Tough guy, be prepared to except the outcome. </P>


BTW. I Agree that we should be allowed to have weapons/guns if they want, but You Do Not bring it into Nightclubs OR Wendy's or Your flipping dentist!!!!!!! &amp; He Won't do the full 2 years, he'll get time off for good behavior - IMHO....</P>

killerblue8787
08-21-2009, 01:56 AM
First i find it a tragedy that burress went from everything to practically nothing. Its sad to see that happen to any man though it was his fault this happened. That being said I personally feel that this was all about Bloomburg and the DA getting publicly to send a message about burress. The penalty does not fit the crime and a man will lose nearly 2 years of his life for a stupid mistake. We can say well if this happened or this happened, but it did not happen like that he shot himself. Yes i agree there was need for some punishment because he did bring a weapon in illegally but 2 years is too much and i prob would not have a problem with it if Bloomburg did not from the beginning make the statement that Plex would be an example. If bloomburg really want to make a statement use plex's celebrity to help teach kids about gun control and saftey let him do 6 months and do a lot of community service that's how he can benefit society but putting him behind bars for 2 years is absolutely insane and makes no sense as he had no criminal intent unlike a lot of other people who illegally carry guns in NYC. But as many in NYC know when Bloomburg wants to put himself in the public eye and the papers he'll do anything to do so. Even if it means destroying a mans life when in reality the situation could have been a lot better if he thought about what would be the best for NYC not how he would look in the public eye.

MOOK3456
08-21-2009, 03:34 AM
First i find it a tragedy that burress went from everything to practically nothing. Its sad to see that happen to any man though it was his fault this happened. That being said I personally feel that this was all about Bloomburg and the DA getting publicly to send a message about burress. The penalty does not fit the crime and a man will lose nearly 2 years of his life for a stupid mistake. We can say well if this happened or this happened, but it did not happen like that he shot himself. Yes i agree there was need for some punishment because he did bring a weapon in illegally but 2 years is too much and i prob would not have a problem with it if Bloomburg did not from the beginning make the statement that Plex would be an example. If bloomburg really want to make a statement use plex's celebrity to help teach kids about gun control and saftey let him do 6 months and do a lot of community service that's how he can benefit society but putting him behind bars for 2 years is absolutely insane and makes no sense as he had no criminal intent unlike a lot of other people who illegally carry guns in NYC. But as many in NYC know when Bloomburg wants to put himself in the public eye and the papers he'll do anything to do so. Even if it means destroying a mans life when in reality the situation could have been a lot better if he thought about what would be the best for NYC not how he would look in the public eye.


meh..I don't know about practically nothing. The guy is still rich when he gets out.... If I knew I had a couple cool million waiting for me, that would be easy time for sure. You know he isn't going to gen population anyways...As far as the 6 months he was offered 3 months. He decided to decline and let it get out of hand. He's an idiot.

Providence
08-21-2009, 10:02 AM
Plax got hosed, plain and simple. Yes he did something outrageously stupid that could have resulted in someone getting shot in the head (and yes that person could have been you, me, or any of our loved ones). But what about drunk driving? I am not trying to bring up the Stallworth case, just drunk driving in general. I am willing to bet my next pay check that statistics show that more deaths occur from drunk driving then gun accidents. Plax got 2 years because his action could have potentially killed someone. If I get pulled over for drunk driving, an action that is much more likely to kill someone, I get hit with a hefty fine and I lose my license, maybe do a night in the clink. </P>


I am not letting plax off the hook in anyway, what he did was absolutely stupid and she be slapped around by everyone in that club for it. But 2 years in prison?! That is not justice, that is one cities' crusade to set an example.</P>

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 10:11 AM
Plax got hosed, plain and simple. Yes he did something outrageously stupid that could have resulted in someone getting shot in the head (and yes that person could have been you, me, or any of our loved ones). But what about drunk driving? I am not trying to bring up the Stallworth case, just drunk driving in general. I am willing to bet my next pay check that statistics show that more deaths occur from drunk driving then gun accidents. Plax got 2 years because his action could have potentially killed someone. If I get pulled over for drunk driving, an action that is much more likely to kill someone, I get hit with a hefty fine and I lose my license, maybe do a night in the clink. </p>


I am not letting plax off the hook in anyway, what he did was absolutely stupid and she be slapped around by everyone in that club for it. But 2 years in prison?! That is not justice, that is one cities' crusade to set an example.</p>

Plax got hosed because the drunk driving laws are too lenient?

That makes alot of sense.....

RoanokeFan
08-21-2009, 10:23 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.


Why do you think Plaxico was treated unfairly

RoanokeFan
08-21-2009, 10:35 AM
Plax got hosed, plain and simple. Yes he did something outrageously stupid that could have resulted in someone getting shot in the head (and yes that person could have been you, me, or any of our loved ones). But what about drunk driving? I am not trying to bring up the Stallworth case, just drunk driving in general. I am willing to bet my next pay check that statistics show that more deaths occur from drunk driving then gun accidents. Plax got 2 years because his action could have potentially killed someone. If I get pulled over for drunk driving, an action that is much more likely to kill someone, I get hit with a hefty fine and I lose my license, maybe do a night in the clink. </p>


I am not letting plax off the hook in anyway, what he did was absolutely stupid and she be slapped around by everyone in that club for it. But 2 years in prison?! That is not justice, that is one cities' crusade to set an example.</p>

Providence, the most serious charges DID NOT stem from Plaxico shooting himself or putting others in harm's way. He carried a concealed, loaded, unlicensed firearm in the City of New York. THAT was his most serious crime (two counts of his indictment). It happens that NYC takes that crime so seriously they legislated mandatory sentencing. You can argue about the pros and cons of mandatory sentencing ll you want but until a case reaches the Supreme Court, that's the law. It's the same law you and me as it is for Plaxico.

byron
08-21-2009, 10:44 AM
Plax got hosed, plain and simple. Yes he did something outrageously stupid that could have resulted in someone getting shot in the head (and yes that person could have been you, me, or any of our loved ones). But what about drunk driving? I am not trying to bring up the Stallworth case, just drunk driving in general. I am willing to bet my next pay check that statistics show that more deaths occur from drunk driving then gun accidents. Plax got 2 years because his action could have potentially killed someone. If I get pulled over for drunk driving, an action that is much more likely to kill someone, I get hit with a hefty fine and I lose my license, maybe do a night in the clink. </P>


I am not letting plax off the hook in anyway, what he did was absolutely stupid and she be slapped around by everyone in that club for it. But 2 years in prison?! That is not justice, that is one cities' crusade to set an example.</P>


Hows it going Providence...I also think Plax got to much ..2 years in prison, all the money he's lost and perhaps the end of his career.</P>


As far as drunk driving goes it varies from state to state. Here in the state Maine its serious business you kill someone while driving drunk more than likelyyour going to time. Couple links here if your interested ..one habitual offenders case here http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/specialrpts/alcohol/d4oui.htmand a first timer herehttp://www.wabi.tv/news/6996/sinclair-sentenced-for-vehicular-manslaughter-and-ouithey can hand out 30 years for this offence. anyway throught you might like to check it out </P>

MOOK3456
08-21-2009, 11:04 AM
I don't think he got too much at all. He got less than the minimum. How is that too much?

Also anyone who has ever been in the system can tell you that if you decide to push to long you end up losing and getting a more severe sentence. Is it right? No. Is it reality in our system? Yes.

Especially in a case where you are clearly 100% guilty, you take whatever deal they are willing to give you, the first time they offer it.

He's an idiot for trying to fight it and even so he still got off easier than he could have. If they were "out to get him" he'd be doing 5 years. Not to mention he will be in there for the winter months, I bet you anything he's released before next summer.

Roosevelt
08-21-2009, 11:11 AM
Plax got hosed, plain and simple. Yes he did something outrageously stupid that could have resulted in someone getting shot in the head (and yes that person could have been you, me, or any of our loved ones). But what about drunk driving? I am not trying to bring up the Stallworth case, just drunk driving in general. I am willing to bet my next pay check that statistics show that more deaths occur from drunk driving then gun accidents. Plax got 2 years because his action could have potentially killed someone. If I get pulled over for drunk driving, an action that is much more likely to kill someone, I get hit with a hefty fine and I lose my license, maybe do a night in the clink. </p>


I am not letting plax off the hook in anyway, what he did was absolutely stupid and she be slapped around by everyone in that club for it. But 2 years in prison?! That is not justice, that is one cities' crusade to set an example.</p>

Providence, the most serious charges DID NOT stem from Plaxico shooting himself or putting others in harm's way. He carried a concealed, loaded, unlicensed firearm in the City of New York. THAT was his most serious crime (two counts of his indictment). It happens that NYC takes that crime so seriously they legislated mandatory sentencing. You can argue about the pros and cons of mandatory sentencing ll you want but until a case reaches the Supreme Court, that's the law. It's the same law you and me as it is for Plaxico.




