WT: Redskins' Taylor rejects plea offer

[bubba9497]

Redskins' Taylor rejects plea offer

By David Elfin

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20050712-113736-3435r

Sean Taylor's court case is heading to trial after the Washington Redskins safety and co-defendant Charles Caughman each rejected a plea bargain offer from the state attorney's office yesterday in separate proceedings in Miami.

Although Taylor's trial is scheduled for Sept. 12, the day after the Redskins open the season against the Chicago Bears at FedEx Field, the state could opt to consolidate the cases now that Caughman won't be a witness for the prosecution. If that happens, the trial would be set for Oct. 3, Caughman's date. The Redskins play host to Seattle in their third game of the year the previous day.

However, Taylor's attorney, Edward Carhart, likely will ask the court to continue the trial until the offseason so that his client doesn't miss any paychecks. NFL players receive all of their salaries during the 17-week regular season. A state attorney's source said his office doesn't generally dispute continuance requests.

After rejecting the plea bargain of three years in state prison, the mandatory minimum for his felony assault charge, Taylor faces a maximum of 16 years if convicted. Taylor, 22, also could be sentenced to up to a year in county jail if convicted of the misdemeanor charge of simple battery.

Carhart, noting that Taylor passed a lie detector test, maintains his client is not guilty. Carhart also wasn't surprised that Caughman rejected the plea bargain.

Caughman's attorney, Evan Hoffman, said the 19-year-old did the right thing by risking a more severe sentence -- a maximum of 15 years -- if convicted of his felony assault charge.

"For the sake of taking the easy way out, we're not going to break any laws," Hoffman said. "We're steadfast on Charles' innocence. Charles is a pawn that the state has been trying to use to get the top dog in this case, which is Sean. The state pursued the most severe charge possible in hopes of getting Charles to plead to a lesser charge. That didn't happen. Now that we've seen the state's cards, it will be interesting to see where its case goes from here."

Hoffman is mystified about the failure of Miami-Dade police to test the supposed victims for gunpowder residue after shots were fired at Taylor's car and at a friend's house during the June 1 incident in which the safety is accused of brandishing a firearm and Caughman of wielding a baseball bat. Hoffman said the state has no evidence that either possessed a weapon during the incident, which began when Taylor claimed two of his all-terrain vehicles were stolen.

Taylor skipped the Redskins' entire offseason program until being excused from last month's minicamp to attend to his legal affairs. The fifth pick in the 2004 draft hasn't spoken to the media -- except briefly after two court appearances -- since being arrested for driving under the influence in October. However, Carhart and running back Clinton Portis, a teammate at the University of Miami and in Washington, expect Taylor to report on time for training camp July 31. Taylor won't face any NFL sanctions unless he is convicted.

Note -- Monday's hearing on the contract dispute between LaVar Arrington and the Redskins has been postponed at the request of the Pro Bowl linebacker and NFL Players Association executive director Gene Upshaw. Upshaw and Arrington hope to settle the dispute with Redskins officials privately in the coming months. Arrington and the Redskins have been at odds over a $6.5 million signing bonus that he says he should have received for renegotiating his contract in December 2003.

Redskins director of football administration Eric Schaffer, who renegotiated the contract with Arrington's agent, Carl Poston, issued a statement after the NFLPA announced the postponement.

"I heard about the postponement and I was disappointed," Schaffer said. "While we agreed to the postponement, I think it's very important to finalize through arbitration that the Redskins did nothing wrong to our highest-paid player. I also feel strongly that the business ethics of the agent should be questioned and looked into."

[dreamingwolf]

this is another sign that he will be found not guilty, most likely both of them will be exonerated.

[tr1]

Originally posted by dreamingwolf

this is another sign that he will be found not guilty, most likely both of them will be exonerated.

Um, I haven't seen the prosecution drop any charges yet. Defense attorneys are paid to make their clients look like victims...

I wonder how his contact beef with the Redskins is coming. And still nothing from him in the way of an apology for putting the organization and fans through this. I'll bet the first thing we hear out of Sean is a complaint about his contract.

[SkinsGuy]

Hoffman is mystified about the failure of Miami-Dade police to test the supposed victims for gunpowder residue after shots were fired at Taylor's car and at a friend's house during the June 1 incident in which the safety is accused of brandishing a firearm and Caughman of wielding a baseball bat.

This is a new wrinkle that I hadn't heard before. The state didn't check any of these folks for powder burns (at least according to this guy's attorney)?

Interesting.

It does seem more and more that the defense's case is going to be that the alleged victims in this case are the actual agressors, and that Taylor is being gone after for who he is, not what he did.

[G-Prime]

Hmmm interesting

[budski]

After reading the Manley article, Taylor aint so bad.

[arrowhead]

Originally posted by bubba9497

Redskins' Taylor rejects plea offer

By David Elfin

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20050712-113736-3435r

Although Taylor's trial is scheduled for Sept. 12, the day after the Redskins open the season against the Chicago Bears at FedEx Field, the state could opt to consolidate the cases now that Caughman won't be a witness for the prosecution. If that happens, the trial would be set for Oct. 3, Caughman's date. The Redskins play host to Seattle in their third game of the year the previous day.

