Laws For the rich and the rest of us

[DayCruiser]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

Am I the only one to notice the last sentence in the story?

"Prosecutors did say that they expect Ludwig to stand trial for a prior burglary charge."

What did this guy do? Crawl out of his totaled sports car, and start pocketing stuff from the house wreckage?

Oh yeah...it states a "prior" burglary charge. When he is not speeding, he must be a kleptomaniac...!

Bottom line is if the victim's family is all right with the verdict...then so am I.

Happy boating!

So families of the victims are in charge of who goes to jail? This guy was 62 years old. Moved out a long time ago. Here you go:

http://www.wyff4.com/chronicle/19314102/detail.html

Ludwig was charged with criminal domestic violence after an incident with his estranged wife, Donavon Ludwig, in February.

According to court documents, Ludwig is accused of hitting and spitting at his wife in front of the couple's child.

That case is still pending in 13th Circuit Court. In March, Ludwig requested a jury trial in the case.

A previous domestic violence charge against Ludwig in November was dismissed.

Both of those arrests came while Ludwig was out on bond on the burglary and resisting arrest charges.

In July of last year, Ludwig, 36, was charged after officers said he kicked in the door of the home of a man, chased the man and then struggled with police who responded to the scene.

After those charges, Ludwig was ordered to post $1 million in bond. That amount was later reduced to $100,000.

The burglary charge is still pending in Circuit Court, but prosecutors decided not to pursue the resisting arrest charge.

According to court documents, as conditions of his bond, Ludwig was required to remain on house arrest with GPS monitoring, and not to have any contact with or to come within half a mile of his wife or the man whose apartment he is accused of breaking into.

In later court hearings, conditions of house arrest and the prohibition against any contact with Donavon Ludwig were dropped from the bond order.

In August of last year, Ludwig was charged with harassment after he was accused of making repeated contact with his estranged wife.

According to court documents, that case was dropped when Donavon Ludwig said that she no longer wished to prosecute the case.

In addition to the criminal cases, Ludwig has faced four traffic charges since September of 2007.

Ludwig is the CEO of SDI Networks, a Greenville-based computer networking and solutions company. He is also a 1994 graduate of Furman University and played football for the Paladins.

No Charges Filed

 

[avenger79]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

So what you are saying is that if I admit to any crime and say I am sorry then there should be little or no punishment?

no not saying that at all. i'm trying to convince myself i guess that this was not actually a crime. yes he was speeding and yes that is illegal but not on the same level as burglary or what not. going with that thought i was going with the "accidents do happen" philosophy. yes i agree this was an extreme case of "accident" but still not an intentional crime of sorts.


of course with further posts about his other hobbies of domestic abuse and burglary, screw him, throw away the key.

 

[Rocky_Road]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

So families of the victims are in charge of who goes to jail? This guy was 62 years old. Moved out a long time ago. Here you go:

http://www.wyff4.com/chronicle/19314102/detail.html

Ludwig was charged with criminal domestic violence after an incident with his estranged wife, Donavon Ludwig, in February.

According to court documents, Ludwig is accused of hitting and spitting at his wife in front of the couple's child.

That case is still pending in 13th Circuit Court. In March, Ludwig requested a jury trial in the case.

A previous domestic violence charge against Ludwig in November was dismissed.

Both of those arrests came while Ludwig was out on bond on the burglary and resisting arrest charges.

In July of last year, Ludwig, 36, was charged after officers said he kicked in the door of the home of a man, chased the man and then struggled with police who responded to the scene.

After those charges, Ludwig was ordered to post $1 million in bond. That amount was later reduced to $100,000.

The burglary charge is still pending in Circuit Court, but prosecutors decided not to pursue the resisting arrest charge.

According to court documents, as conditions of his bond, Ludwig was required to remain on house arrest with GPS monitoring, and not to have any contact with or to come within half a mile of his wife or the man whose apartment he is accused of breaking into.

In later court hearings, conditions of house arrest and the prohibition against any contact with Donavon Ludwig were dropped from the bond order.

In August of last year, Ludwig was charged with harassment after he was accused of making repeated contact with his estranged wife.

