The Surprising Reason Why a Famous Actor Has Requested a Pardon for His Felony Conviction

WahlbergA petition offered recently by an Academy Award-nominated actor is inviting Americans to re-examine the way we treat citizens with felony conviction records. Mark Wahlberg was 16 when he assaulted two Vietnamese men, trying to steal alcohol from them. Now he is asking the Governor of Massachusetts for a pardon in that case.

An estimated 24 million Americans have been convicted of a felony, or approximately one in ten people. Consequences of a felony conviction vary by state, but they are severe. In most cases, felons cannot serve in public office or serve on juries. Many will lose their right to vote; more than 5 million Americans are disenfranchised because of convictions.

A convicted felon’s employment opportunities are often severely restricted. They are usually required to disclose criminal histories to potential employers. They may lose professional licenses, or the right to ever obtain a professional license, and they cannot carry firearms.

Mark Walhberg has played soldiers and police officers in several of his movies, including Lone Survivor, The Departed, and Two Guns. Now, he hopes to become a reserve police officer in California, where he currently lives. First, however, his felony conviction must be voided.

In his petition, Wahlberg says:

(A pardon) would be a formal recognition that someone like me can receive official public redemption if he devotes himself to personal improvement and a life of good works. My hope is that, if I receive a pardon, troubled youths will see this as an inspiration and motivation that they too can turn their lives around and be formally accepted back into society.

If I were fortunate enough to receive a pardon, I would have the ability to become more active in law enforcement activities, including those that assist at-risk individuals.

Walhberg talked about his younger years in a 2009 interview with Britain’s Daily Mail:

I’ve made a lot of mistakes in my life and I’ve done bad things. But I never blamed my upbringing for that. I never behaved like a victim so that I would have a convenient reason for victimizing others. Everything I did wrong was my own fault. I was taught the difference between right and wrong at an early age. I take full responsibility.

During that interview, Wahlberg explained how his parish priest helped him get back on the right path in life:

He was always there for me, through the good times and the bad. Back then there were more bad times than good. But he always had faith that I could change my ways. He was the first to recognize the actor in me.

Wahlberg refocused his attention on music and acting. As do 3 of every 10 Americans with a felony conviction, Wahlberg went on to live a productive life. It may be time to reconsider how we as a society can support people like Wahlberg, who have paid their debt to society, in returning to full status as productive citizens.

FREE Presentation Reveals 1 Crazy Trick That Can Slash Your Grocery Bill By 75%

You may also like...

  • Patrick

    one thought knot head, don’t do the crime ,if you can’t do the time .Times up ,time to pay your dues ,you are no better than anyone else.

    • Chief47

      Amen to that!

      • Amen, amen amen. We non- felons should not be viewed as the same class of people that are felons. You committed a crime and your peers have spoken. Suck it up!

        • tnetcenter

          EVERYONE is a felon waiting to be caught – you’re all in the same class with everyone else!

          • 10-Nov-1775

            apologist, till YOU are the victim.

    • tnetcenter

      He DID the time! Why should he continue to be punished?? He PAID his dues! Why should he have to continue to pay indefinitely???

      • 10-Nov-1775

        The time was only PART of the sentence, being a felon denies you of certain rights, proscribed by law. The felon deprived an innocent victim of his rights. And, most of the time the innocent victim is not made whole.
        If you do not want your rights denied, do not deny others–in other words, do not commit a felony.

      • patriot 86

        Being a felon denies you the right to possess a gun ‘ there is no time limit on it and being that he did the crime he should abide by it’s punishments not whine like a little baby.

      • Patrick

        who made you the law ,stop whining,and take your punishment .law abides and no man is above it .

        • The

          The whole point here is the law is dumb and an unintended consequence of law-and-order mania that swept the country over the past 50 years. Before that, felonies didn’t destroy peoples prospects for employment, licensure, etc. It wasn’t even illegal for someone with a record to own a gun until 1968. YOu have literally no idea what you’;re talking about.

          • Patrick

            !!!CRY ,ME A RIVER ,AND TRY TO KEEP YOUR NOSE CLEAN !!!

      • John E Strom Jr.

        He didn’t do enough time. Do you REALLY think 45 days is sufficient? If you do then you’re sick. He did NOT pay his “dues”. He should have done a year or two for blinding the Vietnamese man. How much time is YOUR eyesight worth? I’ll bet money it’s one Hell of a lot more than 45 days.

    • patriot 86

      yup he puts his pants on one leg at a time and wipes his ass just like the rest of us .Why should he be given special treatment.

  • scopedope

    He should have thought about it before he did it. Now, he’s crying. Too bad!

    • Merrily Snider

      Really? Did you always do the right thing when you were a kid? We learn from our mistakes and it is what we do with that knowledge that really matters. I don’t know about you but, maybe you can improve your life too. Give it a try. Learn to forgive people and stop judging others.

  • 10-Nov-1775

    Absolutely not!! There are ramifications to one’s actions, and if you take away the penalty, there is no compulsion to do the right thing. So, we are going to make everything legal, because of the unfairness of the penalty? HOW ABOUT THE UNFAIRNESS OF THE CRIME? You took others’ rights away, so it is time for some of yours to be taken away. There is too much responsibility inequality in this country already.

    • tnetcenter

      He PAID the penalty! Why should he continue to be punished?

      • 10-Nov-1775

        He is NOT continuing to be punished– the sentence IS the penalty, including all that it entails and affects.