I agree Teri....errrrr....RF. [;)]

What we need to remember is that Plaxico committed a crime that carried with it a mandatory 3 1/2 year jail sentence. He had no defense in this case. Everyone knew he was guilty.

Most of us feel that 20 months is too long a sentence, and I'm one of them. But maybe we should look at it from a different perspective. He could have gotten the 3 1/2 years. Imagine the example the DA could have made of him.

Roosevelt
08-21-2009, 11:19 AM
I don't think he got too much at all. He got less than the minimum. How is that too much?

Also anyone who has ever been in the system can tell you that if you decide to push to long you end up losing and getting a more severe sentence. Is it right? No. Is it reality in our system? Yes.

Especially in a case where you are clearly 100% guilty, you take whatever deal they are willing to give you, the first time they offer it.

He's an idiot for trying to fight it and even so he still got off easier than he could have. If they were "out to get him" he'd be doing 5 years. Not to mention he will be in there for the winter months, I bet you anything he's released before next summer.


I agree with everything you said except I think the sentence is too harsh.

Plaxico had no intention of criminal activity with that gun - we all know that. He put himself and others in danger. And he shot himself. You believe that is truly worth a 2 year sentence?

RoanokeFan
08-21-2009, 11:26 AM
Plax got hosed, plain and simple. Yes he did something outrageously stupid that could have resulted in someone getting shot in the head (and yes that person could have been you, me, or any of our loved ones). But what about drunk driving? I am not trying to bring up the Stallworth case, just drunk driving in general. I am willing to bet my next pay check that statistics show that more deaths occur from drunk driving then gun accidents. Plax got 2 years because his action could have potentially killed someone. If I get pulled over for drunk driving, an action that is much more likely to kill someone, I get hit with a hefty fine and I lose my license, maybe do a night in the clink. </p>


I am not letting plax off the hook in anyway, what he did was absolutely stupid and she be slapped around by everyone in that club for it. But 2 years in prison?! That is not justice, that is one cities' crusade to set an example.</p>

Providence, the most serious charges DID NOT stem from Plaxico shooting himself or putting others in harm's way. He carried a concealed, loaded, unlicensed firearm in the City of New York. THAT was his most serious crime (two counts of his indictment). It happens that NYC takes that crime so seriously they legislated mandatory sentencing. You can argue about the pros and cons of mandatory sentencing ll you want but until a case reaches the Supreme Court, that's the law. It's the same law you and me as it is for Plaxico.




I agree Teri....errrrr....RF. [;)]

What we need to remember is that Plaxico committed a crime that carried with it a mandatory 3 1/2 year jail sentence. He had no defense in this case. Everyone knew he was guilty.

Most of us feel that 20 months is too long a sentence, and I'm one of them. But maybe we should look at it from a different perspective. He could have gotten the 3 1/2 years. Imagine the example the DA could have made of him.


That might be a better perspective for sure. Also consider this, that was the same deal Burress turned down at least once. That he was allowed to plead to that after refusing is a testament to how the system works. Brafman knew once that deal was shelved he would likely not get the same offer again. The DA threw them a bone.

Without discussing the merits of the law or the U.S. Constitution, Plaxico was given leniency UNDER THAT STATUTE. Like it or not, believe it or not.

byron
08-21-2009, 11:33 AM
I don't think he got too much at all. He got less than the minimum. How is that too much?

Also anyone who has ever been in the system can tell you that if you decide to push to long you end up losing and getting a more severe sentence. Is it right? No. Is it reality in our system? Yes.

Especially in a case where you are clearly 100% guilty, you take whatever deal they are willing to give you, the first time they offer it.

He's an idiot for trying to fight it and even so he still got off easier than he could have. If they were "out to get him" he'd be doing 5 years. Not to mention he will be in there for the winter months, I bet you anything he's released before next summer.
</P>


We could go back an fourth on this all day long.. its a done deal.. bottom lineyou break the law, get caught,you pay price. I 've been in trouble a few times myself..you **** with them andthey'll put it to you. I alsoagree. he was stupid not to take the deal and agree it could have been worst as far as amounttime goes. But the money this thing cost him is astronomical... imho...oh well ..at the end of the day.. its his own fault.</P>

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 11:36 AM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.


Why do you think Plaxico was treated unfairly


oh no, your right what am I thinking had it been me surely bloomberg would have put exactly the same pressure on the DA.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 11:38 AM
Without discussing the merits of the law or the U.S. Constitution, Plaxico was given leniency UNDER THAT STATUTE. Like it or not, believe it or not.


but that's not the question the question is how much time would you or I serve had we committed the same crime, my guess? 3 months tops.

Providence
08-21-2009, 11:38 AM
Plax got hosed, plain and simple. Yes he did something outrageously stupid that could have resulted in someone getting shot in the head (and yes that person could have been you, me, or any of our loved ones). But what about drunk driving? I am not trying to bring up the Stallworth case, just drunk driving in general. I am willing to bet my next pay check that statistics show that more deaths occur from drunk driving then gun accidents. Plax got 2 years because his action could have potentially killed someone. If I get pulled over for drunk driving, an action that is much more likely to kill someone, I get hit with a hefty fine and I lose my license, maybe do a night in the clink. </P>


I am not letting plax off the hook in anyway, what he did was absolutely stupid and she be slapped around by everyone in that club for it. But 2 years in prison?! That is not justice, that is one cities' crusade to set an example.</P>




Providence, the most serious charges DID NOT stem from Plaxico shooting himself or putting others in harm's way. He carried a concealed, loaded, unlicensed firearm in the City of New York. THAT was his most serious crime (two counts of his indictment). It happens that NYC takes that crime so seriously they legislated mandatory sentencing. You can argue about the pros and cons of mandatory sentencing ll you want but until a case reaches the Supreme Court, that's the law. It's the same law you and me as it is for Plaxico.




I agree Teri....errrrr....RF. [;)]

What we need to remember is that Plaxico committed a crime that carried with it a mandatory 3 1/2 year jail sentence. He had no defense in this case. Everyone knew he was guilty.

Most of us feel that 20 months is too long a sentence, and I'm one of them. But maybe we should look at it from a different perspective. He could have gotten the 3 1/2 years. Imagine the example the DA could have made of him.


That might be a better perspective for sure. Also consider this, that was the same deal Burress turned down at least once. That he was allowed to plead to that after refusing is a testament to how the system works. Brafman knew once that deal was shelved he would likely not get the same offer again. The DA threw them a bone.

Without discussing the merits of the law or the U.S. Constitution, Plaxico was given leniency UNDER THAT STATUTE. Like it or not, believe it or not.
</P>


Roanoke and Rosie you both make good points. I guess I did overlook the conceleaed, unregistered weapon part a bit. Because I work very closely with the prison system here in Rhode Island and with current and formerly incarcerated men and women I guess it just pains me to see another long sentence (Rhode Island institutes some of the longest). 6 months to serve and 2 years probation would have made more sense. Nevertheless, I don't live in the Big Apple and with all the variables that happen there you've got to keep people in line. Carrying unlicensed adn inregistered weapons is a major staple of gang violence (at least it is in Providence, I am assuming it is in N.Y. too) so if these type of mandatory laws are a barrier to said actions then that is a positive. No happy medium on this one, someone's got to pay the price. This time it was Plax.</P>

rocky325
08-21-2009, 12:01 PM
There have so many threads concerning Burress, Vick, and so many other players. Everyone, including myself, has commented on the crimes and the sentences. All of us have, for the most part, missed both the point and the real problem.



The point is that none of these sentences matter. Whether Burress got two years and Stallwoth got 30 days doesn't matter. The sentences are what they are. Crimes committed by any of these players have occurred in States and within federal government juristictions (as with Vick) with different laws and sentences, sometimes for the same crime. It doesn't matter what Plax got compared to what Vick got compared to what Pacman probably didn't get.



The issue is the real problem which is the number of instances within the NFL wherby players are committing these crimes.


