Gyroscopic Investing

Answer: No

Whether it's because of something to do with his restaurant, or whether the story is true that he wants to be a reserve cop, the fact is Wahlberg could have apologized to his victim many, many years ago. Yes, he served 45 whole days for smashing an Asian man in the face and blinding him in one eye while shouting racist epithets.

Last I read, and this was years ago, he stated that he "feel{s} good when {he} wake{s} up in the morning," and apparently felt no need to meet with his victim until now. I don't like that he's only trying to apologize now because he's trying to get something in return. Screw him.

Not sure what this is about, the actor and former NKOTB member?

So he did this when he was 16?  I thought juvenile records were generally expunged at majority.

Word up!

Philosophical: If someone has reformed his evil ways, is there any reason to impose ongoing penalties on him? And conversely, if he is still a danger to the community, shouldn't he still be in prison?

What Mark Walhberg did in the past was certainly pretty bad... but if he served his time and he hasn't done anything since, then it seems like the system actually worked and he is one of those rare people who as been rehabilitated. In this case, I can see no reason for the law to treat him any different from anyone else, or allow him to be discriminated against on the basis of his past crimes. On the other hand, if he still harbors racist feelings and is a powderkeg likely to explode and commit more racially-motivated violent assaults, then what the hell is he doing out of prison?!

Of course he doesn't belong in prison anymore. The question is, should his record be erased.

You've heard about how blacks are disproportionately pushed out of voting because they are more likely to have felony convictions. Apparently, there are other things you can't do with such a record, like become a reserve police officer. Why should a white rapper/actor enjoy  a pardon? What has he done to earn that? Nothing.

[quote=dualstow]...blinding him in one eye while shouting racist epithets[/quote]

While racist epithets were shouted, apparently Marky Mark did not blind him in any eyes.

I vote no on the pardon thing, though.

WildAboutHarry wrote:

dualstow wrote:...blinding him in one eye while shouting racist epithets

While racist epithets were shouted, apparently Marky Mark did not blind him in any eyes.

I vote no on the pardon thing, though.

Ah, it looks like that page has been updated since I read it last!

Mark Wahlberg Victim Says He Shouldn't Be Pardoned


This is not one of the victims mentioned above, but a black woman whom he threw rocks bricks at when they were both very young.
http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-new ... ed-2015211

We all do shit we're not proud of when we're underage.  But I think he should own it unless he's reformed.  Did he give any indication that he was?  Are his foundations and at-risk charities all inclusive of people of color?  etc.  The  burden of proof is fully on himm otherwise he's just trying to buy his way out of it.

My general approach to criminal records is that (with some common sense exceptions) they should be sealed after a reasonable period of time. For instance, prior to 9-11 most employers were not allowed to ask about criminal convictions that were more than seven years back. But that's not the same thing as an outright pardon. A pardon removes the criminal conviction completely and would among other things restore a felon's right to own a firearm. I am not opposed to pardons on principal. But they should be approached with extreme caution.

I'm not seeing anything here that makes me think a pardon is warranted. And as for his becoming a cop, reserve or otherwise, I can state with a high degree of confidence that even with a pardon that aint happening. Pretty much all police departments do very intensive in depth background checks on applicants, that for obvious reason also go into sealed records. It includes psychological exams and careful consideration of temperament and so on. It is inconceivable that someone with a documented history of violence directed at minorities would ever be even considered for such a position. If for no other reason than any incident involving an officer with that kind of record that involved a minority would be an engraved invitation for a lawsuit. And of course in a court of law he would be the kind of witness that most defense attorneys find only in their wildest fantasies. They would eat him for breakfast if he so much as ticketed a minority for jay-walking.

Ridiculius.  He can have a pardon if he lets his victims punch him in the face with zero legal consequences.

Ad Orientem wrote: My general approach to criminal records is that (with some common sense exceptions) they should be sealed after a reasonable period of time. For instance, prior to 9-11 most employers were not allowed to ask about criminal convictions that were more than seven years back. But that's not the same thing as an outright pardon. A pardon removes the criminal conviction completely and would among other things restore a felon's right to own a firearm. I am not opposed to pardons on principal. But they should be approached with extreme caution.

I'm not seeing anything here that makes me think a pardon is warranted. And as for his becoming a cop, reserve or otherwise, I can state with a high degree of confidence that even with a pardon that aint happening. Pretty much all police departments do very intensive in depth background checks on applicants, that for obvious reason also go into sealed records. It includes psychological exams and careful consideration of temperament and so on. It is inconceivable that someone with a documented history of violence directed at minorities would ever be even considered for such a position. If for no other reason than any incident involving an officer with that kind of record that involved a minority would be an engraved invitation for a lawsuit. And of course in a court of law he would be the kind of witness that most defense attorneys find only in their wildest fantasies. They would eat him for breakfast if he so much as ticketed a minority for jay-walking.

Simonjester wrote: exactly... the only thing they could ever hire him for was "honorary cop" as a publicity/community relations thing.. i think after years of pretending in movies he has confused himself into thinking he is the kind of guy he portrays on screen... playing a villain in one movie then a hero type in the next is one thing.. in the real world your personal history doesn't disappear because you want a different role..

Yes, they need that in order to exclude people with IQ's that are "too high": http://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barr ... y?id=95836. I feel safer already!