        • The

          That is beyond moronic. Its the sort of authoritarian hysteria that only dumb people believe. There is no enlightened civilization on earth that says a man should be denied a professional license for some indiscretion when he was 16, but since we’ve ceded the system over to the THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE YOU SHOULDA THOUGHT ABOUT THAT BEFORE YOU DID WHAT YOU DID THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE droolers, we look like morons on this issue. You are wrong, we;ve done if your way for a long time, now its time for people like you to sit down and shut up. Its not a remotely just consequence to marginalize someone for their entire lives of a crime decades old that didn’t even warrant a year in prison.

      • pateboo

        If he knew the difference between right and wrong, and he still did the WRONG choice, do you really want him making choices that will affect YOU in the voting booth???

      • Marty

        Depends on the crime. Some victims of crime live in fear the rest of their life due to that crime. In this case, it was apparently a robbery/attempted robbery. Yea, the stolen stuff was just alcohol, but a robbery just the same. Kinda like Ferguson, it was just cigars? I do agree however, some victimless crimes should have a penalty sunset. I don’t believe a crime involving dangerous illicit drugs are victimless.

  • tehran444

    Wahlberg is one of the most anti-gun people in Hollywood. Why should he be allowed to carry a gun as a law officer. I also have charges as a juvenile but I did the crime so now I am ready for the consequences. Man up!!!! Donald R Hohman CWO(ret)USA POW

    • Karll

      I didn’t know he was anti-gun. He sure appears in a lot of shoot-em-ups.
      He was exec producer of Boardwalk Empire which was loaded with shootings. If what you say is true, he’s one big hypocrite.

      • patriot 86

        Yup he is anti gun along with arnold the terminator and stallone ‘Three people who’s bread and butter shoot em up movies have made them millionaires.HIPOCRITES’ I would’nt walk across the street to see any of their new movies if they were free .I’m totally pro gun and second amendment and I don’t support traitors to the constitution.

        • Karll

          I agree with your sentiments.

          • patriot 86

            Thanks ‘I don’t support any of those hipocrites’ a few more are george clooney and jamie foxx and will smith .

        • Merrily Snider

          What do you mean they are traitors to the constitution? Just because they are allowed to have guns doesn’t mean they want them. This country is the only country that has so many murders with guns. Have you ever thought of that as anti-constitutional?

          • patriot 86

            Nope’ the second amendment guarantees anyone the right to own one if they are not a felon’ No this country is not the only country with so many murders.Look at what has happened to australia since they outlawed all guns ‘crime is up 400 percent cuz the criminals still have theirs.Blaming the gun and not the individual committing the crimes with them is the biggest cop out there is .Start by demanding that crimes committed with guns be prosecuted and not given a slap on the wrist like they are now .There are enough laws out there we don;t need more ‘what we need is our dead ass president and police officials to start blaming the thugs who commit the crimes and stop villianizing the law abiding citizens who don’t break any laws.I have guns and I have never had one load itself or pull it’s own trigger so until people begin to stop acting like it’s the guns fault and not the person who uses them improperly or illegally nothing will change cuz the law abiding citizens are not the problem here ‘ it;s all the left wing nut jobs who think we would all be safer if guns were banned .Think again cuz that would be a criminals dream come true.

          • The

            Where in the 2nd Amendment does it say :”if they are not a felon” ?

  • John E Strom Jr.

    Why would Mark Wahlberg think he’s entitled to a pardon? Did that Vietnamese man regain his eyesight? [no] Was Mark Wahlberg sufficiently punished for his crime? [no]
    Mark Wahlberg is an embarrassment but SO typical of Hollywood elites. He thinks he’s entitled to special treatment. That is why our country’s criminal justice system is broken – too many judges letting famous people who are also criminals – off lightly. Sorry, Wahlberg, you did the crime so you have no right to claim favored treatment. It would be a miscarriage of justice to give you a pardon.

    • tnetcenter

      “Was Mark Wahlberg sufficiently punished for his crime? [no]” It’s NOT your right to determine that! He DID pay for his crimes! Why should he continue to be punished? Because YOU say so? SORRY! It doesn’t work that way – at least it’s not supposed to.

      Wahlberg ISN’T entitled to “Special” treatment, he’s entitled to the same treatment everybody else gets OR should get!

      100 years ago, when you got out of jail, your weapons were returned to you just like your cloths and other personal belongings. We need to go back to that!

      • patriot 86

        Exactly .

    • patriot 86

      Touche friend.

    • The

      Learn your facts. Walberg wasn’t responsible for the man being blinded. That is false internet rumour, the man himself says he supports the pardon, so just who are you ‘standing up for’ when the victim believes enough time has passed that he should be forgiven? People like you are so lame. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE!

      • John E Strom Jr.

        Well so much for him being CONVICTED then. Who the heck are you? You sound like a Mark Wahlberg apologist. Even Wahlberg asked for the victim’s forgiveness. You are a troll – go away. Wahlberg attacked and injured the man leading to his blindness.

        • The

          What are you even talking about? HE DIDN’T BLIND THE MAN. YOU SAID HE BLINDED THE MAN. THAT IS NOT TRUE. IT IS A LIE. THE MAN RECEIVED THE INJURY DURING WAR. Go learn the truth, you ignorant tard.

          • John E Strom Jr.