Every sport has it's problems. Whether it's steroid use in baseball. An assault charge against against a hockey player, etc. The real problem seems to be the increasing rate at which NFL players are involved in either detrimental conduct, misdemeanors, or felonies. heck they currently have a coverup of sorts going on in Oakland regarding the head coach alledgedly breaking an assistant's jaw!!



The real problem lies with the Commish, the owners, the players, and to a degree the fans. It doesn't matter what happens to a player once he enters the criminal justice system.....it is whatever it is. Every case is different, every sentence varies. The same applies for anyone whether they're an athlete or not. If you've got money or celebrity behind you it helps, sometimes it doesn't.



Considering the real problem, the league needs to address two things. How to better get the message of prevention out to their personnel and what exactly is the across the board policy for anyone convicted of a felony or any conduct detrimental to employment. From what has been reported over the years, other than hiring a personal babysitter for some of these guys (Dallas tried that last year with Pacman) the league actually has done almost everything they can do to deter this type of conduct. The bottom line is that people are people. Some people get it.....it's a priviledge to play in NFL. Some don't.....they believe that based on their talent,,,it's an entitlement. Pacman is the poster boy for that kind of behavior.



The league needs to be consistent and firm in how they regard employment for these guys. The bottom line here is that the NFL is no different than any other major business in the country that deals with union and non union employees. You have a cose of conduct that all employees are required to adhere to.....enforce it! If I embezzled money from my employer, once i pay my debt to society, I am free to start my life over and have someone give me a second chance. However I guarantee that my employer will not hire me based solely on having violated their code of conduct. This is what's known as setting an example to enforce the integrity of the business and it's employees!!!



There's the rub!! The NFL believes these guys should get another chance. None of us would get another chance with our current employers! I've seen employees in my company fired for violating the code. They're supposed to be on a service call and they're seen in a bar during work hours.....clear cut...you're fired!! And tha't without ever committing a crime. The NFL, it's teams, the media, and yes...all the fans start whining that the guy should be reinstated. The NFL will die if Michael Vick isn't playing and being the cover boy for all those endorsements. BS!!! The Falcons replaced him with Matt Ryan and the NFL lives on!!



The issue is not their sentences....it's their behavior people!! The NFL and all of us can live without these clowns. You've got hard working Americans losing their jobs and their homes and we're all worried about the Stallworth's, the Burress', the Vicks, and whether Pete Rose belongs in the hall of fame? Get real!! these guys had their chance. They knew the the consequences. They all deserve a second chance, but the same second chance as the rest of us. Serve your time and go get a real job and get on with your life. Reinstatement in the NFL? Wake up Commissioner and get your act in order and don't be a shill for the owners, the players, and their legal mouthpieces. And the rest of us should kiss these guys goodbye as the Giants did to Plax and move on....there's always another season starting and another game to play. The game goes on without these guys and that's what we should all focus on

MOOK3456
08-21-2009, 12:14 PM
oopz

MOOK3456
08-21-2009, 12:15 PM
I don't think he got too much at all. He got less than the minimum. How is that too much?

Also anyone who has ever been in the system can tell you that if you decide to push to long you end up losing and getting a more severe sentence. Is it right? No. Is it reality in our system? Yes.

Especially in a case where you are clearly 100% guilty, you take whatever deal they are willing to give you, the first time they offer it.

He's an idiot for trying to fight it and even so he still got off easier than he could have. If they were "out to get him" he'd be doing 5 years. Not to mention he will be in there for the winter months, I bet you anything he's released before next summer.


I agree with everything you said except I think the sentence is too harsh.

Plaxico had no intention of criminal activity with that gun - we all know that. He put himself and others in danger. And he shot himself. You believe that is truly worth a 2 year sentence?




Like I said, in NY he isn't serving a full two years, no way with
winter coming up. Overcrowding alone will get him released *unless* he
acts like a complete tool while he's in there.

Do I think it's
worth 2 years? If the mandatory min is 3 years...Yeah. However I think
consideration should be made to the circumstances. But now we find out
they were indeed taken into account and Plax laughed at it....

I
think he's been a fool. If you are facing 3.5 years min for something
you "obviously" did with no doubt in anyone's mind and they offer you 3
months do you turn your nose up at them? I have no idea what the hell
he/his lawyer was thinking...

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 12:20 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.


Why do you think Plaxico was treated unfairly


oh no, your right what am I thinking had it been me surely bloomberg would have put exactly the same pressure on the DA.


Since the DA didn't "prosecute to the max" like Bloomberg requested I would say it wouldn't matter.

Just like it didn't matter with Plax.

Morgenthal is a 90 year old DA who is not up for reelection.

He is going to do what he thinks is right regardless of what the mayor says

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 12:24 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.


Why do you think Plaxico was treated unfairly


oh no, your right what am I thinking had it been me surely bloomberg would have put exactly the same pressure on the DA.


Since the DA didn't "prosecute to the max" like Bloomberg requested I would say it wouldn't matter.

Just like it didn't matter with Plax.

Morgenthal is a 90 year old DA who is not up for reelection.

He is going to do what he thinks is right regardless of what the mayor says



Since he got 2 years which most lawyers and law analysts I've heard think is an extremely harsh sentence for the crime I'd say it did have an effect.

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 12:30 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.


Why do you think Plaxico was treated unfairly


oh no, your right what am I thinking had it been me surely bloomberg would have put exactly the same pressure on the DA.


Since the DA didn't "prosecute to the max" like Bloomberg requested I would say it wouldn't matter.

Just like it didn't matter with Plax.

Morgenthal is a 90 year old DA who is not up for reelection.

He is going to do what he thinks is right regardless of what the mayor says



Since he got 2 years which most lawyers and law analysts I've heard think is an extremely harsh sentence for the crime I'd say it did have an effect.


I have heard other "experts" say he got treated just like any other person would have.

"Assistant District Attorney Mark Dwyer said it is standard policy to
request a two-year sentence as part of a plea bargain on such serious
charges. Sentencing was set for Sept. 22."

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 12:32 PM
I have heard other "experts" say he got treated just like any other person would have.

I've not heard it one time, and I've been paying pretty close attention to this topic, it must be a very rare expert who thinks that.

Roosevelt
08-21-2009, 12:35 PM
I don't think he got too much at all. He got less than the minimum. How is that too much?

Also anyone who has ever been in the system can tell you that if you decide to push to long you end up losing and getting a more severe sentence. Is it right? No. Is it reality in our system? Yes.

Especially in a case where you are clearly 100% guilty, you take whatever deal they are willing to give you, the first time they offer it.

He's an idiot for trying to fight it and even so he still got off easier than he could have. If they were "out to get him" he'd be doing 5 years. Not to mention he will be in there for the winter months, I bet you anything he's released before next summer.


I agree with everything you said except I think the sentence is too harsh.

Plaxico had no intention of criminal activity with that gun - we all know that. He put himself and others in danger. And he shot himself. You believe that is truly worth a 2 year sentence?




Like I said, in NY he isn't serving a full two years, no way with
winter coming up. Overcrowding alone will get him released *unless* he
acts like a complete tool while he's in there.

Do I think it's
worth 2 years? If the mandatory min is 3 years...Yeah. However I think
consideration should be made to the circumstances. But now we find out
they were indeed taken into account and Plax laughed at it....

<font size="4">I
think he's been a fool. If you are facing 3.5 years min for something
you "obviously" did with no doubt in anyone's mind and they offer you 3
months do you turn your nose up at them? I have no idea what the hell
he/his lawyer was thinking...</font>


Without a doubt. Either he received terrible advise or he went against it, I'm not sure which. I've stated several times that I questioned why in the world did he abandon this team. I can't help but think that with the organization behind him he would have fared much better.

Roosevelt
08-21-2009, 12:36 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.


Why do you think Plaxico was treated unfairly


oh no, your right what am I thinking had it been me surely bloomberg would have put exactly the same pressure on the DA.


Since the DA didn't "prosecute to the max" like Bloomberg requested I would say it wouldn't matter.

Just like it didn't matter with Plax.

Morgenthal is a 90 year old DA who is not up for reelection.

He is going to do what he thinks is right regardless of what the mayor says



Since he got 2 years which most lawyers and law analysts I've heard think is an extremely harsh sentence for the crime I'd say it did have an effect.


I have heard other "experts" say he got treated just like any other person would have.

"Assistant District Attorney Mark Dwyer said it is standard policy to
request a two-year sentence as part of a plea bargain on such serious
charges. Sentencing was set for Sept. 22."



I've heard the same.

