It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Newz Forum: BASKETBALL: Former NBA star Williams found innocent of manslaughter

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Former NBA center Jayson Williams was found innocent on Friday of 3 charges brought against him in the accidental shooting of his limousine driver at his home. Williams was found guilty of four lesser charges connected to the attempted cover up of what happened that evening.
 

link
Williams stood stoically and rocked side to side as verdicts of "not guilty" were read by the jury foreperson on charges of aggravated manslaughter, aggravated assault and possession of a weapon with unlawful purpose.

The jury was unable to reach a verdict on another major charge of reckless manslaughter.

I have seen where he has admitted to the shooting, and feels horrible about it. He'll probably end up doing a bunch of gun safety promotions.

[Edited on 4/30/2004 by Ben]




posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 08:42 PM
link   
i guess im kinda happy he didnt get 40 years for this, i woulda felt bad



posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 09:22 PM
link   
Yeah, he stupidly put himself in a bad spot, but he always was a good person.



posted on May, 1 2004 @ 11:22 AM
link   
So let me get this straight....

if you are a sports star, you can just kill people and get away with it. Hmm, reminds me of OJ.


For those of you who feel bad for Jayson, take a minute and think of the family of the man he shot.

Our justice system is becoming a joke.


TRD

posted on May, 1 2004 @ 11:25 AM
link   
Well i can't believe it wether it was death by misadventure or not he still had a friggin gun and must have pointed it at him...He got away with it and i don't feel sorry for him at all.



posted on May, 1 2004 @ 12:44 PM
link   
it was flat out a total accident....the gun malfunctioned...therefor he didnt deserve aggrivated manslaughter so tahts why he "got off". HE will get what he deserved for acting somewhat careless, proly like 5 years.



posted on May, 1 2004 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Osobad28
it was flat out a total accident....the gun malfunctioned...therefor he didnt deserve aggrivated manslaughter so tahts why he "got off". HE will get what he deserved for acting somewhat careless, proly like 5 years.


I respect your opinion, however I am not convinced that it was an "accident."



posted on May, 1 2004 @ 05:12 PM
link   
I obviously don't know all of the details, but from what I have seen of Williams in years past, he did not seem like the type of person who would intentionally kill someone (in his own house yet). I beleive him that it was an accident.
And he probably (incorrectly) freaked out and tried to cover the accident up.

He should be punished for the attemped coverup, which was very stupid on his part. And he definately should be punished for killing that man.

Just because I beleive it was an accident, doesn't mean I feel sorry for him.



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 12:11 AM
link   
There was a similar story here in the Springs two years ago with a kid at my school. A kid at my middle school was watching tv, while his dad was cleaning his guns with a friend, which was a cop. the cops gun malfunctioned and shot the kid in the back of the head. Both got off without any charges, mainly because the one guy was a cop. Though noones sure if they did it on purpose or accident, they have done a couple gun-safety things here, and the cop quit his job. Said he didn't want to be around guns anymore.



posted on May, 21 2004 @ 05:08 PM
link   
Looks like Jayson is going to be re-tried on the charge of reckless manslaughter -

story link

Even though I beleive that the incident was a mistake, he deserves to be punished for this, and get the maximum penalty, which looks to be 10 years in prison.



posted on Apr, 22 2006 @ 08:12 AM
link   


NEWARK, N.J. -- A New Jersey appeals court ruled Friday that former NBA star Jayson Williams can be retried on a reckless manslaughter charge in the shooting death of a limousine driver at the athlete's mansion.

The retired New Jersey Nets star had sought to avoid a second trial, contending it would be double jeopardy.

Williams, 38, has been free on bail since his April 2004 conviction on four charges stemming from an attempt to cover up the 2002 shooting. The jury acquitted Williams of the most serious offense, aggravated manslaughter, but deadlocked on a charge of reckless manslaughter.

Williams spokeswoman Judy Smith said the athlete will appeal the ruling. Prosecutor Steven C. Lember did not immediately return a call.


Source Link -

CBS Sportsline.com



posted on Apr, 22 2006 @ 04:32 PM
link   
Not to get too political but does anyone here think Cheney should've done time for "accidentally" shooting Wittington? Accidents happen, but people have to pay for them (or so I've heard). If Williams is considered guilty of any crime I don't understand why Cheney would get off /endofpoliticalrant

edit: Forgot there is a difference between manslaughter and non-manslaughter, hopefully some port of my point still stands.