According to court documents, that case was dropped when Donavon Ludwig said that she no longer wished to prosecute the case.

In addition to the criminal cases, Ludwig has faced four traffic charges since September of 2007.

Ludwig is the CEO of SDI Networks, a Greenville-based computer networking and solutions company. He is also a 1994 graduate of Furman University and played football for the Paladins.

No Charges Filed

What I see here is a failure of the system to corral this joker. Was this due to his position in society...or just a too lenient (read: liberal) court system? Remember the cop killer that was just wasted in Seattle? He also beat the system numerous times...and he surely didn't do that with money!

Ludwig seems to have a serious drug abuse problem, and to not test him at the scene of the accident was pure incompetence.

 

[WIMUSKY]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

I realize that in the current mood of the country it is purely evil to be rich and/or successful.

DayCruiser's abundant use of negative adjectives to explain unproven theories and imaginary events is a classic example of demonization.

You asked what I think. I told you. Sorry if you don't like it. I don't like what you think, so we are even.

Peace?

Apparently, what's good for the goose isn't necessarily good for the gander. When we express opinions that you don't agree with, threads get closed or pulled. Yet you can express your negative thoughts and that's fine. You even attacked(bashed) DayCruiser yet that's ok? Let's get real....

 

[Fly Rod]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

Come on people you are bashing this poor guy and we know nothing about him other then on the news. The other blog was locked for using less negatives.

 

[tashasdaddy]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

anyone of you have a Law Degree, the transcript of the hearing? all of this is guessing. would said the news is correct. i catch errors every night between channels.

 

[DayCruiser]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

anyone of you have a Law Degree, the transcript of the hearing? all of this is guessing. would said the news is correct. i catch errors every night between channels.

Update: http://www.wyff4.com/news/21655763/detail.html

After public outcry about the lack of jail time for John Ludwig Jr., the solicitor is asking the court to reconsider the sentence and impose the maximum of 10 years.

Many people in the Upstate have expressed outrage over Ludwig?s sentence of probation after he pleaded guilty Monday to reckless homicide when his Maserati slammed through an Upstate home, killing the 62-year-old man inside. (Full Story)

In the request to the court, 13th Solicitor Bob Ariail said, "The sentence in this case is so disproportionate to the sentences imposed in similar cases of reckless homicide in Greenville County over the last five years to justify a review and reconsideration of the sentence imposed in the case."

Ariail said penalties in Greenville for the same crime in the past five years have ranged from the maximum of 10 years to sentences suspended for straight probation.

The court expressed that one of its considerations in sentencing was that it was "influenced by the way the defendant had spent the money he had earned. This consideration is not appropriate in sentencing and for that reason the sentence imposed should be reconsidered without this being a factor."

"The public reaction to the sentence imposed mandates a review and reconsideration of this sentence in the interest of ensuring community confidence and faith in our judicial process."

Ludwig's attorney, Billy Wilkins, released a statement Wednesday afternoon saying, "We, of course, will oppose this motion. No two cases are identical. The stature in question allows a judge to impose a sentence of from zero to ten years, depending on particular facts of the case before the judge.

"I note that the cases cited by the state in its motion reflect sentences ranging from incarceration to house arrest to straight probation. It is important to understand that John was not intoxicated or high on drugs. This was a case about driving too fast which resulted in a terrible and unintended tragedy."

Speaking to News 4 about the public's reaction to the verdict, Wilkins said, "I think the public understands all of the facts, the true facts, and not the rumored facts. That most folks would agree that this is an appropriate sentence."

On Ariail's claim that the sentence was 'disproportionate,' Wilkins said, "Well there are no two cases alike. There's an offense called reckless homicide but it can be committed in a variety of different ways." He added that it was "entirely appropriate" to consider the individual characteristics of a defendant in their sentencing.

Wilkins said Ludwig was at work when he got the news. He said that Ludwig said he didn't understand it, and would have to call Wilkins back.

After hearing about Ariail's motion, Upstate defense attorney John Abdalla spoke to News 4's Myra Ruiz and said, "It's a very novel thing. I've never seen where the prosecution asks for a motion to reconsider the sentence."