            You’re partially right. Wahlberg’s attack on the Vietnamese man didn’t blind him but here’s a little excerpt from Wikipedia that shows the world what a dirt bag Mark Walhberg was and still is…there are many other sources in addition to Wikipedia so if you need further proof of what a sleazy guy he is feel free to ask.

            “Wahlberg had been in trouble 20–25 times with the Boston Police Department in his youth. By age 13, Wahlberg had developed an addiction to cocaine and other substances.[9][10] At 15, civil action was filed against Wahlberg for his involvement in two separate incidents of harassing African-American children (the first were siblings, and the second incident was a group of black school children on a field trip), by throwing rocks and shouting racial epithets.[11] At 16, Wahlberg approached a middle-aged Vietnamese man named Thanh Lam on the street and, using a large wooden stick, knocked him unconscious while calling him “Vietnam fucking shit”.[12] That same day Wahlberg also attacked a second Vietnamese man named Hoa “Johnny” Trinh, punching him in the face. He believed he had left his victim permanently blind in one eye.[11][12][13] Trinh was interviewed in December 2014 by the Daily Mail, who revealed that he had already lost his eye during the Vietnam War, was not severely injured by Wahlberg, and did not know the identity of his assailant prior to being contacted by the media.[14] According to court documents regarding these crimes, when Wahlberg was arrested later that night and returned to the scene of the first assault, he stated to police officers: “You don’t have to let him identify me, I’ll tell you now that’s the mother-fucker who’s (sic) head I split open.”[13] Investigators also noted that Wahlberg “made numerous unsolicited racial statements about ‘gooks’ and ‘slant-eyed gooks’.” [12][13]”
            So that’s Mark Wahlberg. As for ignorant I’m guessing you’re a leftist apologist for him.

          • The

            What we’ve proven here is that you wantonly talk out of your a*s without feeling normal human shame when its demonstrated that you are a blowhard who had no idea what he was talking about. Getting the feeling yet this conversation isn’t going so well for you ? HE BLINDED A MAN!
            Uh, no he didn’t.
            YES HE DID.
            Really, no. He didn’t.
            (Goes and does research) UH WELL OK HE DIDN’T BUT LETS JUST PRETEND I NEVER SAID THAT AND SHIFT PREMISES TO SOMETHING ELSE!
            You;re not a man of very high integrity.

          • John E Strom Jr.

            OK, moron, what I previously read was incorrect. The REST of what I posted WAS so you’re giving this dirt bag a pass on all of his other criminal activity. He’s a dirt bag and evidently you think he’s just fine. Here’s a bit more for you to chew on. More from Wikipedia – just for you. Seems like he likes to beat people up. I’m guess you’re his a-hole buddy? 45 days. What a joke and HE thinks HE paid his debt on that crime. Bull

            “For these crimes, Wahlberg was charged with attempted murder,
            pleaded guilty to assault and was sentenced to two years in Suffolk
            County Deer Island House of Correction. He ultimately served only 45 days of his sentence.[12][15] In another incident, the 21-year-old Wahlberg fractured the jaw of a neighbor in an unprovoked attack.[16] Commenting in 2006 on his past crimes, Wahlberg has stated: “I did a lot of things that I regret, and I have certainly paid for my mistakes.”
            He said the right thing to do would be to try to find the blinded man
            and make amends, and admitted he has not done so, but added that he
            was no longer burdened by guilt: “You have to go and ask for
            forgiveness and it wasn’t until I really started doing good and doing
            right by other people, as well as myself, that I really started to
            feel that guilt go away. So I don’t have a problem going to sleep at
            night. I feel good when I wake up in the morning.”[15]

          • The

            Its not like your position is some innovative or insightful vantage. its typical AINT NO CRIME EVER PAID FER CUZ YOU CANT UNDO WHAT BEEN DONE YOU SHOULDA THOUGHT BOUT DAT FER YA DID WHAT YE DID!! imbecilic tard prattle. Again, its stuff dumb people think. There is no civilization on this earth I would want to be associated with that maintains the sentence for every crime should be life of civil death. Again, stupid people think that, you think that, by proxy it makes it a very safe assumption you are stupid but nobody else but authoritarian droolers believes that’s fair. So, we see here that you do. Great! Just remember that having the right to an opinion is no kind of insulation from your opinion being awful, misguided, ignorant or otherwise an indicator of your general intelligence level. It is completely wrong to say that 20+ years later, someone should continue to be punished for something done decades ago, barring the most extreme events like murder or abuse of children.

          • John E Strom Jr.

            You pompous ass, Walhlberg served less than 7% of his sentence two year sentence. And what matter if his victim forgave him. The law isn’t supposed to and I, for one, do not think he’s entitled to. If you don’t like it – who cares. This is the last response to you since you’re apparently of the belief Mark Wahlberg deserves special treatment. He doesn’t.

          • The

            A pardon isn’t ‘special treatment’, Einstein. Anyone is allowed to apply for one, expungement and post conviction relief is totally standard in the vast majority of places but a few holdouts don’t. MA is one. You are a complete drooler in your belief that the ‘law isn’t supposed to forgive anyone’. That is an opinion you are indeed totally entitled to, but you are a great illustration of the sort of people who society has judged as fringe tards with dumb beliefs whose opinions aren’t really worth listening to. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE!

          • The

            No, I’m fully right and you are fully wrong. Nobody is arguing that he didn;t beat the guy up. The point is he didn’t blind him, which is a hugely relevant fact, one you got wrong. Even more cringe-worthy, one you dug in on and really defended.