[Edited on 4/22/06 by Kwyjibo]



posted on Apr, 22 2006 @ 04:37 PM
link   
I don't think he needed any time. Accidental Shooting occur all the time in hunting. I'd know since I use to live in Wisconsin. Now had cheney killed the man, then maybe a little time would have been deserved, to ensure that he is much more careful. And since it was obviously an accident, and the shot wasn't fatal, I think he should have been let off. the only way he would be charged is if the man pressed charges, or if they found that Cheney intentionally did it.



posted on Apr, 22 2006 @ 04:47 PM
link   
not to go too far off topic but the investigation into the Cheney shooting was non-existant. Bottomline is Cheney was careless with a deadly weapon (I don't wan't to get into the conspiracy theories). If Williams deserves punishment (not too harsh) as does Cheney (very harsh, for more reasons than this). Anyway, I was trying to make a point in there somewhere, for some reason the two incidents had certain parallels that are interesting to me.



posted on Apr, 22 2006 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Both have two very similar properties:

1) Both were accidents, though one ended up being fatal

2) Both people have butt-loads of money, and would probably get out of it

It's just the way things go. High-class people can get away with murder... literally.

Where I lived in North Carolina, a murder that took place when my mother was in HS ther (She had me at 16) a guy dragged a man with his car and shot him in the head after being caught with his girlfriend. The man did not serve any time because it was a "crime of passion". In another case, my real fathers wife was involved with a murder at a trailor park. The shooter served only two years after killing the man with a shot to the neck, but the wife served 6 1/2 for trying to help her husband get away with it. That's life for ya.



posted on Apr, 22 2006 @ 06:11 PM
link   
Speaking as the criminal lawyer in this bunch, I would just point out that the jury did NOT "find him innocent." They found that the prosecution had failed to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That's worlds apart from affirmatively finding him innocent.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 06:52 AM
link   
BHN, those are the words from Yahoo sports, the source of the original article. When I post items in sportznews, I tend to keep the original headline, and provide a link to the source page. There were some issues with plagarism earlier in the life of this site.

As far as the Cheney thing goes, and I hate to sound as if I'm defending him, but, there was an investigation, and he had nothing to hide (no one was murdered) The man who was shot did not press charges.



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 09:14 PM
link   
As far as any administration investigation, I don't think it can be given any credibilty (especially regarding the Cheney incident). There are suspicious things such as the rumor that Cheney was drunk and the fact the story didn't break until 24 hours after the shooting. Anyway, my point was to connect this (in theoretical ways only) to Jayson William's case, which I guess I'll have to work hard on doing.



posted on Apr, 27 2006 @ 02:28 AM
link   
Where I lived in North Carolina, a murder that took place when my mother was in HS ther (She had me at 16) a guy dragged a man with his car and shot him in the head after being caught with his girlfriend. The man did not serve any time because it was a "crime of passion". In another case, my real fathers wife was involved with a murder at a trailor park. The shooter served only two years after killing the man with a shot to the neck, but the wife served 6 1/2 for trying to help her husband get away with it. That's life for ya.



W.T.M.F.???!!!!!

So, what do they do in North Carolina, make up their own rules? Crime of passion??!!!!! That's not a defense to murder!!! Jeeezuz.

In every American state, I'm sure, you can get a murder mitigated down to voluntary manslaughter, and thereby get your sentence reduced to some extent, varying from state to state, if you kill "in the heat of passion"--AND if the circumstances were such that an ordinary person would have gone into the heat of passion. And THE classic law school example is finding your mate in bed with another, though usually it's the mate who buys it, not the 3rd party--who may not even know you exist. (I mean, I don't know about y'all, but when I was young, I slept with a couple of married women whose marital status I didn't learn about until after the fact, and on the second occasion, the woman's husband was in prison for kidnaping, armed robbery and attempted murder. THANKS!)

Anyway, that is NO excuse for murder. It mitigates it down to either second-degree murder or voluntary manslaughter, IF you react very quickly, while you are still in the "heat of passion." If you wait long enough to cool down, then plan out your revenge carefully, that's murder one. And that's the law everywhere, I'm quite certain.

So what you had there was a jury of 12 people who chose to go back in their caves and disregard the law, thereby approving an execution killing. Or, maybe the jury rendered the right verdict and the judge, at sentencing, went into his/her cave. And that was just as much b.s. 17-20 years ago as it is now.

SHAME ON THEM.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join