Yahoo blogger suggests Leonard Little should kill himself

[AFJF]

Kind of surprised Yahoo published this given the last comment

Ten years later, Leonard Little is sorry for killing that woman

By MJD

Ten years ago on his birthday, Leonard Little got drunk and decided to drive. He ran a red light, plowed his Navigator into a tiny little car, and he killed the mother inside.

He hasn't spoken about it much since then, but last week, he did tell a group of sixth- and seventh-graders his cautionary tale, which included a half-hearted suicide attempt.

"A few weeks later, I tried to kill myself," he said Tuesday afternoon as he sat inside the principal's office sipping bottled water. "I had gone back home to my mom's house outside Knoxville (Tenn.), and the first thing I did was just go down in her basement. It had no windows, just a bathroom, a sink and a television. I stayed in the dark for days. All I did was cry. I couldn't deal with what I'd done."

His mother could see the pain eating away at him. His mother made him go see a psychologist in Knoxville. He saw her four or five days a week. One day in broad daylight as he was driving a little rental Toyota on his way home from the psychologist's office, still unable to shed the guilt, Little stared at the tall trees that lined both sides of the highway.

"It was like I was in one of those movies where the good angel is on one shoulder and the bad one's on the other," he said. "Well the bad one kept telling me, 'Just go ahead Leonard, turn the wheel. It'll be easy. Crash into those trees and all this pain will be over.'"

As Little talked, he held his hands out in front of him like he was driving.

"I actually did turn the wheel," he said. "I did it. I tried to end my life. I swerved the steering wheel. But like I said, I guess there was a good angel on my other shoulder, because just as soon as I swerved, I turned the wheel right back."

I guess it's a good thing that Little is finally able to talk about what happened, and the exact depths of despair to which it sent him. I'm glad he's telling his story to kids who might learn something from it.

But I want to know where those angels were six years later, when Leonard was picked up for driving drunk again, though he was eventually acquitted despite failing three field sobriety tests and refusing a breathalyzer test. This, after killing someone. After being suicidal with grief. After 90 days in jail. And after getting a whole new shot at life.

You suck, Leonard Little's shoulder angels

[GM]

Bravo to him. Little should be in prison

[Garb]

Kind of surprised Yahoo published this given the last comment

Ten years later, Leonard Little is sorry for killing that woman

By MJD

Ten years ago on his birthday, Leonard Little got drunk and decided to drive. He ran a red light, plowed his Navigator into a tiny little car, and he killed the mother inside.

He hasn't spoken about it much since then, but last week, he did tell a group of sixth- and seventh-graders his cautionary tale, which included a half-hearted suicide attempt.

"A few weeks later, I tried to kill myself," he said Tuesday afternoon as he sat inside the principal's office sipping bottled water. "I had gone back home to my mom's house outside Knoxville (Tenn.), and the first thing I did was just go down in her basement. It had no windows, just a bathroom, a sink and a television. I stayed in the dark for days. All I did was cry. I couldn't deal with what I'd done."

His mother could see the pain eating away at him. His mother made him go see a psychologist in Knoxville. He saw her four or five days a week. One day in broad daylight as he was driving a little rental Toyota on his way home from the psychologist's office, still unable to shed the guilt, Little stared at the tall trees that lined both sides of the highway.

"It was like I was in one of those movies where the good angel is on one shoulder and the bad one's on the other," he said. "Well the bad one kept telling me, 'Just go ahead Leonard, turn the wheel. It'll be easy. Crash into those trees and all this pain will be over.'"

As Little talked, he held his hands out in front of him like he was driving.

"I actually did turn the wheel," he said. "I did it. I tried to end my life. I swerved the steering wheel. But like I said, I guess there was a good angel on my other shoulder, because just as soon as I swerved, I turned the wheel right back."

I guess it's a good thing that Little is finally able to talk about what happened, and the exact depths of despair to which it sent him. I'm glad he's telling his story to kids who might learn something from it.

But I want to know where those angels were six years later, when Leonard was picked up for driving drunk again, though he was eventually acquitted despite failing three field sobriety tests and refusing a breathalyzer test. This, after killing someone. After being suicidal with grief. After 90 days in jail. And after getting a whole new shot at life.

You suck, Leonard Little's shoulder angels

Everything is upside down! Honestly! So this guy kills a woman because of his drunk driving.....and then drinks and drives again only to have his fame and fortune get him off. Yet, Michael Vick raises/abused pit-bulls he gets three years of hard time?

Am I missing something here? I in no way, shape, or form, condone what Vick did.....but do these two crimes fight the two punishments? Since when is an animals cruel death more tragic than a young mothers sad one?