          • John E Strom Jr.

            You are an idiot. He was a ONE MAN crime wave. He should have gotten YEARS in prison. He got 45 days. And I was incorrect on one issue. In fact, mutt, even Wahlberg thought he had put the guy’s eye out – so piss off like a good chap.

          • The

            Do you realize how dumb you look when you’re wrong about something but try to spin it like you were ‘kinda right’? Really, really dumb.

          • John E Strom Jr.

            Your boyfriend, Mark Wahlberg, is a dirt bag. And that is a fact. Now f off like a good chap you leftist mutt.

          • The

            … and now we see what a low-rent mind you have as you stumble into the nearest left/right paradigm and bleat something about LIBERALS! or TEA BAGGERS! Guys like you are beyond dumb. The country is rapidly losing interest in pretending your stupid ideas matter or are worth a seat at the table. Huge bi-partisan initiative announced regarding criminal justice reform, which will also address the expungement issue. I’m sure you’re well acquainted with what it feels like to be on the losing side all the time so you won’t be too discouraged when society yet again passes legislation rendering your beliefs even further out onto the drooler fringe.

  • snowyriver

    Wahlberg gets a pardon and tens of thousands others should also.

    • Paula

      I think that would depend on how money the others have.. you need lots to grease the right palms!

  • Shipwreck

    Sounds like getting that LE certification would let him carry a firearm, even as he does his best to disarm people like me, “ME” is a guy without a criminal record, not a misdemeanor, not even a “stop and frisk”.

    Now, past age 60, I carry every day (licensed). The reason is that there are still mutts like Mr. Wahlberg USED TO BE, and they feel no compunction when it comes to beating the hell out of seniors, women or the disabled among us.

    Sorry Mark. I enjoy your work, but no gun-grabber should be allowed to have a firearm, and scamming to get a badge (and the right to carry) simply isn’t right. Become a volunteer firefighter. It’s a worthy calling. Opinions vary; this one is mine.

  • theskids

    I’m from part of Boston called Hyde Park, Wahlberg is from Dorchester. I know people from Southie that ran with Mark. His fans don’t know what else Marky Mark was doing & let me tell you he was a mess with serious issues. I also got into my share of trouble in my party years with my issues. I am a business owner now, took myself back to school in ’98 & also attended trade schools. I knew back then that because of my record, my opportunites were limited. Thanks to vindictive X’s I was labeled a violent person. I was on 60 minutes in the 90’s thanks to my daughters mother. Nowadays potential employers do back ground checks, so again I am limited. I had to start my own business, because the CORI sheet read like I was a big time bad guy & I would hire myself because I know me. Law enforcement think they know me from a piece of paper. That was only half of me. I knew what my problem was & in order for me to be a better person for my daughter & for myself I had to change & it started when I stopped the parting & beating myself up with drugs & alcohol when my X would mess with me. I always worked but I was a “working stiff”. So Mark if you get the pardon why don’t you help other unfortunate individuals get back into society, providing they meet certain criteria & have society embrace us like the Gov will embrace your petition.

    • Steven

      Based on what you say hear, I believe you deserve a pardon. I will most likely never be in a position to grant anyone a pardon, but if I were in a position to hire someone, and you were seeking the position, I believe I would overlook past.

      • meyati

        look how hypocritical some companies like Home Depot are. They won’t give a person with any type of minor offense a job, yet look at the Martha Stewart products. They can go into business with somebody that went to the federal pen for a variety of high stakes crimes, but won’t give the average Joe a break-a chance.

        • Chuck Estes

          I have zero convictions, yet I have a bigger problem with corporations partnering with Stewart than giving a “regular con” a break. I think that she has serious ethics issues and no demonstration that she has overcome them.

          • meyati

            I live in a police militarized state.
            I was a good girl, but students get arrested for things that I did and have probation, school suspension for a 3rd degree felony. So, if you get jumped- you have a record and Home Depot won’t hire you. Your boyfriend comes in a new car, the cops stop you, and you are a felon for being in a stolen car and Home Depot won’t hire you. I had a very nice friend, and she went riding with a boyfriend. They were stopped by the cops. They took her to the station. The cops called her parents, and explained that she could be charged. They let her go home, no court- nothing. Our boyfriends had to show up in their regular cars. Then the judicial system was more forgiving, the first few times.

            Now you spit on the sidewalk and it’s a serious crime. Then like you say- We have unrepentant federal felons like martha Stewart in business with Home Depot, TV contracts, publishing–