RoanokeFan
08-21-2009, 12:39 PM
I have heard other "experts" say he got treated just like any other person would have.

I've not heard it one time, and I've been paying pretty close attention to this topic, it must be a very rare expert who thinks that.


No, Jint is correct, in fact the ADA presenting before the court made that exact argument to assure the judge there was no disparate treatment. If he were lying, he would be disbarred.

RoanokeFan
08-21-2009, 12:41 PM
It's a damn shame they couldn't treat him fairly and decided to make an example out of him because of his fame.


Why do you think Plaxico was treated unfairly


oh no, your right what am I thinking had it been me surely bloomberg would have put exactly the same pressure on the DA.


Bloomberg flapping his gums had no effect on the outcome of this case. Nothing he said was anything more that theater for the voters of NYC. The mayor does not control the court system any more than the President controls the Supreme Court.

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 12:42 PM
I have heard other "experts" say he got treated just like any other person would have.

I've not heard it one time, and I've been paying pretty close attention to this topic, it must be a very rare expert who thinks that.


I dont think you are looking in the right places - here is another

from last december - this guy seemed to know what he is talking about

Instead, the three-and-a-half year minimum sentence was established. As
a result, legal experts said Tuesday, Burress may have little wiggle
room as he tries to avoid prison time. “Even if he pleads down, he can
only plead down one count and he would still face a minimum of two
years in prison,” said Robert C. Gottlieb, a New York-based criminal
defense lawyer and a former prosecutor in the Manhattan district
attorney’s office. “The other wiggle room is that he could try and
prevent the district attorney’s office from charging him with this
crime and charge him with a lesser crime.”

http://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/2008/12/main-threat-to-burress-is-a-sentencing-law.html

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 12:42 PM
I have heard other "experts" say he got treated just like any other person would have.

I've not heard it one time, and I've been paying pretty close attention to this topic, it must be a very rare expert who thinks that.


No, Jint is correct, in fact the ADA presenting before the court made that exact argument to assure the judge there was no disparate treatment. If he were lying, he would be disbarred.


So what about the 8 or 9 lawyers or law analysts brought on to talk radio and on TV saying otherwise....?

Look, it's said he was offered 3 months and didn't accept it, so that's his bad, but 2 years is a LONG sentence for this crime, most people don't get that.


[Edit] If what you are saying is true Jints, how come he was offered 3 months? 2 years is an unusually long sentence for the crime Plax committed...that's why he was offered less, it's his fault he didn't take it.

RoanokeFan
08-21-2009, 12:43 PM
I don't think he got too much at all. He got less than the minimum. How is that too much?

Also anyone who has ever been in the system can tell you that if you decide to push to long you end up losing and getting a more severe sentence. Is it right? No. Is it reality in our system? Yes.

Especially in a case where you are clearly 100% guilty, you take whatever deal they are willing to give you, the first time they offer it.

He's an idiot for trying to fight it and even so he still got off easier than he could have. If they were "out to get him" he'd be doing 5 years. Not to mention he will be in there for the winter months, I bet you anything he's released before next summer.


I agree with everything you said except I think the sentence is too harsh.

Plaxico had no intention of criminal activity with that gun - we all know that. He put himself and others in danger. And he shot himself. You believe that is truly worth a 2 year sentence?




Like I said, in NY he isn't serving a full two years, no way with
winter coming up. Overcrowding alone will get him released *unless* he
acts like a complete tool while he's in there.

Do I think it's
worth 2 years? If the mandatory min is 3 years...Yeah. However I think
consideration should be made to the circumstances. But now we find out
they were indeed taken into account and Plax laughed at it....

<font size="4">I
think he's been a fool. If you are facing 3.5 years min for something
you "obviously" did with no doubt in anyone's mind and they offer you 3
months do you turn your nose up at them? I have no idea what the hell
he/his lawyer was thinking...</font>


Without a doubt. Either he received terrible advise or he went against it, I'm not sure which. I've stated several times that I questioned why in the world did he abandon this team. I can't help but think that with the organization behind him he would have fared much better.


Rosie, I am pretty sure he ignored Brafman until it was time to go to trial. A trial would have been worse. Brafman is not an idiot and had to be begging Plaxico to take the deal when it was originally offered.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 12:44 PM
Rosie, I am pretty sure he ignored Brafman until it was time to go to trial. A trial would have been worse. Brafman is not an idiot and had to be begging Plaxico to take the deal when it was originally offered.


I agree.

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 12:45 PM
One thing to remember - those stats all these experts are referring to and the ones from the article I posted yeaterday are from 2003-2007.

The new tough laws didn't get on the books till 2006 so it makes them largely useless

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 12:46 PM
I have heard other "experts" say he got treated just like any other person would have.

I've not heard it one time, and I've been paying pretty close attention to this topic, it must be a very rare expert who thinks that.


No, Jint is correct, in fact the ADA presenting before the court made that exact argument to assure the judge there was no disparate treatment. If he were lying, he would be disbarred.


So what about the 8 or 9 lawyers or law analysts brought on to talk radio and on TV saying otherwise....?

Look, it's said he was offered 3 months and didn't accept it, so that's his bad, but 2 years is a LONG sentence for this crime, most people don't get that.


[Edit] If what you are saying is true Jints, how come he was offered 3 months? 2 years is an unusually long sentence for the crime Plax committed...that's why he was offered less, it's his fault he didn't take it.


I don't know

Braffman is denying the 3 month deal was ever on the table - maybe it never was.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 12:47 PM
One thing to remember - those stats all these experts are referring to and the ones from the article I posted yeaterday are from 2003-2007.

The new tough laws didn't get on the books till 2006 so it makes them largely useless



he was offered 3 months Jints, average joes and celebrities alike, never does a first time offender ever serve a full sentence, it just doesn't happen....Unless its like murder.

rocky325
08-21-2009, 12:48 PM
I have heard other "experts" say he got treated just like any other person would have.

I've not heard it one time, and I've been paying pretty close attention to this topic, it must be a very rare expert who thinks that.


No, Jint is correct, in fact the ADA presenting before the court made that exact argument to assure the judge there was no disparate treatment.* If he were lying, he would be disbarred.


So what about the 8 or 9 lawyers or law analysts brought on to talk radio and on TV saying otherwise....?

Look, it's said he was offered 3 months and didn't accept it, so that's his bad, but 2 years is a LONG sentence for this crime, most people don't get that.


[Edit] If what you are saying is true Jints, how come he was offered 3 months? 2 years is an unusually long sentence for the crime Plax committed...that's why he was offered less, it's his fault he didn't take it.



Read my earlier post. You're all beating a dead horse! Who cares what sentence he got.......3 months or 3 years. Once the guy, or any other guy, gets convicted, it's moot. The problem is either the NFL trying to prevent this stuff or better yet....why are they allowing these guys to play again. They aren't needed for the success of their team or the NFL.

RoanokeFan
08-21-2009, 12:49 PM
I have heard other "experts" say he got treated just like any other person would have.

I've not heard it one time, and I've been paying pretty close attention to this topic, it must be a very rare expert who thinks that.


No, Jint is correct, in fact the ADA presenting before the court made that exact argument to assure the judge there was no disparate treatment. If he were lying, he would be disbarred.


So what about the 8 or 9 lawyers or law analysts brought on to talk radio and on TV saying otherwise....?

Look, it's said he was offered 3 months and didn't accept it, so that's his bad, but 2 years is a LONG sentence for this crime, most people don't get that.


He was never offered three months prison time. If you read the recent articles today you will see comments about how the DA allowed Brafman to accept the offer they had originally made which was two years.

There were any number of defense lawyers interviewed over the span of time this saga has been in the news. To a man they all said if he went to trial he go to prison for 3 and a half years. When the original please was offered many of them said take it and run, Plaxico.

You can argue the merits, complain about the Constitution and all of that. But the facts are what they are and A two year plea bargain in a mandatory sentencing case is a break. How many people do you know PERSONALLY who got a different plea in an identical case?

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 12:50 PM
One thing to remember - those stats all these experts are referring to and the ones from the article I posted yeaterday are from 2003-2007.

The new tough laws didn't get on the books till 2006 so it makes them largely useless



he was offered 3 months Jints, average joes and celebrities alike, never does a first time offender ever serve a full sentence, it just doesn't happen....Unless its like murder.


I'm not sure how that relates to what I said but Plax didn't get the full sentence.

The full sentence would have been 3.5 years

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 12:50 PM
Read my earlier post. You're all beating a dead horse! Who cares what sentence he got.......3 months or 3 years.