[SayNoToDMC]

I don't disagree with him

[OJDidIt]

I think the author of that article has also committed a terrible crime. Journalists are the lowest form of life on this planet. He should admit that he and Leonard Little are both the scum of this society.

[#27TheDominator]

Everything is upside down! Honestly! So this guy kills a woman because of his drunk driving.....and then drinks and drives again only to have his fame and fortune get him off. Yet, Michael Vick raises/abused pit-bulls he gets three years of hard time?

Am I missing something here? I in no way, shape, or form, condone what Vick did.....but do these two crimes fight the two punishments? Since when is an animals cruel death more tragic than a young mothers sad one?

Intent. The difference is intent, not that Little not being punished isn't a joke.

The shoulder angel comment may not be read solely as meaning that Little should have killed himself, but why were those "angels" there to protect Little, but not to protect others while he is out driving drunk?

[serphnx]

It is really, really, really hard to punish drunk driving because of the intent requirement. You're better off driving drunk than getting caught speeding a few times, which is rather dumb. But of course, killing someone when you're drunk and not getting punished for it because you were drunk is on a whole different level of stupidity. The most you can get someone for is reckless endangerment, when I personally think driving while you're drunk and then killing someone is instead pre-meditated murder. It's the same thing as firing a gun off in a crowded movie theatre. I don't care if you weren't thinking it'd hit somebody, it's pretty obvious what you were doing was going to do it.

[gangreenman]

Intent. The difference is intent, not that Little not being punished is a joke.

The shoulder angel comment may not be read solely as meaning that Little should have killed himself, but why were those "angels" there to protect Little, but not to protect others while he is out driving drunk?

I think he ( the author) was saying that the Shoulder Angels sucked because they couldnt prevent him from driving drunk again.

[OJDidIt]

It is really, really, really hard to punish drunk driving because of the intent requirement. You're better off driving drunk than getting caught speeding a few times, which is rather dumb. But of course, killing someone when you're drunk and not getting punished for it because you were drunk is on a whole different level of stupidity. The most you can get someone for is reckless endangerment, when I personally think driving while you're drunk and then killing someone is instead pre-meditated murder. It's the same thing as firing a gun off in a crowded movie theatre. I don't care if you weren't thinking it'd hit somebody, it's pretty obvious what you were doing was going to do it.

BWAAHAHHAA! Are you serious? Tell that to people doing 20+ for killing someone while drunk driving. Yeah it's really 'hard to punish'.

How about states that put you away for years for 'committing a crime' while driving drunk. Oh, and that 'crime' could be not wearing your seatbelt. Slam! See you in 10 years.

Get a clue.

[#27TheDominator]

It is really, really, really hard to punish drunk driving because of the intent requirement. You're better off driving drunk than getting caught speeding a few times, which is rather dumb. But of course, killing someone when you're drunk and not getting punished for it because you were drunk is on a whole different level of stupidity. The most you can get someone for is reckless endangerment, when I personally think driving while you're drunk and then killing someone is instead pre-meditated murder. It's the same thing as firing a gun off in a crowded movie theatre. I don't care if you weren't thinking it'd hit somebody, it's pretty obvious what you were doing was going to do it.

I think premeditated murder is a stretch. He didn't plan to kill anybody, but it certainly could support a murder charge based upon extreme indifference to the danger caused by driving intoxicated. You can try to hang premeditated on somebody like that genius Yankee fan in New England that mowed down the Red Sox fans.

[yisman]

Little should be in jail. Still pisses me off how easy he got off.

[Boozer76]

I don't know if any of you know it, but the husband of the woman he killed is a sports photographer and happens to be on the field during every home St Louis home game. Little has never, not once, had his little angels tell him to walk over and apologize to the guy for killing his wife. The guy is a bona fide scumbag and I wouldn't shed a tear if he did pull the wheel the right way. Especially knowing that the ******* drove drunk again.

[KudosForND]

I dont understand how he even ever drank again after he did that if i killed someone from drinking I wouldn't even drink ever again..

and for the angel thing thats the stupidest think ive heard. no such thing in angels and it wasent the "angels" that pulled the wheel back it was him he to big of a ***** to kill him self.