  • Pa John

    In New York they are already going through medical records and misusing/misapplying common medical terms to deny people their 2nd Amendment rights. In short, the gun grabbers in government can use your formerly private medical records to take away your 2nd Amendment rights and you have no recourse, no appeals process, no way to fight back and regain your rights. You’ve all seen “new media” articles on this before so I will not repeat here. A tragedy here is for those folks who do not even own a gun – their rights can be stripped away and they won’t even know it, and will _never_ know it unless/until they attempt to legally acquire a firearm. THEN they find out the hard way how their own government has deceived and abused them. No criminal history, no record of any violence, yet flagged as high risk in their medical records by people who absolutely mean to disarm everyone, including you. The government is not friendly to gun owners. Catch a clue.
    .
    Second, check out a book called “3 Felonies A Day: How the Feds Target The Innocent”.
    http://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594035229
    (I have no association with the book/author or Amazon).
    – – – Description – – –
    The average professional in this country wakes up in the morning, goes to work, comes home, eats dinner, and then goes to sleep, unaware that he or she has likely committed several federal crimes that day. Why? The answer lies in the very nature of modern federal criminal laws, which have exploded in number but also become impossibly broad and vague. In Three Felonies a Day, Harvey A. Silverglate reveals how federal criminal laws have become dangerously disconnected from the English common law tradition and how prosecutors can pin arguable federal crimes on any one of us, for even the most seemingly innocuous behavior. The volume of federal crimes in recent decades has increased well beyond the statute books and into the morass of the Code of Federal Regulations, handing federal prosecutors an additional trove of vague and exceedingly complex and technical prohibitions to stick on their hapless targets. The dangers spelled out in Three Felonies a Day do not apply solely to “white collar criminals,” state and local politicians, and professionals. No social class or profession is safe from this troubling form of social control by the executive branch, and nothing less than the integrity of our constitutional democracy hangs in the balance.

    – – – End Description – – –
    The above two points are why I look to precisely what the 2nd Amendment says. I don’t see anything there about having to pass some mental evaluation by people who think it is _crazy_ for you to want to exercise your right to keep and bear arms in the first place. Neither do I see anything about this right being denied to felons who have already paid their debt to society – if someone is too dangerous then don’t let them out when their parole hearings come up! Otherwise they have paid their dues to society and served their time. Back into society they go with all the rights and responsibilities of a citizen and life goes on, although with a record that will follow them forever. The alternative is as per above – since EVERYBODY can be labeled “felons” that approach simply isn’t workable in the real world where tyrants and liberals scheme to disarm and rule with an iron fist. An armed society is a polite society. Nut jobs and crazies will not threaten and hurt people for very long – such problems will solve themselves fairly promptly in a free society of armed citizens. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. And that is that. Always choose liberty.

    • tnetcenter

      It’s NOT possible for adults to NOT commit a crime in this country, just going about their daily business. Government IS running amuck. The USA has the highest per capita incarceration rate in the entire world – more people per population are in jail or have been convicted. The USA also has one of the highest prison populations in general in the world. Most of those are drug crimes and don’t involve violence of any kind.

      • Tomcat01

        We also make the most excuses for poor behavior and how few accountable until many have crossed the line into offenses that result in prison.

    • Steven

      Last I heard, simply being present in the US, you are likely violating a Federal law, or three, even if you don’t wake up and do anything.

  • Buckindaburg

    Not defending Wahlberg…but I do know that many young people are involved in things that could turn out very badly. That they didn’t, allowed them to grow and gain wisdom. But I do not believe that he is entitled to any special treatment under existing laws.
    Problems in our society can be laid firmly at the door step of mitigation in the court room. I do not advocate that every crime can be justly handled by applying the same penalty, but once a law is bent to favor a “Special Case”…..it continues to be bent to the point where no one is punished for whatever crime they commit…or, they are allowed to plea down to a lesser charge so an aspiring assistant district attorney can put another notch in his/her conviction score card. There should be a list of certain crimes that do not allow plea bargaining. One that rankles me most is the dirt bag that commits a crime with a stolen gun and that perp is allowed to plea the gun away and thus avoid a mandatory prison sentence. Carrying a weapon is a birth right and it burns my butt that so many crimes that involve illegal guns, are wiped clean and those thugs are in the street within days….committing another crime with an illegal gun. Then the Mothers against Guns…or some other group of anti gun folks are painting anyone with a gun as a criminal or on the verge of becoming one.

    • newhon63

      Agree entirely.

  • doctorbob

    Give him his pardon. Do you realize that America, the land of the free, is the ONLY nation on the planet that permanently disenfranchises felons? He’s lucky it was a State conviction. Had it been a Federal conviction, he would never have been allowed to appeal for its dismissal. That is NOT justice. When a person commits a crime, the State comes along and says that he must serve X- number of years in prison, or pay X-amount of fine. One he has served that time and paid his fine, he has REPAID HIS DEBT TO SOCIETY IN FULL, as demanded by the State. In America, we are SUPPOSED to grant second chances to people. 50 years ago, a person could simply move to another state and start over. I have several friends tho committed a crime when they were young, and served their sentence, but went on to lead exemplary lives.. With today’s computers, they can’t go anywhere to start over, except to leave the country. Yet, they are not without talents and skills, and have much to offer society.. If they commit another crime, then of course arrest them. But if they have not committed any further crimes, they should be allowed to return to society IN FULL. End the “punishment in perpetuity.” No court ever sentences anyone to perpetual punishment, so why should society inflict that on anyone not convicted of a heinous crime? Wahlberg stole some alcohol when he was young? I bet YOU got into your father’s liquor cabinet when you were young and tried out his Scotch without his permission. So, YOU, sir, are no better than Mark Wahlberg. YOU stole alcohol from your father! Let him have his life back. ALL felons deserve that second chance after they have paid their debt to society. .

    • Tomcat01

      I disagree. Wahlberg can serve as an example to society on two fronts. First and foremost, cannot do the time do not comit the crime. He failed to listen to those around him and by his own admission had good parenting. People in this country need to learn there are consequences for their actions and some can be severe.
      Secondly, he can be a great example of how to overcome his setbacks and “screwups.”
      Thirdly, so a repeat felon should be consisitntly pardoned and have his voting and gun rights restored only to keep repeating crimes which are felonies so long as he/she completes their prison sentence? Not on my watch. Maybe lower degree of misdemeanors and such, but felonies heck no!! Felonies are usually pretty serious crimes.