I DO.


Once the guy, or any other guy, gets convicted, it's moot. The problem is either the NFL trying to prevent this stuff or better yet....why are they allowing these guys to play again.

That's a different topic then what this thread is about.


They aren't needed for the success of their team or the NFL.

no they aren't, but it's their career it's their life and assuming they serve their debt to society, the deserve to be able to continue their career.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 12:52 PM
One thing to remember - those stats all these experts are referring to and the ones from the article I posted yeaterday are from 2003-2007.

The new tough laws didn't get on the books till 2006 so it makes them largely useless



he was offered 3 months Jints, average joes and celebrities alike, never does a first time offender ever serve a full sentence, it just doesn't happen....Unless its like murder.


I'm not sure how that relates to what I said but Plax didn't get the full sentence.

The full sentence would have been 3.5 years



actually your wrong, the full sentence for what he DIDN'T PLEAD GUILTY TO would have been 15 years, 3.5 was the minimum but since he plead to something completely different what your saying is completely irrelevant.

byron
08-21-2009, 12:54 PM
Without a doubt. Either he received terrible advise or he went against it, I'm not sure which. I've stated several times that I questioned why in the world did he abandon this team. I can't help but think that with the organization behind him he would have fared much better.
</P>


I've been thinking same thing and couldn't believe he turned down the giants offer .. And I think the Giants had some idea about that three month deal why else would they offer that kind of money to him. Maybe someday we'll know the whole story. It ****ing ..mind boggling</P>

RoanokeFan
08-21-2009, 12:56 PM
Without a doubt. Either he received terrible advise or he went against it, I'm not sure which. I've stated several times that I questioned why in the world did he abandon this team. I can't help but think that with the organization behind him he would have fared much better.
</p>


I've been thinking same thing and couldn't believe he turned down the giants offer .. And I think the Giants had some idea about that three month deal why else would they offer that kind of money to him. Maybe someday we'll know the whole story. It ****ing ..mind boggling</p>

There was no three month plea agreement offered to Plaxico. That's a rumor started here.

LT= Lawrence Taylor
08-21-2009, 12:57 PM
Here's some advice for Plax when he's in prison

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEcfpwJ_TTY

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 12:58 PM
One thing to remember - those stats all these experts are referring to and the ones from the article I posted yeaterday are from 2003-2007.

The new tough laws didn't get on the books till 2006 so it makes them largely useless



he was offered 3 months Jints, average joes and celebrities alike, never does a first time offender ever serve a full sentence, it just doesn't happen....Unless its like murder.


I'm not sure how that relates to what I said but Plax didn't get the full sentence.

The full sentence would have been 3.5 years



actually your wrong, the full sentence for what he DIDN'T PLEAD GUILTY TO would have been 15 years, 3.5 was the minimum but since he plead to something completely different what your saying is completely irrelevant.


how is it irrevelant?

He got less the the minimum of the crime he was charged for and from what I can tell he got the minimum he could have outside of an acquittal.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 12:59 PM
There was no three month plea agreement offered to Plaxico. That's a rumor started here.


there were multiple links to articles RF...not saying its not a rumor, but it was reported by websites way before anyone brought it up here.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 01:01 PM
how is it irrevelant?

He got less the the minimum of the crime he was charged for and from what I can tell he got the minimum he could have outside of an acquittal.

It's irrelevant because you don't get sentenced on the crime you are CHARGED with you get sentenced to the crime you are CONVICTED of, he didn't plead guilty to the crime you think he did, he was CHARGED with it, but he plead down to something different...something that DOESN'T have a 3.5 year minimum sentence.

rocky325
08-21-2009, 01:03 PM
Read my earlier post. You're all beating a dead horse! Who cares what sentence he got.......3 months or 3 years.

I DO.

*
Once the guy, or any other guy, gets convicted, it's moot. The problem is either the NFL trying to prevent this stuff or better yet....why are they allowing these guys to play again.

That's a different topic then what this thread is about.

*
They aren't needed for the success of their team or the NFL.

no they aren't, but it's their career it's their life and assuming they serve their debt to society, the deserve to be able to continue their career.




It's obvious you care. I can respect that. However prisons are full of people who got a bad shake....the streets are full of people who were let off too easy and get in trouble again.


It also does apply to the thread....if the guy wasn't stupid enough to do this, you wouldn't be talking about it....you'd be posting how we have a great WR corps with Plax, Smith and the two draftees



Lastly.....try stealing, embezzling, or committing any other felony......do your time...and see how quickly your employer gives you your job back. You'll eventually find work but your position will no longer be there for you.

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 01:06 PM
how is it irrevelant?

He got less the the minimum of the crime he was charged for and from what I can tell he got the minimum he could have outside of an acquittal.

It's irrelevant because you don't get sentenced on the crime you are CHARGED with you get sentenced to the crime you are CONVICTED of, he didn't plead guilty to the crime you think he did, he was CHARGED with it, but he plead down to something different...something that DOESN'T have a 3.5 year minimum sentence.


but it DOES have a 2 year minimum

so he got the Min - how is that being treated unfairly?

LT= Lawrence Taylor
08-21-2009, 01:08 PM
And I just want to say this.

Do I feel bad? Not really. He was well aware of the gun law. In order to carry a concealed weapon in NYC, you need to have a license. It's simple.

For those people who say that that's unconstitutional, it's not. He still has the right to bear arms, he just needs a license for it, which is actually the best thing to do. I support gun control and believe that you should be licensed. Where I live, all you have to do is show a driver's license and you can buy a gun. That's ridiculous. I support having to get a license to have a gun. So spare me the whole unconstitutional crap.

Some people say "oh it's so unfair... he shot himself... he was just dumb"

He's not going to jail for shooting himself. He's going to jail for having an unlicensed hand gun in NYC. If the gun was licensed and he shot himself, he wouldn't be going to jail for 2 years. He's going to jail for illegal possession of a weapon, which is exactly what happened. He owned a gun illegally. Now he has to pay the price.

And he got off kinda easy, considering Bloomberg wanted to punish him "to the fullest extent of the law" and there was a mandatory 3.5 year sentence if he went to trial. He got 2 years, 20 months on good behavior. That's better than somewhere between 3.5-15 years in my opinion.

Plaxico could have been remembered for his performance against Green Bay in the 2007 NFC Championship Game. For the game-winning TD in Super Bowl XLII. He could have been one of the best receivers in the game today. He could have gone down as one of the best Giants who ever played.

Instead, his defining legacy is that night in November in a Manhattan night club.

It's sad, yes. But I don't really feel bad for him. He fought the law and the law won.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 01:13 PM
It's obvious you care. I can respect that. However prisons are full of people who got a bad shake....the streets are full of people who were let off too easy and get in trouble again.

Agreed, but that doesn't mean we should ignore it.



It also does apply to the thread....if the guy wasn't stupid enough to do this, you wouldn't be talking about it....you'd be posting how we have a great WR corps with Plax, Smith and the two draftees

No it doesn't apply to the thread, since this thread has to do specifically with his sentence...and your post is specifically telling us to ignore the sentence.




Lastly.....try stealing, embezzling, or committing any other felony......do your time...and see how quickly your employer gives you your job back. You'll eventually find work but your position will no longer be there for you.

Depends on the job.....and the NFL does and should have low standards for that type of stuff....it's not like they are Police Officers and they wield some sort of power over the public...they are entertainers...they should have the same standards as Hollywood actors...and we all know how hard it is for them to get a job after committing a felony.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 01:15 PM
but it DOES have a 2 year minimum

so he got the Min - how is that being treated unfairly?



because most average joes get to plead to something with less jail time, they offer him a plea, they offered him a stricter plea then you or I would have got..(assuming the stories about the 3 month plea being turned down among other pleas aren't true.)

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 01:20 PM
but it DOES have a 2 year minimum

so he got the Min - how is that being treated unfairly?



because most average joes get to plead to something with less jail time, they offer him a plea, they offered him a stricter plea then you or I would have got..(assuming the stories about the 3 month plea being turned down among other pleas aren't true.)


I dont know why you are ignoring this - but with the sentencing guidelines currently in place this is the MINIMUM he could have gotten for this crime....