[OJDidIt]

they should make 'angels in the outfield 2' based on this heartwarming story

[SayNoToDMC]

I've drunk drove in the past and I realize it was ****ing stupid, most people have at some point. I got lucky, when I've done it I've taken back roads and been careful as **** but I still feel I'm lucky. This ****sucker killed somebody and I wouldn't condem him for that, but that is a life changing ****up. Then he does it again showing he learned nothing. I saw 2 people die like a 6 months ago getting hit by a drunk driver coming home on the Bronx River Parkway. The car exploded and they burned to death, screaming and nobody could get close enough to the car to help them. I'm still waiting to hear what is going on with the trial since I'm probably going to have to testify in court, being that I was right there and saw it all happen.

This guy is a scumbag if he killed somebody went out and did it again, then **** him. I didn't really see the writer say he should kill himself but I wouldn't disagree if he did,

[Thai Jet]

I think the author of that article has also committed a terrible crime. Journalists are the lowest form of life on this planet. He should admit that he and Leonard Little are both the scum of this society.

Being a little tough on the author of the article don't ya think ? Little yes, he is pure scum. I've thought that since his rearrest for drunk driving but the author? Really

[serphnx]

BWAAHAHHAA! Are you serious? Tell that to people doing 20+ for killing someone while drunk driving. Yeah it's really 'hard to punish'.

How about states that put you away for years for 'committing a crime' while driving drunk. Oh, and that 'crime' could be not wearing your seatbelt. Slam! See you in 10 years.

Get a clue.

lol, that's funny you know that, cuz I know a thing or two about criminal prosecutions and drunk driving offenses....Let's just say if you said that in a room full of prosecutors, they'd laugh you out of it.

[AFJF]

This guy is a scumbag if he killed somebody went out and did it again, then **** him. I didn't really see the writer say he should kill himself but I wouldn't disagree if he did,

That's how I interpreted the part where the writer said that his little shoulder angels suck. I read it as meaning if not for the angel telling him to pull the wheel back he'd be dead.

[OJDidIt]

lol, that's funny you know that, cuz I know a thing or two about criminal prosecutions and drunk driving offenses....Let's just say if you said that in a room full of prosecutors, they'd laugh you out of it.

bwahahaha!

Oh really? So the seatbelt violation didn't put a drunk driver behind bars for 10+ years? Sorry to bring up actual caselaw to a 'prosecutor'. Maybe you should make drinking and driving your platform to become governor! Then you can abscond with state funds and spend it on high end escorts!

You are a proud agent of the rule of law! We should hold you accountable for the crimes of the state. Have fun in the slammer!

[nyjetsjetsjets]

lol, that's funny you know that, cuz I know a thing or two about criminal prosecutions and drunk driving offenses....Let's just say if you said that in a room full of prosecutors, they'd laugh you out of it.

just shows how ****ing stupid they are too. the dude should be in jail and not allowed to EVER drive a vehicle, or buy alcohol again.

[OJDidIt]

just shows how ****ing stupid they are too. the dude should be in jail and not allowed to EVER drive a vehicle, or buy alcohol again.

Yes! We should be able to 'ban' certain people from buying alcohol! Let's set up federal and state agencies to monitor all DUI offenders purchases for the rest of their lives and also the purchases of their friends! We'll have tens of thousands of agents ready to investigate if a dui offender ever 'purchases alcohol'! I'm sure it will be effective! And it will only cost you and other american taxpayers billions of dollars over the life of the program!

Great idea! Let's get working on it! Let me know how it goes!

[#27TheDominator]

Yes! We should be able to 'ban' certain people from buying alcohol! Let's set up federal and state agencies to monitor all DUI offenders purchases for the rest of their lives and also the purchases of their friends! We'll have tens of thousands of agents ready to investigate if a dui offender ever 'purchases alcohol'! I'm sure it will be effective! And it will only cost you and other american taxpayers billions of dollars over the life of the program!

Great idea! Let's get working on it! Let me know how it goes!

It's difficult to enforce, so we should all give up. Just let people drink and run each other over. No worries.

[PeterNorth09]

It is really, really, really hard to punish drunk driving because of the intent requirement. You're better off driving drunk than getting caught speeding a few times, which is rather dumb. But of course, killing someone when you're drunk and not getting punished for it because you were drunk is on a whole different level of stupidity. The most you can get someone for is reckless endangerment, when I personally think driving while you're drunk and then killing someone is instead pre-meditated murder. It's the same thing as firing a gun off in a crowded movie theatre. I don't care if you weren't thinking it'd hit somebody, it's pretty obvious what you were doing was going to do it.

In most jurisdictions a drunk driver who kills someone would probably be convicted of manslaughter. Only a recklessness mens rea is required to convict someone of manslaughter in most, if not all state jurisdictions in this country.

Some courts have actually gone the extra step and convicted drunk dirvers with 2nd degree murder by holding that extreme recklessness is equivalent to intent.