      • tnetcenter

        He DID “do his time” – THAT’s the point. Society continues to punish EX-felons even though they have paid the prescribed “debt” to society.

        How loudly would you be screaming if your Dad was still whipping your a$$ 20 years after you did something wrong, for that act??

        By all means, continue to punish those who CONTINUE to break the law – but stop punishment in perpetuity

        as one person put it!

        • Tomcat01

          He committed a felony, too bad. What my did to me as a kid bears NOTHING on what Walhberg did to that gentleman.
          The laws have been there for a long time. I’ll bet with all the people who attempted to provide guidance he he disregarded the advice and thus must suffer the consequences.

          • tnetcenter

            You didn’t bother reading the article did you?

          • Tomcat01

            I DID read the article and Wahlberg isn’t the first to bring this up. Technically, even making the movie with the “props,” he was in violation if you go by the letter of the law. He ac knowledges his mistakes, but that doesn’t erase them. What has he done for his victim? I like Wahlberg as an actor, but again you do the crime you do the time. All too often in today’s society we continue to make excuses for poor behavior and hold few accountable.
            I suggest that you re-read the article and rethink your position.

        • newhon63

          Okay. Wait. It has been going on for decades that felons have gotten time off for “Good Behavior”. So a 20 years stretch turns out to be 10 and out. Did Wahlberg do his full time? I don’t know but in my mind a) there should be no time off for good behavior, you were not able to behave while out here in society only do the cell doors slam shut do you realize that you need to be a human being toward others? Or does it take the first time a guard busts you across the back with his nightstick that awakens the thought? The crime says 30, you do 30 and not a day less. Many get out prematurely due to overcrowding to be unleashed upon the rest of us.

          2) It’s a trust thing. After 20 years in prison with the rest of humanity’s worst, what other kinds of nasty things have someone learned? People do not want to take the chance that a felon they hire will or will not do something. Businesses take alot of time and money to build. It would be nice to be able to trust an ex-convict enough to hire them, but it is tatamount to playing Russian Roulette. You would always ask yourself. Did you just hire a guy who really does want to start over or did you let a guy into your business who is going to corner your wife/daughter, brutally rape and murder her or come to work in the morning to find your warehouse is empty of your inventory?

          • The

            What a stupid, stupid characterization.

            1) You literally have no idea what you’re talking about but you just typed a bunch of stream-of-conciousness drivel that proved it.
            2) This isn’t a guy who did 20 years in prison for some heinous crime. It was a 16 year old kid who punched a shop-keeper and grew up like we all do.
            3) The reason judges give sentences is because judges judge cases. There is no such thing as one sentence fits all crimes and most judges sentence in accord with what the ‘actual time served’ will be.
            4) Did I mention you REALLY demonstrate you have no clue what you;’re talking about?

          • newhon63

            Because my opinion does not coincide with yours I don’t know what I am talking about. That speaks volumes about the kind of person you are. No, he was not a 20 years convict but he did commit a crime that he knew was illegal and he did it anyway. I grew up and did not punch someone. My upbringing was less than desirable but I did not resort to violence. Walberg, by his own statement as someone here also points out, was good but he decided to commit a felony, not a misdermeaner, a felony. If there were one price for each crime then perhaps people would think twice before committing crimes if they knew that if they rob a store for example and the penalty is 15 years and they WOULD serve the whole 15 years then they would not do it.

            Did I mention that I think you might have some felons in your family or you would not be so animate about my comments. Reminds me of a conversation some fellow students and I were having about the death penalty. This woman was dead set against the death penalty. Come to find out her brother was serving life for murder. Like you, I think she would have been for the death penalty for murder as well but since her brother was a murderer that was different.

          • The

            Actually, no. The reason I understand this issue at depth is because I am an attorney. I see the reality every day whereas you have cheap, disposable ideals, that’s it. The reason you have no idea what you’re talking about relaly has nothing to do with your opinion sharing a coincidence with my opinion. It’s because you don’t know facts. Its not like you’re the only person to have some elaborate opinion bulked up on something you fundamentally don’t understand, but if you are seriously a man who cannot make a distinction between a relatively trivial offense committed when someone was 16 and some magical imperative to marginalize someone forever because of some cheap mantra about YOU DON’T DO THE CRIME IF YE CAN’T DO THE TIME, it doesn’t really matter what I say, you’ll be too slow to understand it. As far as ‘felons in my family’, I could make you into a felon in 6 months time. Give me a decent investigation team, subpoena power and a grand jury, you’re toast. You are a naive man. If you weren’t, your “opinion” would be closer to mine but since you are, you enjoy the blissful ignorance of believing something dumb.

          • newhon63

            Ahh, so now I have cheap ideals just because I am not an attorney. You have no idea where I got my ideas or what kind of experiences I have had to have come to the point where I believe what I do. Just as you have not got any knowledge about me, nor do I about you. You claim to be an attorney. Woopty doo. No way to know for sure but I do notice you are resorting to insults.
            In some states a juvenile’s records are sealed once they reach the age of majority. Looks like Walberg’s home state is not on that list. There must be a reason for that or he committed another crime after he turned 18 that is not mentioned. As far as making me a felon in 6 months. Is that with or without fabricating evidence? I have no record as I am law-abiding.
            If Walberg were not a celebrity, he would not have a chance in hell of getting a pardon but since he is, he can use star power to get what he wants. If you want to keep having a conversation we can but if you are going to continue the insults, this conversation is over.