Instead, the three-and-a-half year minimum sentence was established. As
a result, legal experts said Tuesday, Burress may have little wiggle
room as he tries to avoid prison time. “<font size="5">Even if he pleads down, he can
only plead down one count and he would still face a minimum of two
years in prison</font>,” said Robert C. Gottlieb, a New York-based criminal
defense lawyer and a former prosecutor in the Manhattan district
attorney’s office. “The other wiggle room is that he could try and
prevent the district attorney’s office from charging him with this
crime and charge him with a lesser crime.”

rocky325
08-21-2009, 01:22 PM
It's obvious you care. I can respect that. However prisons are full of people who got a bad shake....the streets are full of people who were let off too easy and get in trouble again.

Agreed, but that doesn't mean we should ignore it.


*
It also does apply to the thread....if the guy wasn't stupid enough to do this, you wouldn't be talking about it....you'd be posting how we have a great WR corps with Plax, Smith and the two draftees

No it doesn't apply to the thread, since this thread has to do specifically with his sentence...and your post is specifically telling us to ignore the sentence.



*
Lastly.....try stealing, embezzling, or committing any other felony......do your time...and see how quickly your employer gives you your job back. You'll eventually find work but your position will no longer be there for you.

Depends on the job.....and the NFL does and should have low standards for that type of stuff....it's not like they are Police Officers and they wield some sort of power over the public...they are entertainers...they should have the same standards as Hollywood actors...and we all know how hard it is for them to get a job after committing a felony.



You make some valid points. So do I and countless others. I'm moving past all things Burress at this point. He's officially as much a part of Giant history as Stray, LT, and Tiki.



I will say this. You're right about the type of job. The comparison to Hollywood is right on the money. Unfortunately that's the problem. If Roger enforced a policy of no reinstatement, maybe guys like Plax would think about what they were doing before acting the way they do. It doesn't look like the league has any other valid deterrent to felony behavior. Hell even the Oakland coaches may be doing it. I just wish we wouldn't take a page out of Hollywood and just send the right message. You do the crime.....you can no longer play in the NFL

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 01:26 PM
I dont know why you are ignoring this - but with the sentencing guidelines currently in place this is the MINIMUM he could have gotten for this crime....

Because it's simply not true.


Instead, the three-and-a-half year minimum sentence was established. As
a result, legal experts said Tuesday, Burress may have little wiggle
room as he tries to avoid prison time. “<font size="5">Even if he pleads down, he can
only plead down one count and he would still face a minimum of two
years in prison</font>,” said Robert C. Gottlieb, a New York-based criminal
defense lawyer and a former prosecutor in the Manhattan district
attorney’s office. “The other wiggle room is that he could try and
prevent the district attorney’s office from charging him with this
crime and charge him with a lesser crime.”


and yet you have a gaggle of other lawyers claiming 2 years is severe or harsh, and his lawyer is surprised with the outcome, do you REALLY believe two years was the minimum sentence, there are many stories about other plea's he could have taken earlier as well that were less then 2 years...not just 3 months but I've seen 1 year reported to.

you are EXTREMELY naive if you think he could not and would not have gotten less then 2 years if he was you, or me, I suppose you think OJ didn't commit the crime either because he was declared innocent? nothing is "set in stone" when it comes to the law.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 01:29 PM
I just wish we wouldn't take a page out of Hollywood and just send the right message. You do the crime.....you can no longer play in the NFL

But, the NFL is a form of entertainment, why SHOULD it have strict rules...when most other jobs in entertainment have nearly no rules at all.

rocky325
08-21-2009, 01:31 PM
I just wish we wouldn't take a page out of Hollywood and just send the right message. You do the crime.....you can no longer play in the NFL

But, the NFL is a form of entertainment, why SHOULD it have strict rules...when most other jobs in entertainment have nearly no rules at all.




Sorry guy.....I'm done with Burress. Don't care about Hollywood...just the NFL and the Giants...have a good one

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 01:34 PM
I just wish we wouldn't take a page out of Hollywood and just send the right message. You do the crime.....you can no longer play in the NFL

But, the NFL is a form of entertainment, why SHOULD it have strict rules...when most other jobs in entertainment have nearly no rules at all.




Sorry guy.....I'm done with Burress. Don't care about Hollywood...just the NFL and the Giants...have a good one

I was done with Burress when we released him, I'm talking about football in general, its a form of entertainment, why does everyone assume it should have strict rules when most other forms of entertainment don't.

Roosevelt
08-21-2009, 01:38 PM
I don't think he got too much at all. He got less than the minimum. How is that too much?

Also anyone who has ever been in the system can tell you that if you decide to push to long you end up losing and getting a more severe sentence. Is it right? No. Is it reality in our system? Yes.

Especially in a case where you are clearly 100% guilty, you take whatever deal they are willing to give you, the first time they offer it.

He's an idiot for trying to fight it and even so he still got off easier than he could have. If they were "out to get him" he'd be doing 5 years. Not to mention he will be in there for the winter months, I bet you anything he's released before next summer.


I agree with everything you said except I think the sentence is too harsh.

Plaxico had no intention of criminal activity with that gun - we all know that. He put himself and others in danger. And he shot himself. You believe that is truly worth a 2 year sentence?




Like I said, in NY he isn't serving a full two years, no way with
winter coming up. Overcrowding alone will get him released *unless* he
acts like a complete tool while he's in there.

Do I think it's
worth 2 years? If the mandatory min is 3 years...Yeah. However I think
consideration should be made to the circumstances. But now we find out
they were indeed taken into account and Plax laughed at it....

<font size="4">I
think he's been a fool. If you are facing 3.5 years min for something
you "obviously" did with no doubt in anyone's mind and they offer you 3
months do you turn your nose up at them? I have no idea what the hell
he/his lawyer was thinking...</font>


Without a doubt. Either he received terrible advise or he went against it, I'm not sure which. I've stated several times that I questioned why in the world did he abandon this team. I can't help but think that with the organization behind him he would have fared much better.


Rosie, I am pretty sure he ignored Brafman until it was time to go to trial. A trial would have been worse. Brafman is not an idiot and had to be begging Plaxico to take the deal when it was originally offered.


You are probably right. Brafman was in a no win situation.

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 01:41 PM
I dont know why you are ignoring this - but with the sentencing guidelines currently in place this is the MINIMUM he could have gotten for this crime....

Because it's simply not true.


Instead, the three-and-a-half year minimum sentence was established. As
a result, legal experts said Tuesday, Burress may have little wiggle
room as he tries to avoid prison time. “<font size="5">Even if he pleads down, he can
only plead down one count and he would still face a minimum of two
years in prison</font>,” said Robert C. Gottlieb, a New York-based criminal
defense lawyer and a former prosecutor in the Manhattan district
attorney’s office. “The other wiggle room is that he could try and
prevent the district attorney’s office from charging him with this
crime and charge him with a lesser crime.”


and yet you have a gaggle of other lawyers claiming 2 years is severe or harsh, and his lawyer is surprised with the outcome, do you REALLY believe two years was the minimum sentence, there are many stories about other plea's he could have taken earlier as well that were less then 2 years...not just 3 months but I've seen 1 year reported to.

you are EXTREMELY naive if you think he could not and would not have gotten less then 2 years if he was you, or me, I suppose you think OJ didn't commit the crime either because he was declared innocent? nothing is "set in stone" when it comes to the law.


At the end of the day - he got the minimum allowed by the sentencing guidelines.

Could he have gotten less?
Possibly, but he could have easily gotten alot more.

I see no concrete evidence that his celebrity status was a negative factor.

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 01:42 PM
I just wish we wouldn't take a page out of Hollywood and just send the right message. You do the crime.....you can no longer play in the NFL

But, the NFL is a form of entertainment, why SHOULD it have strict rules...when most other jobs in entertainment have nearly no rules at all.


because the fans have called for it

or so the owners think anyway

rocky325
08-21-2009, 01:47 PM
I just wish we wouldn't take a page out of Hollywood and just send the right message. You do the crime.....you can no longer play in the NFL

But, the NFL is a form of entertainment, why SHOULD it have strict rules...when most other jobs in entertainment have nearly no rules at all.




Sorry guy.....I'm done with Burress. Don't care about Hollywood...just the NFL and the Giants...have a good one

I was done with Burress when we released him, I'm talking about football in general, its a form of entertainment, why does everyone assume it should have strict rules when most other forms of entertainment don't.



