These would be excellent questions to ask in a Thread where posters are overwhelmingly arguing that Wahlberg should be making some financial compensation to his victim from years ago.
In this Thread, people are mostly just saying he’s an asshole and that he should not be pardoned because one of the consequences of these kinds of crimes (with or without eye-gouging) should be that the record stays with you. Some posters have complained that he has never reached out to the victim to show empathy, apologize, and make amends (with no mention of monetary compensation, “making amends” need only mean an apology and closure).
I can search around the internet a bit for you to try to find some people who want to insist that Wahlberg owes money to his victims.
I’ll let you know where I find these people so that you can engage them in this argument you seem to really want to have.
The dilemma is benville:, that once someone famous, and wealthy, makes a hand-holding feel good gesture like that one, they are instantly liable for cash compensation, up to whatever a glory-hogging lawyer representing the injured person can frothily rant on tabloid TV show their client now deserved.
Heck, if anyone, even you or me, makes any sort of gesture like that, we instantly become liable for any and all compensation a lawyer can dream up.
Sure, Mark Wallberg could definitely star in some PSA about racism and violence. It might even have some slight effect on some people, given his particular story. And I’m actually one of those sorts of people who believe felony convictions should stick, in particular to gun ownership.
But I’ve never “reached out” to people I’d been involved with in fender benders, for example. What if I did, and they said, “Well, 18 months later, the car developed engine problems, and as a result, I missed some days of work, caused me excess stress, which caused me to neglect my dog, and as a result, my girlfriend at the time left me. So don’t you think now, 10 years later, I should have some cash from you?” I’m not saying that sort of thing will happen, but it can.
So if you want to know where and when common courtesy and politeness went off and died, it could be our litigious culture.
This is driven by pure commercial interest. If this sack of **** had a conscience, he’d have reached out to the man he near-blinded many, many years ago. As in, " I know I did a tiny bit of jail time, but I know you are suffering and have since I **** you up. What can I do to help? "
But nope. Now, because his **** restaurant would be best served, he wishes to alter his record.
Roman Catholic, he says? Goes to Mass daily? Better hit the knees and start repenting, you pathetic bully. Eternity is an exceedingly long time to spend in utter torment.
Exactly. Not by way of condoning. But this IS the Straight Dope. We fight ignorance. I found that one rather salient fact just after I posted, so I edited.
He committed simple assault, punched a guy in the face and knocked him down. He didn’t cause grievous bodily injury. If it was his first offense at age 16 he probably would not have been sent to prison at all or transferred to adult court, but he had a rap sheet and did 45 days. Sounds about right to me, honestly. It’s not a felony conviction, under Massachusetts law, so I can’t see why it’s a big deal. Misdemeanors are fairly common.
I’m familiar with a case in which a man assaulted a college student and the college student suffered a traumatic brain injury, he is now in a persistent-vegetative state / minimally conscious state likely for the rest of his life. Unable to communicate and only intermittently responds to any external stimuli. The guy who put him there did 2 years.
Before he punches out the one-eyed man, he broke a wooden pole over another guy’s head, knocking him unconscious. Probably just a misdemeanor. Or attempted murder.
Five years later he had money, so he was able just pay off his next victim. He broke the guys jaw while his bodyguard held him down.
Hitting someone in the head with a wooden pole is unlikely to successfully be prosecuted as attempted murder. Like I said, there’s nothing out of line with cases I’m personally familiar with in Wahlberg’s 45 day sentence for his miniature crime spree. I know of a lot worse that didn’t get much more of a punishment. Attempted murder requires an intent element, I’ve often complained that some particularly violent assaults (like ones I’m aware of that have left people essentially dead, in that they are in persistent vegetative states) are not punished adequately.
People like Charles Dutton (manslaughter), Dr.Dre (kicked a woman down a flight of stairs), Rick James (kidnapping and torture)
By the way, I, a friend, and two girls were attacked in a mall by youths claiming to be Black Panthers, in a racially motivated attack. My girlfriend was struck in the head and back with a chair several times…security let the guys go. Police took thirty minutes to show up and never pursued the matter. Had the races been reversed, you could read about it on Wikipedia.
Exactly. Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against whites then vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit a robbery, according to federal statistics. But I guess that’s just something that goes along with the privilege?
Even with dummy/blank rounds, things can go wrong (e.g. Brandon Lee’s death).
This raises the question of why they don’t simply fill in the shooting with SFX in post-production the way they do for skiffy beam guns and whatnot. (For that matter, why they are allowed to play with actual loaded, even with blanks, guns – I thought California gun control laws for most of this stuff had a “you have to prove that you need it” limitation, and given the aforementioned SFX option Hollywood simply does not need even a milligram of actual gun-flash pyrotechnics.)
There is many cases of pardons being issued after someone has proven they have changed their life.
Merle Haggard was pardoned a decade after serving 3 years in San Quintin. He paid his debt to society. He established a career as a musician. The pardon simply restored his rights as a citizen.
Why should Mark Wahlberg be denied? Governors often issue pardons in these circumstances. My governor has a long list of pardons as he leaves office at the end of this month. He isn’t pardoning anyone that hasn’t already served their sentence and established a new life.
Okay, so why not just pardon anyone who has successfully finished out a prison term? Wipe the slate clean for all convicts, so they can be treated like full citizens.
I’m not seeing why becoming a rich celebrity makes someone any more entitled to a pardon that the average joe who commits a similar crime.
Well, what about the oft-repeated claim that teenagers’ brains are not fully developed, and thus holding them criminally responsible for acts they commit is problematic in some way?
Seems to me that was mentioned a time or two here on the SDMB.