          • The

            See? Here you go spouting ignorance again all over the place. I judge you on your words and ideas, which are very clearly from the vantage of legitimate cluelesness. Just look at the repugnant, almost cringe-worthy fallacy of “SOME STATES SEAL JUVENILE RECORDS WELL HIS DOESN’T SO THERE MUST BE A REASON!” So, you fill in your own intellectual and knowledge gap with “WELP, THERE MUST BE A REASON ITS THAT WAY OTHERWISE IT WOULDN’T BE THAT WAY!” That’s called circular logic. Its something dumb people do. Notice a theme here? See how you’re being judged based on your own bad ideas? It is completely absurd to perpetually stigmatize juveniles (or anyone, for that matter) for decades after completing their sentence, denying them every opportunity to reenter society as a productive man. Its disgusting to see people like you champion that grotesque notion… and for the record? No. a prosecutor have you run up a rail on a felony charge without fabricating evidence. “Show me the man, I’ll show you the crime” has become a reality in the USA. You don’t understand this because as we’ve already robustly established, you don’t know what you;’re talking about.

          • newhon63

            yup. Okay.

          • newhon63

            And if you have that kind of attitude about what sounds like guilty until proven innocent, I find that extremely unfortunate coming from an officer of the court.

          • Will

            newhon63

            If a starving person were to walk into a Safeway and steal $51.00 of meat, they would be charged with a FELONY.

            If that same person stole $49.99 worth of meat that person would be charged with a MISDEMEANOR.

            SO, you, in your backward thinking, believe that a starving shoplifter that gets caught with $51.00 of meat should be punished for the rest of their lives?

            That’s the point!

            Up until now, it’s obvious that you have been very lucky in life.

            And very, very hypocritical of those less fortunate.

  • junkmailbin

    If someone goe 20 years after a felony conviction, they should receive a pardon. THIS DOES NOT GO FOR SEX OFFENDERS, THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN EXECUTED ON THE FIRST OFFENSE

    • Tomcat01

      Don’t do the crime in the first place. If he had learned this as a kid as many of us did then maybe he wouldn’t be in this situation.

  • Jack Strohbach

    How fair is the law that does not allow 25 years of exemplary life and service wipe away a youthful error of judgement. He must have paid the price when he was younger and he has led a productive life. Being famous helps, but so does being remorseful and wishing to do more to help similarly situated youths.

    • Tomcat01

      And what of his victim? What reparations has he made to him?

      • Jack Strohbach

        Excellent point, Tom. So another 25 years of Mark not having his rights is going to cure him?

        • Tomcat01

          Yeppers!!!!! Wahlberg shouldn’t be given a “free pass,” just because his victim has permanent injuries. Wahlberg has done very well for himself and if you watched their show you’d see that the Wahlbergs are actually quite proud of their reputation when younger. So, if M Wahlberg was paroled for murder would you feel the same because we couldn’t raise the victim from the dead?

          • Jack Strohbach

            Tom, you are right. I am not making myself clear. NO ONE, except for the the very worst criminals, should forever loose their rights. EVERYONE should be able to redeem themselves. All these people served their time. Some are still serving, so we don have to worry about their special rights. Some have redeemed themselves and some did not. Some of these penalties are just too harsh. What does a sixteen year old know about life? It is hard to imagine one that young thinking about life-long consequences before getting into a fight, or driving. Or getting naked. They ALL should be more responsible, but how can they be when all they learn is Paris Hilton road to success method? And I am sorry I missed the Wahlberg’s show, I am sure I would have learned a word or two of Boston English I never heard before.

          • Tomcat01

            Jack, it’s nice to have a decent conversation with someone like you without all the name calling that seems to frequent here.
            While I understand what you are saying, I still have to disagree. I knew at 16 the consequences of “breaking the rules,” regardless of what there are. All too often in today’s society we’ve lost the ability to “parent,” our children. It’s more popular to be their “buddy,” while raising them and the crap it takes a village to raise a child is political Bull crap. It take two loving parents committed to loving and guiding their children. The greatest gift a parent can give a child isn’t solely their love, but the tools necessary to make it through life. Life isn’t always fair as you well know.
            The courts are bogged down and to take something like this on a case by case basis may be overwhelhming. We cannot keep making exceptions to the laws or then they become ineffectual. Wahlberg can petition his state, but that will NOT moved the federal statute. Where do you then draw the line as well regarding other mistakes in society? If a person gets other than an honorable discharge from the military do we then go back 20- 30 years later and correct that because he/she was a good person after that? Misdeanors are one thing, but felonies are another. Believe me here as well, just as with us when we were 16, they know the ropes as we did.
            Wahlbergs problem is that he disregarded the advice given to him and they seem proud of being known as “rambuncious.” Just as we did at 16, even 25 seems old and a long way off.
            The rights are not special as you stated. They are guarenteed under the Constitution unless you forfeit them. I knew that even in the 8th grade. Stuff like this isn’t taught in school any longer. In fact I am not sure what is being taught. The biggest thing not being taught in school is how to think and reason for yourself. Tests are taught and NOT the ability to show how we get to that result. A high school girl I was helping with her ALgebra was amazed that I arrived at the correct answer just looking at a problem. She had no idea about the formula to get there.
            Another subject not taught at home or school is honor. I always try to behave as if those who raised me are watching and I do not wish to disappoint them. Today, it’s all about personal satisfaction.