"I've been practicing a long time and I've never seen that. That tends to be a defense motion," he said. "I think he (Ariail) is just backed into a corner and is reacting to the outcry."

WYFF News 4's Facebook page has had dozens of comments posted about the lack of prison time for John Ludwig Jr. Thousands of people have voted in a News 4 survey, with 93 percent saying they disagreed with Ludwig's sentence of probation and community service. In another News 4 survey, 56 percent of the people who responded thought Ludwig should have received the maximum 10-year sentence.

Former public defender Pete Partee said Tuesday that he blamed Ariail for the outcome. Partee was a public defender from 1959 to 1992. He is now in private practice, and said he has followed the Ludwig case closely from the very beginning.

"I've never had a case that interests me as much as this," Partee said.

When he learned that Ludwig was sentenced to five years suspended to three years probation with 500 hours of community service, he found it disturbing.


"I've tried many murder cases, and Wilkins uses every card he's got," he said. "That was Wilkins' show."

Partee questions why Ariail handled the prosecution the way he did. He questioned why Ariail would give such short notice for a plea hearing in such a high-profile case. He also wonders why the solicitor let it go before a retired judge. And he questioned why Ariail did not go into court with the understanding or agreement that Ludwig would serve jail time.

Partee said, "I was with five or six lawyers yesterday, and they couldn't believe it."

He said Ariail dropped the ball, and because of that, he said Ludwig walks.

"I would have required some jail time," Partee said. "I think the public is demanding it."

Before he filed the requested for reconsideration of the sentence, Ariail said on Tuesday that he didn't pick the judge, the chief justice of the state did. As for when the hearing was scheduled, Ariail said it had to be done while the judge was in town. And as for why he didn't demand jail time, Ariail said he did. He said, "It was my opinion that the appropriate sentence was 10 years and I wouldn't take anything less. They (Ludwig and his attorney) would not agree."

 

[JustJason]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

This guy deserves 3-5 years of country club prison. 500+ hours of community service. 10 years probation, and permanant loss of license privledges.

 

[Tim Frank]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

I realize that in the current mood of the country it is purely evil to be rich and/or successful.

DayCruiser's abundant use of negative adjectives to explain unproven theories and imaginary events is a classic example of demonization.

You asked what I think. I told you. Sorry if you don't like it. I don't like what you think, so we are even.

Peace?

I am not sure what the penalty is for disagreeing with a poster who is also a moderator, but I guess I'll find out....I may get more "jail" time than Ludwig.

I realize that in the current mood of the country it is purely evil to be rich and/or successful.

JB, I don't think that is the case at all. I think people have a genuine distaste for the appearance/perception of double standards and uneven application of the law....especially in a country that prides itself so highly (and with ample justification), on its founding principles....as yours does.

Criticising people for reading a media account, and then forming an opinion that has the temerity to be different from yours, is a bit self-serving....and quite uncharacteristic of you.

If your press is unreliable and inaccurate, that is a different issue; but nothing in that posted account appears less than factual and objective. Daycruiser's observations are drawn from a reputable source which is accountable to a more objective and populist-based standard than is this forum. Calling them "unproven theories", and "imaginary events", and making reference to "negative adjectives" is very nearly "Daycruiser-bashing". I've seen posts jumped on by mods for far less.....

As for someone's later suggestion that the victim's family being OK with the sentence somehow gave it credence, hopefully the NEXT victim's family will be OK with it , too.

 

[BeaufortTJustice]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

Ludwig seems to have a serious drug abuse problem, and to not test him at the scene of the accident was pure incompetence.

How would you suggest the officers test him at the scene for drug abuse? Hold him down while sticking a needle in his arm? Or grabbing his junk and squeezing out a urine sample? Please review the fourth amendment and the 100 plus years of case precedent that further clarify, define, and interpret that amendment.

I do not believe that there is enough "factual" information pertaining to what happen on the scene after the collision(s) to jump to the incompetence argument. DUI/DWI suspects have the right to refuse testing in most states. The only penalty for refusing is a license suspension. It is possible that is what happened in this case...we just don't know.

 

[kenmyfam]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

Without witnessing the incident and doing a sobriety test after nobody will ever know the real truth.
Just my 2 cents though.