Like I said....don't care about other entertainment. I have season tickets to the Giants. that's where i choose to spend my money. I spend it on the NFL.....the Giants and their opponent any given Sunday. I care what the NFL does. Don't care about Burress...he's now an ex-NFL er. Since I have to PSL and pay for the tickets, I would prefer to watch guys who aren't ex-cons. Therefore I support a policy of not rehiring them. No one has a right to play in the NFL. You do the time and want to play....try the CFL or another league. However that's a moot point as well. Roger is the commish and he'll set the rules. If the rules let the Vicks of the world play, then it is what it is. I either give up my season tickets or i accept it. i may not like it, but I just happen to like the Giants a whole lot more

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 01:50 PM
At the end of the day - he got the minimum allowed by the sentencing guidelines.

He got the minimum allowed by sentencing guidlines for WHAT HE PLEAD to, but they would not allow him to plea to what you or I would have (maybe) because he was a celebrity...that's my point.

if it were you or me, we would have been offered a plea with a lower minimum sentence is my point Jints.



I see no concrete evidence that his celebrity status was a negative factor

maybe not, but your not so stupid as to not believe that Bloomberg putting excess pressure on a DA ...and then plax just so happening to get a harsh sentence (in comparison to the average first offender) have no connection are you?

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 01:52 PM
I would prefer to watch guys who aren't ex-cons.

ok, but my point is, that's YOUR choice, there are millions of other fans with their own opinion on the topic, for example, I couldn't careless, I just want to see the best players play, ex-con or not.

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 01:55 PM
maybe not, but your not so stupid as to not believe that Bloomberg putting excess pressure on a DA ...<font size="4">and then plax just so happening to get a harsh sentence (in comparison to the average first offender)</font> have no connection are you?


See this is where we differ.
I don't think this is true with regards to the new sentencing guidelines.

You are forgetting the 22% of people charged are found guilty.
(The number is probably higher for the last two years because of the new laws)

That means 22% get MORE time than plax did.

Show me evidence of this statement other then someone calling into a sports radio show and calling the punishment "harsh"

rocky325
08-21-2009, 01:57 PM
I would prefer to watch guys who aren't ex-cons.

ok, but my point is, that's YOUR choice, there are millions of other fans with their own opinion on the topic, for example, I couldn't careless, I just want to see the best players play, ex-con or not.




There it is in a nutshell. We agree to disagree.....on to 2009 Giant football

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 01:59 PM
Show me evidence of this statement other then someone calling into a sports radio show and calling the punishment "harsh"

It's not "someone" calling into a radio show, it's respected lawyers and analysts booked as "Guests" to radio and TV shows. Roger Cosek, was the most recent example, booked as a guest on the Micheal Kay show, also, where is your evidence that other first time offenders spend "more time" and hey on that topic, how many of the 22% convicted are first time offenders in the first place, I'm willing to bet it's less then 1%

not to mention in your OWN ARTICLE which you took that quote from it says that the other 78% (in Manhattan, 90%+ in other boroughs) got off with LESS then 3.5 years.

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 02:02 PM
not to mention in your OWN ARTICLE which you took that quote from it says that the other 78% (in Manhattan, 90%+ in other boroughs) got off with LESS then 3.5 years.


and plax falls into that group

Morehead State
08-21-2009, 02:03 PM
Show me evidence of this statement other then someone calling into a sports radio show and calling the punishment "harsh"

It's not "someone" calling into a radio show, it's respected lawyers and analysts booked as "Guests" to radio and TV shows. Roger Cosek, was the most recent example, booked as a guest on the Micheal Kay show, also, where is your evidence that other first time offenders spend "more time" and hey on that topic, how many of the 22% convicted are first time offenders in the first place, I'm willing to bet it's less then 1%

not to mention in your OWN ARTICLE which you took that quote from it says that the other 78% (in Manhattan, 90%+ in other boroughs) got off with LESS then 3.5 years.
</P>


Didn't you already admit that you were wrong on this? It seems you are still fighting the fight you had already lost.</P>

GiantsInDallas
08-21-2009, 02:17 PM
<font size="4">From Mike and Mike this morning. This should end the "it's so unfair" argument I keep seeing. About a 4 minute convo.</font>

http://sports.espn.go.com/stations/player?id=4413998

<font size="4">I thought Texas was bad about guns, but it sounds like it's the Wild West up there if they have to make these type of laws.</font>

TuckYou
08-21-2009, 02:19 PM
http://blog.nj.com/giants_impact/2009/08/large_plaxtuck820.jpg</P>


Plax- "Yo Justin, I just bought these new dope sweatpants at the sweatpants store. They a little big, but ill find something to 'hold em up'. I think Im going to rock em tonight at the club, you in?"</P>


Tuck- "psssssssss, haha, oh maaaaannnn. Nah , Im good bro. Not reallyclubbin kinda dude this close to game time, but 'have a blast'!"</P>


Osi- "Hahahahaaahahahaaaaa, did you say sweatpants?! You rocking sweatpants at the club?!? hahaha! Maybe you'll pull some ladies with em tonight man, but remember to 'bring protection'!"</P>


Plax- "Protection.........hhmmmmmm."</P>

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 02:23 PM
<font size="4">From Mike and Mike this morning. This should end the "it's so unfair" argument I keep seeing. About a 4 minute convo.</font>

http://sports.espn.go.com/stations/player?id=4413998


thanks -
from the interview

"they should have taken this deal in january"
"Plax and his laywer were looking for a miracle"
"if he went to trial, he would have served more than two years"
"he had no answer to these charges"

MOOK3456
08-21-2009, 02:24 PM
http://blog.nj.com/giants_impact/2009/08/large_plaxtuck820.jpg</p>


Plax- "Yo Justin, I just bought these new dope sweatpants at the sweatpants store. They a little big, but ill find something to 'hold em up'. I think Im going to rock em tonight at the club, you in?"</p>


Tuck- "psssssssss, haha, oh maaaaannnn. Nah , Im good bro. Not reallyclubbin kinda dude this close to game time, but 'have a blast'!"</p>


Osi- "Hahahahaaahahahaaaaa, did you say sweatpants?! You rocking sweatpants at the club?!? hahaha! Maybe you'll pull some ladies with em tonight man, but remember to 'bring protection'!"</p>


Plax- "Protection.........hhmmmmmm."</p>

ROFL!!

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 02:25 PM
"If I hd done this , or john q public did this, what would have been the sentance?"
"it would have been just about the same"
"In NY there is NOTHING anyone can do to get out from under these charges"

The who interview exactly backs up my point - he got treated as fair if not better than the average joe

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 02:27 PM
Didn't you already admit that you were wrong on this? It seems you are still fighting the fight you had already lost.

Jint's is saying the article he posted, that proved me wrong, isn't actually true...so....I can start arguing again, if he posts the article as evidence of his position that Plax DID get a 3 month plea offered and that he turned it down and that he's just an idiot, then again, I'll submit, if that's true I'm wrong and he did get treated fairly and was just stupid.

but Jint's is now claiming something different, that 2 years is normal and what you or I would have gotten which I completely disagree with.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 02:31 PM
"If I hd done this , or john q public did this, what would have been the sentance?"
"it would have been just about the same"
"In NY there is NOTHING anyone can do to get out from under these charges"

The who interview exactly backs up my point - he got treated as fair if not better than the average joe



where is that from, and anyhow, I've already given you names and told you that other interviewed lawyers have said otherwise, even Plax's own lawyer has said so, and he's not a no name lawyer.....it's pretty clear that many lawyers and other experts think that plax's fame had a negative effect on the outcome of the trial, I'm not the only one who thinks this Jints, infact I SERIOUSLY doubt im even close to the minority.

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 02:34 PM
but Jint's is now claiming something different, that 2 years is normal and what you or I would have gotten which I completely disagree with.


The only thing I'm claiming is he got trrated like any other criminal and neither Bberg or his celebrity status had anything to do with is sentancing.

I have two solid pieces of evidence backing me up. - the interview from Mike and Mike and the article on the sentencing guidelines.

plus the article from the daily news.

all you have is some hearsay

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 02:36 PM
"If I hd done this , or john q public did this, what would have been the sentance?"
"it would have been just about the same"
"In NY there is NOTHING anyone can do to get out from under these charges"

The who interview exactly backs up my point - he got treated as fair if not better than the average joe



where is that from, and anyhow, I've already given you names and told you that other interviewed lawyers have said otherwise, even Plax's own lawyer has said so, and he's not a no name lawyer.....it's pretty clear that many lawyers and other experts think that plax's fame had a negative effect on the outcome of the trial, I'm not the only one who thinks this Jints, infact I SERIOUSLY doubt im even close to the minority.


listen for yourself

http://sports.espn.go.com/stations/player?id=4413998 (%20http://sports.espn.go.com/stations/player?id=4413998)

Oh Plax's layer says it harsh - theres a shocker.

he also accepted the plea so he must have thought it was too bad.

and I googled the name you gave me, nothing came up.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 02:40 PM
The only thing I'm claiming is he got trrated like any other criminal and neither Bberg or his celebrity status had anything to do with is sentancing.