          • Will

            Jack,

            You seem to be one of the common sense people on here.
            I agree with your comments.
            Please have a read of mine above.

            Not only does the perpetual life sentence prevent ex-felons from many rights, but that EXTRA punishment is set in the individuals mind.

            They can’t find work. Can’t vote, Can’t drink in some instances, Can’t do drugs, Can’t socialize with certain people even ones in their own family, the list goes on and on.

            This ALONE, is a mental form of punishment. The individual knows this and realizes they will have these strict restrictions on them for the rest of their lives.

            It also instills into many people much more a feeling of being useless to society!

            This leaves them few options!

            This is a huge factor in REPEAT OFFENDERS!

      • Will

        I would bet you that Mark Wahllberg has communicated with and probably apologized and possibly offered reparation to his victim
        .
        Why would he not?

        • Tomcat01

          You are speculating. If he had done so I think the article would have mentionedit Additionally, he may have been forbidden to contact the victim by the court.

  • newhon63

    Although Wahlberg has gotten his crap in one bucket and I am sure there are others that have too after committing a felony, giving a pardon for it would only open the way for those who are not sincerly repentive a means in which to game the system.

    Besides, Wahlberg did this at 16. I am not familar with laws in New Jersey or California but is a juvenile record not sealed at age of majority, 18?
    If it is then Wahlberg has nothing to worry about. As long as he has kept his head out if his butt at 18 and beyond, he should be ready to do what he wants. Unless, of course, he was stupid enough to scoop the water from under the bridge and tell the cops his history as a teen. If the cops unsealed his juvenile record and discovered it themselves then Marky Mark may have a lawsuit for violating his rights fir unsealing them.

    If he wants to join the reserve police, it is going to take more than acting in movies as a cop or soilder to do it. He is going to have to go to the academy like all other cops.

  • James Maxwell

    When I was in the AF I served with and was a supervisor of some who had screwed up. At that time they were

    given a choice back home to either join the Military or go to Jail. Some of those turned out to be very good

    individuals and like ever case some were not . Those who took advantage of the military and worked hard to

    rebuild their lives were good people who screwed up. Those who could not accept responsibility for their

    action wound up getting in trouble and getting kicked our or in jail before they were kicked out. If a person

    has actually learned from their mistakes and strove to build a respectable career and become good citizens
    then I say they deserve a second chance. That applied to convicted felons if they have proved they have
    avoided a life of crime and built a respectable life. Since I do not know Wahlberg nor his life I cannot judge
    him, that must come from the local police and a solid background check before a pardon could or should be
    granted.

  • Lester Troxel

    To pardon Walburg is nothing. I’d like to see Sharpton pay this four and a half million dollar taxes.

  • Patrick

    The Law abides,and hold no favors ,and you are not anybody better than anyone else ,stop your whinning

  • Nicodemus

    The liberal/progressive/NAZI/Communist infiltrators (bad guys…whatever you want to call them) have been using Felony Convictions for a long time to deprive folks of their Constitutional rights (namely the 2d Amendment). Drunk Driving, Gambling, writing bad checks, prostitution….a whole list of non-violent activities can now be felonies in many states…even just grabbing someone on the ass! (felony sexual battery!). A decade ago, 80,000 police lost their right to carry when Misdemeanor domestic battery was added to the list. Their goal is clearly to disarm everyone by whatever means available. 1 in 3? I think it really is time to begin passing laws to restore people’s rights after a conviction, perhaps for all non-violent offenders for a beginning, for violent offenders after a certain number of years have passed. Wahlberg may be an anti-gun idiot, but what he’s doing may be of benefit to Americans as a whole, so I think he deserves our support. (blogged by a retired law-enforcement office and county attorney)

  • tom2

    He should not ask for a pardon. He should work to change the law, adding retroactive relief, so everyone in his circumstance benefits equally. That’s the way we teach our kids because that’s the way it’s done in this nation. Pardons are for special circumstances and I don’t see anything special here.

  • Patrick

    totally agree

  • VAfrmNJ

    Wahlberg is a Democrat, having donated all of his campaign contribution money so far to Democratic presidential candidates, including Obama in 2008. He seems to have been a supporter for Obama’s 2012 campaign as well. We don’t need another “Clinton” type in office.

  • James D

    I have to admit, this guy has a lot of nerve. He is basically saying “I need a pardon from a felony conviction so I can be a cop.”. Little Marky Mark wants to play the other side of “cops and robbers”. Want to help the cops? Go tell all your liberal idiot friends to stop endorsing the protestors and the rioters.

  • Patrick

    this has become a farce ,and a waste of time commenting on someone who thinks he above the law and because of his position in a make believe world of stars and has beens .

  • theskids

    Steven thanks for the vote of confidence. I was turned down for a job working as a maintenance tech at a multi-unit apt building. My education/work history impressed the super, but when they asked me about doing a background check I was truthful with him. I explained what was going on w/my X. He spoke to the powers that be & told me sorry we have women in this complex & you may be a liability.

  • JusttheTruth

    Have you read the actual crimes he committed? Maybe you would feel less sorry for Wahlberg . . . and more for the victims.