 

[thefairlaneman]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

I live in North Carolina not far from where the accident occured. In NC in any accident where there is a fatality it is REQUIRED that a blood acohol test be performed on the drivers or driver of the car. This guy needs alot of jail time and the one who made the decision not to give the blood test should also serve some time.

 

[JB]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

"If your press is unreliable and inaccurate, that is a different issue; but nothing in that posted account appears less than factual and objective. Daycruiser's observations are drawn from a reputable source which is accountable to a more objective and populist-based standard than is this forum. Calling them "unproven theories", and "imaginary events", and making reference to "negative adjectives" is very nearly "Daycruiser-bashing". I've seen posts jumped on by mods for far less."

Yeah. My bad. I had no thought to attack Daycruiser, just his ranting far beyond what is reported. I will edit my post.

I think it is very unjust to disrespect the official persons responsible to deal with the case.

Bottom line is I hate gossip. It has destroyed innocent people and caused unlimited pain to families. I know of no case when gossip did anything good for anybody.

 

[jay_merrill]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

OK, then I'll speak hypothetically.

I'm a judge. I get a case with a guy who has 24 speeding tickets in 17 years, four of which are in the last two years. I am aware of other issues, as well.

If I am allowed to take all of these things into account and I can give him up to 10 years on the current charge, he had better get his affairs in order ... quick. He won't see the outside for every bit of those ten years.



???

 

[walleyehed]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

I don't like to see this type of thread....never have.
I DO feel for the elder man's family and hope something can be done.
Normally I would not post anything on this type of thread but I must say-We the people have voted these folks in-local or other-wise.
I think it would be better time spent writting to your elected officials than posting this on a Family-friendly forum where it always turns into a head-banger with the disagreements that "usually" end-up in a locked or deleted thread.
Remember, "clean, respectful and nice".

 

[wajajaja02]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

comparison,,, one of my daughters groomsmen, killed his best friend as a passenger in his car, he was DUI, 24 years old both,,, this was his second time same thing, he had this happen when he was 18. penalty is 6 month in prison , probation, and community service, high school lectures, hes a certified teacher. or was. penn.

 

[jay_merrill]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

One of the things that occurs to me about this, is that the judge could not consider the other criminal behavior, because he has not yet been convicted on those counts. While it appears that the sentence is a "slap on the hand," the judge may have felt that he will go to trial on those offenses, will be convicted and will get into the "three time loser" world. This is, of course, a WAG on my part, but you never know.

Mr. Mazerati may end up spend quite a bit of time as a "guest of the state," before its all over.




???

 

[DayCruiser]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

I posted credible local news sources to back up the threads topic and content. So therefore I am not gossiping. I didn't quote the National Enquirer or some other rag. Greenville is a metro area of around 500,000 people. The Greenville News and News4 are highly respected news outlets. Its our duty to watch out for corruption and/or incompetence that may exist in our system of government. Trust but verify

"If your press is unreliable and inaccurate, that is a different issue; but nothing in that posted account appears less than factual and objective. Daycruiser's observations are drawn from a reputable source which is accountable to a more objective and populist-based standard than is this forum. Calling them "unproven theories", and "imaginary events", and making reference to "negative adjectives" is very nearly "Daycruiser-bashing". I've seen posts jumped on by mods for far less."

Yeah. My bad. I had no thought to attack Daycruiser, just his ranting far beyond what is reported. I will edit my post.

I think it is very unjust to disrespect the official persons responsible to deal with the case.

Bottom line is I hate gossip. It has destroyed innocent people and caused unlimited pain to families. I know of no case when gossip did anything good for anybody.

 

[Fly Rod]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

walleyehed: I feel that you have driven home a very good point. No one has taken heed to your post.

 

[avenger79]

Re: Laws For the rich and the rest of us

Update: http://www.wyff4.com/news/21655763/detail.html

After public outcry about the lack of jail time for John Ludwig Jr., the solicitor is asking the court to reconsider the sentence and impose the maximum of 10 years.

whether or not we agree with his sentence, this I would absolutely disagree with. a judge made the decision. we trust him to make the decision, it's why he was put there. otherwise why not have angry mobs sit outside the courtroom and decide sentencing.