Point is, Leonard Little should be rotting in a jail cell.

[OJDidIt]

It's difficult to enforce, so we should all give up. Just let people drink and run each other over. No worries.

arguing the extreme counterpoint to refute another point is an effective tactic. Congratulations.

[nyjetsjetsjets]

Yes! We should be able to 'ban' certain people from buying alcohol! Let's set up federal and state agencies to monitor all DUI offenders purchases for the rest of their lives and also the purchases of their friends! We'll have tens of thousands of agents ready to investigate if a dui offender ever 'purchases alcohol'! I'm sure it will be effective! And it will only cost you and other american taxpayers billions of dollars over the life of the program!

Great idea! Let's get working on it! Let me know how it goes!

it wouldn't be that hard. set up a barcode on the id, scan it and there ya go. would take little to nothing. we waste billions of tax dollars anyways, might as well do something worthwhile with it.

[serphnx]

In most jurisdictions a drunk driver who kills someone would probably be convicted of manslaughter. Only a recklessness mens rea is required to convict someone of manslaughter in most, if not all state jurisdictions in this country.

Some courts have actually gone the extra step and convicted drunk dirvers with 2nd degree murder by holding that extreme recklessness is equivalent to intent.

Point is, Leonard Little should be rotting in a jail cell.

There's a huge difference between murder and manslaughter in terms of jail time and other consequences. I don't remember the actual sentencing, but drunk driving murderers don't spend all that much time in jail, and most if not all of that time is usually in county jail, which isn't that big of a deal.

Nassau County responded to that by going for civil forfeiture of the cars used. It's pretty unique in that regard, very few jurisdictions do that. The reason for that is the current DA ran on a platform against drunk driving, and that is pretty much how she got elected.

You won't be able to convict on murder, or it'll be an extreme longshot case.

That OJ guy is going crazy, makes me think he was convicted for drunk driving and is angry about it.

[#27TheDominator]

arguing the extreme counterpoint to refute another point is an effective tactic. Congratulations.

I'm bad at telling if people are total douchebag trolls or trying to have a rational discussion, so I'll bite. You made the "extreme counterpoint" first. Just because we can't enforce a drinking ban does not mean we can't ban these people from drinking or driving cars. That way, if they are caught drinking and driving again the punishment can be increased. The problem with these laws is that drunk driving "killers" may be upstanding citizens that meant no harm, but made one tragic mistake. They also may be disgusting recidivist jerkoffs that should be shot in the head. By banning them from drinking and driving we can let them back into society, but keep a charge hanging over their head if they are caught again, they should be locked up with a severe penalty. (See Drago's jerkoff "doctor" neighbor story). Keep it as a condition of being out.

[nyjetsjetsjets]

I'm bad at telling if people are total douchebag trolls or trying to have a rational discussion, so I'll bite. You made the "extreme counterpoint" first. Just because we can't enforce a drinking ban does not mean we can't ban these people from drinking or driving cars. That way, if they are caught drinking and driving again the punishment can be increased. The problem with these laws is that drunk driving "killers" may be upstanding citizens that meant no harm, but made one tragic mistake. They also may be disgusting recidivist jerkoffs that should be shot in the head. By banning them from drinking and driving we can let them back into society, but keep a charge hanging over their head if they are caught again, they should be locked up with a severe penalty. (See Drago's jerkoff "doctor" neighbor story). Keep it as a condition of being out.

ding ding ding. we have a winner.

i agree 100% and could not have said it any better.

[#27TheDominator]

ding ding ding. we have a winner.

i agree 100% and could not have said it any better.

I thought I was "so dumb"?

PS: Pete, it was ten years ago. Even if they hit him up pretty hard he'd probably be out and done rotting by now.

[KudosForND]

and also 10 years ago hitting him hard wit drunk driving manslughter would be like 5 years most. and if it was 10 years ago for vick it would be like only a fine and hes done.

[Thai Jet]

In most jurisdictions a drunk driver who kills someone would probably be convicted of manslaughter. Only a recklessness mens rea is required to convict someone of manslaughter in most, if not all state jurisdictions in this country.

Some courts have actually gone the extra step and convicted drunk dirvers with 2nd degree murder by holding that extreme recklessness is equivalent to intent.

Point is, Leonard Little should be rotting in a jail cell.

That scumbag should have at least spent 5 years or so in jail. Just saying "sorry" and paying a fine just doesn't cut it. The woman died. Her kids were denied ever seeing their mother again. Of never having her love ever again. It's just not right.