Comments on: Mistrial Declared In Trial Of Billings Murder Suspect Donnie Stallworth

By: Pcola54

Pcola54 — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 19:32:18 +0000

OMG, can it be ?????? Pensacola is actually running out of jurors that aren’t willing to lie while under oath! IMO the way the judicial system has handled the
” Billings ” case from the very beginning is an insult to Escambia County’s Law Enforcement as well as the Escambia County Court System. First, the State Attorney’s Office takes advantage of a couple of juveniles by scarring the poo out of them. Telling them what kind of sentence they could be looking at ( under the worst scenario, if in fact they would have been found guilty ). Then explaining to them how the State Attorney’s Office could recommend much lesser charges and much less sentencing as long as they co-operate and say what their told to. The biggest problem with that, was it’s now been well over a year and a half and both of the State’s witnesses have detoxed and long been jones’en for that buzz and forgot what they were supposed to say. They have repeatedly lied under oath and the fact is that neither one of them are credible witnesses. Secondly, what was up with that juror that gave a comment to the WEAR TV reporter outside the court house stating that she believes that Stallworth was guilty and that she couldn’t wait to see the Billings’s family so that she could apologize ??? ( not sure anyone understood that comment ). Last but not least, since when has it not become unacceptable for a judge ( hearing the trial ) to sleep during the trial. Judge Geeker had quite a lengthy nap, that in it’s self should have been reason enough for a miss-trial.

By: potentialjural

potentialjural — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 14:30:19 +0000

The comments on this blog have a different flavor then the ones on PNJ (Pensacola News Journal). It apppears bloggers on this forum are using their heads. Is this blog in Florida or Alabama? Anyhow.,…

I was at the trial and was able to observe first hand the evidence. THERE WAS NONE. Only circumstantial – but one must remember in this county one can be convicted on circumstantial evidence – in fact, most people are.

There is so much more to this case that people know, including the jury. The main thing is the State of Florida knows it and is doing nothing about it. My heart goes out to the victim’s family and also the family of the accused.

People, people, people – DO NOT BELIEVE WHAT YOU READ OR SEE – DO THE MATH YOURSELF!

By: d

Tue, 08 Mar 2011 14:10:08 +0000

Mr. Stallworth was a hard worker when he worked for me in Florida. He did not show any open tendencies to participate in such a crime. If he was in fact involved, he was very good at concealing such disturbing acts. When I learned of his potential involvement, I was utterly shocked. That aside, if he was involved, I believe that he should be held accountable. Where is the proof??

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 13:22:54 +0000

I doubt they intended to kill. They just didn’t intend to NOT KILL if the situation arose and THEY created the situation for killing by their actions. These weren’t children who didn’t understand what would happen if shooting started. Nor did they think they were out on a picnic.

Again consider the situation of shooting into a crowd, you MIGHT not intend to kill, you may just mean to cripple for life. Nonetheless, there is a reasonable expectation of death to follow your actions in such a case.

David considering causes and effects,
actions, attitudeds and consequences

By: Sweetie

Sweetie — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 04:36:41 +0000

Yes, David, I understand what you are saying, but I still think that if someone is going in to steal doesn’t necessarily mean they were there to kill. If a person fires into a crowd, then he meant to kill someone. A person in this situation may or may not have totally considered what could happen, only that their intent was to steal the money. But, as I said earlier, being there put them in the position to get whatever. But what could really have been in their minds, one really will never know.

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 20:29:08 +0000

REGARDING:
“some of these men, maybe even the one who pulled the trigger, did not know what was going to happen until it did. The one who pulled the trigger got what he deserved. They shouldn’t all be convicted of murder just because they were there. They should be charged with what they did, no more and no less.”

If you accept the fact that they were knowingly there in the commission of a felony in which a reasonable possibility of gunfire and murder existed, then you accept that they took part in the murders. Does it really make sense to you for any to say, “I knew we were going in with loaded guns but I never thought they might be fired or anyone be killed”?

Were they part of the murder? Ask yourself if the shooter would have tried to rob and kill if he didn’t have the cooperation of the others to help him steal the safe? Would he have done it if he hadn’t expected others to drive the getaway vehicles?

Consider a person who fires a gun into a crowd. He doesn’t know if the bullet will kill anyone and he doesn’t know who will be hit, but wouldn’t you agree he is just as guilty of murder as if he had picked out a particular person to kill?

Now consider if this is equivalent or at least similar in attitude.

David considering
concept of felony murder

By: Sweetie

Sweetie — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 18:34:14 +0000

To Just An Old Soldier: I will do that, because I’d like to see more evidence. Since I haven’t seen those tapes, it may enlighten me further. Like I said, justice should be justice and they should be punished for whatever they did. If they knew there was going to be a murder, and was all for it, then oh well, they get what they deserve. All I’m saying is that the punishment should fit the crime. And, by the way, I’m republican.

By: Just An Old Soldier

Just An Old Soldier — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 18:17:06 +0000

Seems like memories run pretty short among people – guess that’s why Democrats keep getting elected.

Look at the interview tapes of the folks involved in the Billings Murder investigation, they are online at youtube, and other websites. The Sheriff’s Dept got it absolutely right, and got it done in impressive time. Look it up.

This guy was in it up to his gills.

If the jury looks at the evidence, they’re sure to come back with a guilty verdict.

By: Sweetie

Sweetie — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 18:02:54 +0000

I tend to think that some of these men, maybe even the one who pulled the trigger, did not know what was going to happen until it did. The one who pulled the trigger got what he deserved. They shouldn’t all be convicted of murder just because they were there. They should be charged with what they did, no more and no less. I tried to put myself in their shoes. If i thought I might make a couple of hundred thousand if I just went in and helped get a safe out of the house, doesn’t mean that I went in with the intention of murder. But I should get proper punishment for robbery. I may not have even been in the room when the people were killed. And very surprised that it happened. But, I did put myself in that position by being there, so I should be charged with what I did. Justice should be justice. Not overdone, or underdone. If I was in the room and could have stopped it, but did nothing, then that is different, too. If I handed him the gun and told him to shoot, that is another story. But, I can’t help but believe that some of the guys may not have known this was going to happen. I actually see it sort of this way: Gonzales confronts the Billings and tells them to lead him to the money, they refuse, he says I’ll shoot you, they still refuse, he shoots them. Stupid, but likely. He needed to get what he got. As for the others? We’ll see as the trials go on. Donnie Stallworth….good luck to you.

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Sun, 06 Mar 2011 23:38:08 +0000

REGARDING:
“wasn’t there testimony that no one in the video could be positively identified due to the lack of quality of the video?”

And

“How do we know this man was there? – - I do think that he should be judged by what evidence is against him. I do not think that what these others testify against him should mean a lot they have made deals. They could say any of us was there”

If video doesn’t show clearly who, that doesn’t mean nobody was there. Thus, it’s reasonable to ask those willing to testify as to their parts in the sorry affair who did what.

It’s always possible they’re lying. It’s more likely if they have something to gain by lying. You have to assume they prosecutors were asking them to lie in exchange for their testimony, but it is POSSIBLE–just not likely. What does anybody have to gain to accuse an innocent person and not name a guilty person? Further, remember if it is proven later they lied during testimony, all deals promising reduced sentence are off. Thus you have to assume they are both lying with the knowledge of their lawyers and that they are assuming the truth will never come out, as well as assume that the prosecutors also expect to never get caught.

Seems unlikely but it’s up to the jury to decide.

David thinking