Sunburn Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Does it look like he's going to be playing with us next season? Last thing I saw about the trial was that there were now multiple charges against him. Anyone got any dirt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timitim Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I would like to know to. I have noticed that the sean taylor issue has sort of taken a back burner effect everywhere except the messege boards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllBusiness Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 tim, that is a GREAT signature thingy you have there! I LOVE IT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNewU Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 the trial hasnt even started so cant even speculate right now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins4ever Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 It's hard to say. I'm hoping Sean doesn't have to do any time. The prosecutor is trying to make him spend 46 years of his life in jail. But what I want to know is, how can a jury convict him if it was his property that was being tresspassed on? It's like someone trying to break into your home or rob you or something. If you're able to retaliate in order to protect you or your property, how is that wrong? That prosecutor is mentally slow to me and he's trying to give a young black man a hard time for no apparent reason. He's targeting Sean because he's a star in the NFL and he's a young black male. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eeyeats Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 It's hard to say. I'm hoping Sean doesn't have to do any time. The prosecutor is trying to make him spend 46 years of his life in jail. But what I want to know is, how can a jury convict him if it was his property that was being tresspassed on? It's like someone trying to break into your home or rob you or something. If you're able to retaliate in order to protect you or your property, how is that wrong? That prosecutor is mentally slow to me and he's trying to give a young black man a hard time for no apparent reason. He's targeting Sean because he's a star in the NFL and he's a young black male. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I was under the impression that Taylor went out looking for his stolen ATVs. So no one tresspassed on his property; rather, he sought out the guys he believed to be the thieves, so there is no issue of protection of property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins4ever Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I was under the impression that Taylor went out looking for his stolen ATVs. So no one tresspassed on his property; rather, he sought out the guys he believed to be the thieves, so there is no issue of protection of property. Okay then. I stand corrected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natsfan3 Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I was under the impression that Taylor went out looking for his stolen ATVs. So no one tresspassed on his property; rather, he sought out the guys he believed to be the thieves, so there is no issue of protection of property. The guys had his ATV when he found them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins4ever Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 The guys had his ATV when he found them. He should have called the police. But then again, what good are the police at times? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timitim Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I don't think the issue here is whether he tresspassed on private property or not. The lawyers are going after the one thing that stands florida appart from most states and thats their gun laws. They are trying to prove whether he had a gun and if he brandished it during the altercation and whether or not he assualted someone after the fact. Without a permit to carry a concealed weapon coupled with assault is what is going to get taylor all those years in prison if convicted. I think i am right on this issue....please correct me if i'm wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailSkinz1 Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I think it's pretty much well documented that the only way you will serve jail time during the season is if you actually commit murder (see: Carruth, Rae). Some how, Taylor will be exonerated. And it has never been established that those were his ATVs and that those guys stole them. They could have been totally innocent bystanders, or they could have been thugs. Hail, H Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddub52 Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 If the ravens can get away with murder, we should be able to get away with a dinky pistol whip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOVA2Tampa Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Sean Taylor won't spend one day in jail...he's gonna plead out or walk... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig19406 Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I don't think the issue here is whether he tresspassed on private property or not. The lawyers are going after the one thing that stands florida appart from most states and thats their gun laws.They are trying to prove whether he had a gun and if he brandished it during the altercation and whether or not he assualted someone after the fact. Without a permit to carry a concealed weapon coupled with assault is what is going to get taylor all those years in prison if convicted. I think i am right on this issue....please correct me if i'm wrong. Tim, you are correct...the issue basically deals with whether or not Taylor brandished a weapon during the altercation. I was watching ESPNNews last week and a couple of the analysts were discussing some of today's (and yesterday's) players that have had some "legal problems" lately (mostly drug related). They brought up Sean Taylor and said that the real issue was whether or not he brandished a firearm during the altercation and the only witness the prosecution has is the guy who is accused of stealing the ATVs. They stated that it would be unlikely to get a conviction on Taylor which is why the prosecution separated the charges into three. I guess it increase the odds of getting something to stick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eeyeats Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Tim, you are correct...the issue basically deals with whether or not Taylor brandished a weapon during the altercation. I was watching ESPNNews last week and a couple of the analysts were discussing some of today's (and yesterday's) players that have had some "legal problems" lately (mostly drug related). They brought up Sean Taylor and said that the real issue was whether or not he brandished a firearm during the altercation and the only witness the prosecution has is the guy who is accused of stealing the ATVs. They stated that it would be unlikely to get a conviction on Taylor which is why the prosecution separated the charges into three. I guess it increase the odds of getting something to stick. You beat me to it, well put. If he had a gun, it bumps up the severity of the charge, and consequently, the