It's interesting how the Post missed this piece of information in its rush to press yesterday. :doh:

However, Taylor's attorney, Edward Carhart, likely will ask the court to continue the trial until the offseason so that his client doesn't miss any paychecks. NFL players receive all of their salaries during the 17-week regular season. A state attorney's source said his office doesn't generally dispute continuance requests.

[/b]

...and then we cut to the heart of the matter where attorneys are concerned. Doesn't matter if it's an ambulance-chaser, a defense attorney, or sports agent, the bling bling is always king.

[TheGreek1973]

Originally posted by budski

After reading the Manley article, Taylor aint so bad.

Say what you will about Taylor but one thing is for sure. He has some loyal friends. Man this guy could have plea bargained and gotten off completely free it looks like but by not doing so he has a 15 year jail term hanging on top of his head.

Without him really I don't thing the state has a case. hell once again no mentioned of a gun-if they found one to begin with let along that Taylor actually had it. This means NO PHYSICAL evidence. Very tough to get a conviction.

[arrowhead]

Originally posted by TheGreek1973

Say what you will about Taylor but one thing is for sure. He has some loyal friends. Man this guy could have plea bargained and gotten off completely free it looks like but by not doing so he has a 15 year jail term hanging on top of his head.

Without him really I don't thing the state has a case. hell once again no mentioned of a gun-if they found one to begin with let along that Taylor actually had it. This means NO PHYSICAL evidence. Very tough to get a conviction.

If you're the DA, you've got to be in damage control mode right about now. Too bad Jerry Orbach's not around to gather the real story. I wonder what Sam Waterston would do in a case like this?

[Mark The Homer]

The WT didn't include Taylor's quote outside the courtroom as reported by the WP this morning when asked if he planned on reporting with other players for training camp on July 31st. Taylor's reply:

"We'll see."

[Funkyalligator]

I wonder who is paying for the other guys lawyer?

[SkinsGuy]

Originally posted by Mark The Homer

The WT didn't include Taylor's quote outside the courtroom as reported by the WP this morning when asked if he planned on reporting with other players for training camp on July 31st. Taylor's reply:

"We'll see."

No they didn't.

But then, no one could give the context in which it was said, either.

Considering Taylor's adverserial relationship with the press, his answer was probably a dimissive, 'none-of-your-business' type "We'll see", muttered as he brushed by the press and rushed to his vehichle.

There's no reason to waste time fretting about it. All you can do is wait till July 31st and see if he shows.

[SkinsNatsFan]

What I still find interesting is that we're told that Taylor's friend, Charles Caughman, has already given statements indicating that there were no weapons at the scene, which would not make him a good witness for the prosecution.

We obviously have to assume that he was being asked to change his story, and say that Taylor had a gun. But what they're saying then is that we want you to give this specific testimony, in exchange for a deal. Not that we necessarily want you to tell the truth, but if you get on the stand, and say these specific things, then you walk.

[bobzmuda]

Originally posted by arrowhead

..and then we cut to the heart of the matter where attorneys are concerned. Doesn't matter if it's an ambulance-chaser, a defense attorney, or sports agent, the bling bling is always king.

You can't be that naive. It's not all about money. It's MAINLY about money, and it's sometimes about power, and it's sometimes about doing the right thing. The DA, like many other DA's, is simply trying to add a high-profile notch on his or her belt. The successful conviction of a celebrity is a good way to (a) get noticed for lateral and upward moves and ( get remembered by the public as "tough on crime" since the DA isn't mesmerized by starpower.

Also, I'd say most defense attorneys make very little and are in their roles as they feel called to public service.

Originally posted by Funkyalligator

I wonder who is paying for the other guys lawyer?

It likely comes down to one of four parties: Caughman, friend/family of Caughman with his interest in mind, Taylor, or the taxpayers of Florida.

[red zone]

Not that I believe this, but I feel compelled to be the first on this thread to state, "Well, at the very least Taylor is guilty of poor judgement. He needs to pick better people to hang around with.

He's a drunk driver, spit on a guy, changed agents and is holding out.... blah blah blah."

It seems as though every ST thread of late has contained posts with this type of rhetoric. I thought I'd save those of you who feel inclined to post along these lines a little time.

[arrowhead]

Originally posted by bobzmuda

You can't be that naive. It's not all about money. It's MAINLY about money, and it's sometimes about power, and it's sometimes about doing the right thing. The DA, like many other DA's, is simply trying to add a high-profile notch on his or her belt. The successful conviction of a celebrity is a good way to (a) get noticed for lateral and upward moves and ( get remembered by the public as "tough on crime" since the DA isn't mesmerized by starpower.

I hate to split hairs with another Skins fan, but you seem pretty fair-minded and, afterall, it is a forum for opinions and friendly debate. Where there's money, there's power, plain and simple.

Also, I'd say most defense attorneys make very little and are in their roles as they feel called to public service.

[/b]

I think you mean most public defenders feel a calling to public duty. Celebrities and pro athletes, it would seem, are in a different class and can afford the best defense that money can buy. And there are defense attorneys (i.e. the late Johnnie Cochran et al) that are happy to oblige. Believing anything else it naive.

It likely comes down to one of four parties: Caughman, friend/family of Caughman with his interest in mind, Taylor, or the taxpayers of Florida. [/b]

Would it shock anyone if Taylor ended up picking up his legal tab? Nowhere in any article thus far is it made known whether Caughman's attorney is a court-appointed one. At this point, does it really matter?