And I'm saying your wrong, and that I've heard many other respected lawyers say you are wrong, go listen to Micheal Kay's pod cast from yestarday, Roger Cosek put it pretty well.


I have two solid pieces of evidence backing me up. - the interview from Mike and Mike and the article on the sentencing guidelines.

plus the article from the daily news.


The article proves MY POINT, and the interview on mike and mike is one of 30 or 40 interviews done with equally respected experts, most of those interviews have agreed with MY point, a few have agreed with you, Ihave as much if not MORE solid evidence backing up my point then you have banking up yours.

The sentencing guidelines are irrelevant, because they only apply to the plea he was forced to accept, had it been you or me we would have gotten a different deal to accept and then the minimum sentence for the plea plax accepted would not be applicable.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 02:41 PM
listen for yourself

http://sports.espn.go.com/stations/player?id=4413998 (%20http://sports.espn.go.com/stations/player?id=4413998)

Oh Plax's layer says it harsh - theres a shocker.

he also accepted the plea so he must have thought it was too bad.


good for you, you found one interview out of 30 or 40 that agree's with you whats your point, many more have agreed with me, and he accepted the plea because they refused to offer a different one like they would have for you or me.

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 02:43 PM
The only thing I'm claiming is he got trrated like any other criminal and neither Bberg or his celebrity status had anything to do with is sentancing.

And I'm saying your wrong, and that I've heard many other respected lawyers say you are wrong, go listen to Micheal Kay's pod cast from yestarday, Roger Cosek put it pretty well.


I have two solid pieces of evidence backing me up. - the interview from Mike and Mike and the article on the sentencing guidelines.

plus the article from the daily news.


The article proves MY POINT, and the interview on mike and mike is one of 30 or 40 interviews done with equally respected experts, most of those interviews have agreed with MY point, a few have agreed with you, Ihave as much if not MORE solid evidence backing up my point then you have banking up yours.

The sentencing guidelines are irrelevant, because they only apply to the plea he was forced to accept, had it been you or me we would have gotten a different deal to accept and then the minimum sentence for the plea plax accepted would not be applicable.





Link?

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 02:46 PM
listen for yourself

http://sports.espn.go.com/stations/player?id=4413998 (%20http://sports.espn.go.com/stations/player?id=4413998)

Oh Plax's layer says it harsh - theres a shocker.

he also accepted the plea so he must have thought it was too bad.


good for you, you found one interview out of 30 or 40 that agree's with you whats your point, many more have agreed with me, and he accepted the plea because they refused to offer a different one like they would have for you or me.


you say there are so many agreeing with you but you haven't supplied one link

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 02:47 PM
The most recent one is on micheal kays show from 8/20 you can go to his pod cast and listen to the whole show I'm not sure exactly at what time it was on but I'll like the pod cast for you.

http://stations.espn.go.com/stations/1050espnradio/archive?id=2693958

but I've heard at least 10 lawyers interviewed say the same thing, it's what the common belief seems to be.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 02:47 PM
The most recent one is on micheal kays show from 8/20 you can go to his pod cast and listen to the whole show I'm not sure exactly at what time it was on but I'll like the pod cast for you.

http://stations.espn.go.com/stations/1050espnradio/archive?id=2693958

but I've heard at least 10 lawyers interviewed say the same thing, it's what the common belief seems to be.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 02:48 PM
you say there are so many agreeing with you but you haven't supplied one link

you are saying so many are disagreeing but you have supplied one link.....

and I'm sorry I don't save a link to the archives of shows I've listened to over the last few months.....maybe you need to listen to half as much radio as I do while i'm at work [:P].

BlueBlitzer
08-21-2009, 02:49 PM
Would the mayor have taken the time , for a photo-op, if it was six-pack Joe ? Damning the man, and demanding a mandatory prison sentence before the man was even charged ? There-by poisening any jury that would hear the case. In front of the biggest media out-lets in the world ? Oh yeah, Plaxico's noteriety had nothing to do with it.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 02:51 PM
Would the mayor have taken the time , for a photo-op, if it was six-pack Joe ? Damning the man, and demanding a mandatory prison sentence before the man was even charged ? There-by poisening any jury that would hear the case. In front of the biggest media out-lets in the world ? Oh yeah, Plaxico's noteriety had nothing to do with it.

I know, it's ****ing common sense, Jint's is being silly.

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 02:56 PM
The most recent one is on micheal kays show from 8/20 you can go to his pod cast and listen to the whole show I'm not sure exactly at what time it was on but I'll like the pod cast for you.

http://stations.espn.go.com/stations/1050espnradio/archive?id=2693958

but I've heard at least 10 lawyers interviewed say the same thing, it's what the common belief seems to be.


what I hear is complaing about the harshness of the law -

Not the harshness of the application of the laws as they stand in this case

In fact they are talking about how there is no room for discretion with the current law - which further backs up my point

Jint Fan 73
08-21-2009, 02:58 PM
Would the mayor have taken the time , for a photo-op, if it was six-pack Joe ? Damning the man, and demanding a mandatory prison sentence before the man was even charged ? There-by poisening any jury that would hear the case. In front of the biggest media out-lets in the world ? Oh yeah, Plaxico's noteriety had nothing to do with it.

I know, it's ****ing common sense, Jint's is being silly.


thats not what I'm saying at all

Yes - Bloomberg used Plax celeberity to drive his agenda

I'm saying that it didn't affect the job that the DA did.
The way the law is written it couldn't - he had no choice

RoanokeFan
08-21-2009, 03:01 PM
There was no three month plea agreement offered to Plaxico. That's a rumor started here.


there were multiple links to articles RF...not saying its not a rumor, but it was reported by websites way before anyone brought it up here.


Just read this, please. Do you think if Plaxico had been offered a three month custodial sentence that Brafman wouldn't have threatened to shoot him in his other leg if he refused?

You are looking at this from an emotional point of view and that's fine. But I spent 35 years in law enforcement and I am telling you he did better with the plea than had he gone to trial. It is illogical to imagine a lower sentence when the crimes called for and MANDATORY three and a half years.

Plaxico won't serve the full two years unless he brings his attitude into the prison with him. If he does that and gets into a cscrape with anopther iname or guard, he'll do the full 24 months.

Lawyers who offer their opinions for punlic consumption on radio shows are looking for two things. Notoriety and more clients.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 03:01 PM
what I hear is complaing about the harshness of the law -

Not the harshness of the application of the laws as they stand in this case

In fact they are talking about how there is no room for discretion with the current law - which further backs up my point



Apparently you don't hear things the same way I hear them, usually when they say things like "Bloomberg certianly didn't help Plax's cause" and "This is a harsh punishment for the crime"

to me that means this case is unusual, meaning it turned out different then it would for the normal person.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 03:02 PM
The way the law is written it couldn't - he had no choice



you keep saying that, but that's completely false.

DavenIII
08-21-2009, 03:07 PM
Just read this, please. Do you think if Plaxico had been offered a three month custodial sentence that Brafman wouldn't have threatened to shoot him in his other leg if he refused?

Oh of course I do, I don't believe he was offered anything less then 2 years personally.


You are looking at this from an emotional point of view


no I'm really not RF, I'm REALLY not.


But I spent 35 years in law enforcement and I am telling you he did better with the plea than had he gone to trial.

I could have told you that too.


It is illogical to imagine a lower sentence when the crimes called for and MANDATORY three and a half years.

No it's not, explain to me why it is, because he wasn't convicted of the crime you are talking about, he was offered a plea, a bad one (because he's in the public eye and because Bloomberg came down on the DA specificly for this case) the plea he was offered had a minimum 2 year sentence, but other first time offenders are offered pleas with less jail time all the time for exactly the same crime, and that IS a fact.


Plaxico won't serve the full two years unless he brings his attitude into the prison with him. If he does that and gets into a cscrape with anopther iname or guard, he'll do the full 24 months.

I really couldn't give a **** how much time plax does, he means nothing to me he's not on our team, what I care about is the justice system and how it treatede him unfairly due to his fame.


Lawyers who offer their opinions for punlic consumption on radio shows are looking for two things. Notoriety and more clients.


perhaps.....