I don't hate the guy for what happened. It just shows me that he is completely irresponsible. My wife or I go out drinking pretty regularly. One of us will drive and not drink. It is so freaking easy, that is makes DUIs inexcusable to me. And I'm just a regular dude.
Jones has money and people all over the place. But still, sometimes shut happens and you can't find a DD. in that case, you just don't drink.
Yeah, he got off easy because he didn't kill anyone. But if he would have, DUI manslaughter caries many years in prison.
Truer words have never been spoken. I have seen way too many crashes where regular folks, minding their own business, get hurt or their property gets damaged by a person so lazy or proud to just get a ride. Everyone thinks that it is cheesy to say that kind of stuff, but the numbers don't lie. I just hope he stands up and faces the music. IF not, Dana should be prepared to sanction him heavily.
Originally Posted by Diesel_tke
Well said. Still got to through the "there has not been a trial yet". Having said that I think one of the bet sanctions is not a sanction at all: legal issues don't count as excuse to miss fights.
Just another case of a celebrity / person in the public eye being held to the same standard as everyone else.
Except for some reason, we seem to treat said celebrities / people in the public eye as if their sins are even more unpardonable just because they are rich.
Stupid act on his part, yes.
But the media and general public's overreaction to these things is equally stupid in my opinion.
He's an athlete, not a saint.
Don't get me wrong, mike, if he's innocent (as in he blew a blood alcohol less than the legal limit) then he does not need to be harped on. However, there is nothing more slimy than getting a DWI lawyer, who bases their career on finding loopholes so their guilty client gets off.
From my personal experience, I "lost" a court case where a three year old child was killed by a drunk driver. The lawyer did not argue the fact that his client was or was not intoxicated. He, in fact, told everyone that he did horrible on the tests. However, when we went to the Intoxilyzer room (breath test) I did not see him put chapstick on his lips four minutes before using the machine. That little gesture provided him with the ability to show reasonable doubt to the jury. A doctor would later find that chapstick makes no difference to your blood alcohol (no ****), but it was too late. A perfect example of a tragedy. The family gets no justice for their baby, I hold myself personally responsible for their pain and the drunk gets to move on with a loophole victory.
Granted, this is not Jon Jones's case and I do not know the circumstances. I just hope that if he was drunk he just owns up to it.
Again well said presumption of innocence is not innocence.
Also why would the judge allow that nonsense? Unfreaking believable.
It's reasonable doubt. This asshole pays good money to the lawyer to find reasonable doubt. I agree it is ridiculous. It is the world we live in. Look at Casey Anthony. Following the trial the jurors said that they thought she murdered her child, however the lawyers were able to show enough reasonable doubt.
Yeah. There are a lot of stories out there like that. It really sucks.