possible penalty. It does help that there do not appear to be any independent witnesses, and therefore I think it will be difficult for them to convict Taylor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor21_INT_4_TD Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 thats great...good news for my redskin ears bro You beat me to it, well put. If he had a gun, it bumps up the severity of the charge, and consequently, the possible penalty. It does help that there do not appear to be any independent witnesses, and therefore I think it will be difficult for them to convict Taylor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Gude Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 the trial hasnt even started so cant even speculate right now The hell you say! LOL I have a friend, a gun guy, who lives in Florida. he has a carry permit and is an ex cop. The thing in Florida is it is easy to get a permit to carry a concealed weapon in public BUT you are held VERY responsible for how you use it. Florida has a MANDATORY minimum that conveys to any crime with a weapon, from brandishing, to assault, to actual use. He's also a football fan (Steelers) so, he's aware of who Taylor is and the story. His take is that unless the case somehow falls apart, Shawn is looking at a year for sure IF he wasn't a public figure. Having said that, he's not sure how Shawn gets out of it anyway. It is supposed to be mandatory. The splitting of the charges is designed to increase the pressure to get at least one to stick. He's betting he gets a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophet Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 If he did it... he needs to pay for the crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinklein Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 My guess is that he'll get off with community service charges and no time done. 46 years...come on...thats just unreasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fletch76 Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 Hope he's got a good lawyer.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_U Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 I've been a police officer for 7 yrs now. FL's laws are a lot different that here in VA. No matter what happened, one BIG issue that will certainly develop during the trial is the credibility of the "victims/witnesses". It's my understanding that their "rap sheet" is not something that mom would frame on the wall. This is speculation because i dont know full details, but if ST and a friend went to confront them about his ATV(s), I'm not sure how many there were, but lets say there was 4-5 of them and they became verbally aggressive and even approaching ST, he has the right to protect himself, no matter where he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eeyeats Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 I've been a police officer for 7 yrs now. FL's laws are a lot different that here in VA. No matter what happened, one BIG issue that will certainly develop during the trial is the credibility of the "victims/witnesses". It's my understanding that their "rap sheet" is not something that mom would frame on the wall. This is speculation because i dont know full details, but if ST and a friend went to confront them about his ATV(s), I'm not sure how many there were, but lets say there was 4-5 of them and they became verbally aggressive and even approaching ST, he has the right to protect himself, no matter where he is. Credibility is paramount, you're absolutely right. Like I posted earlier, there don't seem to be any independent witnesses; so the fact that the only witnesses have long rap sheets could certainly be used for impeament and that only further benefits Sean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaVarIsDaMan Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 The hell you say! LOLI have a friend, a gun guy, who lives in Florida. he has a carry permit and is an ex cop. The thing in Florida is it is easy to get a permit to carry a concealed weapon in public BUT you are held VERY responsible for how you use it. Florida has a MANDATORY minimum that conveys to any crime with a weapon, from brandishing, to assault, to actual use. He's also a football fan (Steelers) so, he's aware of who Taylor is and the story. His take is that unless the case somehow falls apart, Shawn is looking at a year for sure IF he wasn't a public figure. Having said that, he's not sure how Shawn gets out of it anyway. It is supposed to be mandatory. The splitting of the charges is designed to increase the pressure to get at least one to stick. He's betting he gets a year. you say it's mandatory to serve a year for this crime. but that's only if he actually gets CONVICTED of the crime. from what i hear, the only witness/evidence the prosecution has is the guy who's pressing charges. if that's the case, that is not very much for this D.A. ... what happens with nfl players that commit crimes, goes something like this... the main prosecutor gets a call from a hotshot head-of-firm from the area (in this case, Miami) and is offered lunch. at some point during this meal, a high-paying job is "mentioned" to the prosecutor by the hotshot lawyer, slightly hinting what the hotshot wants him to do. the nfl is not just a professional sports league, but a very very powerful business. they have ways to influence the court system in little ways, like it or not. but for some odd reason, the prosecutor in this trial seems like a stand-up straight, stick up his ass, type of guy. i saw an interview, not too long ago with the prosecutor. it seems as if he's not standing down and REALLY wants to take Taylor down. maybe he wants to be the guy to not give in to corrupt business or maybe he want's his 15 minutes of fame. anyway, the bottom line is, the case/evidence against Taylor is not strong at all and if he serves more than a couple months in jail, i would be very surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitmandm Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 It's hard to say. I'm hoping Sean doesn't have to do any time. The prosecutor is trying to make him spend 46 years of his life in jail. But what I want to know is, how can a jury convict him if it was his property that was being tresspassed on? It's like someone trying to break into your home or rob you or something. If you're able to retaliate in order to protect you or your property, how is that wrong? That prosecutor is mentally slow to me and he's trying to give a young black man a hard time for no apparent reason. He's targeting Sean because he's a star in the NFL and he's a young black male. Is he targeting Sean because his an NFL Athlete... perhaps. I don't think it is cause he's black. A Bunch of convicts said Sean pointed a gun at them and shot at them...that's why Sean is where he is today. I think he'll get off, but I don't think race has anything to do with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Kenzo Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 I would expect Sean Taylor to be back with us next year. Yes he is looking at a lot of time. But I don't see him getting any playing time for waving a gun because two THUGS decided to rat him out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.