Oldskool Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 I read this thread as " Taylor Beats Up Legal Team" Now that I re-read the title, the thread isnt as interesting.. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 I read this thread as " Taylor Beats Up Legal Team"Now that I re-read the title, the thread isnt as interesting.. :laugh: Thats funny! :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thespaniard Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 No. The DA, because he wasn't born yesterday, is choosing not to prosecute them until after the Taylor trial. They did shoot up his car and possibly his house, but putting convicted felons on the stand doesn't look too good, now does it? He wants Taylor tried first, he's the high profile defendant. With that conviction comes notoriety. Lets keep the horse before the cart. Not only that, but it is probably his best chance to get both Taylor and the other guys convicted. If Taylor's trial relies more on witness testimony, then it is smart to make sure your witnesses are credible. The other case has more physical evidence (i.e the bullet holes) so Taylor (who could be a convicted felon by then) may not necessarily need to testify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinstzar Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 Speaking in the third person huh??? I wonder how old you are. :doh: I think it's funny, third person is classic humor when used correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thespaniard Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 I think it's funny, third person is classic humor when used correctly. It's a pretty good way to make sure no one pays attention to the thoughts in your post... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sableholic Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 It's a pretty good way to make sure no one pays attention to the thoughts in your post... :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martini Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 I wonder if this is only the tip of the iceburg with this guy. You have to wonder about someone that is willing to find himself in a situation where he is accused of this type of activity. While he may be a good football player, ask yourself if you would want to hang around this guy or for that matter want your 20 year old children hanging around him? Or if you should count on him as a team player for years to come. It is my fear that regardless of the outcome of this trial ST will find himself in similar circumstances again and again and again. Hope I am wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sacase Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 No. The DA, because he wasn't born yesterday, is choosing not to prosecute them until after the Taylor trial. They did shoot up his car and possibly his house, but putting convicted felons on the stand doesn't look too good, now does it? He wants Taylor tried first, he's the high profile defendant. With that conviction comes notoriety. Lets keep the horse before the cart. First of all the DA does not tell the police who to investigate. The police will invistigate the case and make arrests, then forward the information to the DA for prosecution. The DA did not tell the police....hold off on investigating this until I take Taylor to trial. Think about it for a minute. Arrests have to be made search warrents obtained so they can get evidence. So they have the bullets. Bullets are crappy evidence when you have no GUN to match them to. If they would have had probalble cause to obtain a search warrent then they would have gotten it by now and searched the homes and vehicles of the suspects. Since none of that has happened do you really think that those guns are just sitting around the house waiting for the police to come find them. I guarentee those guns used to shoot up ST house and car are LONG gone. No arrests have been made, so you cannot say that they are the ones who shot up his house and car. While I think they have knowledge of who shot up his house and car, I can't prove it. What really bothers me about the whole thing is people are trying to come up with far fetched excuses as to why he didn't do it. Of couse the blame has been shifted to some one who may or may not have a ciminal histroy but is poor. The three people he allegedly threatened with a gun may not have had anything to do with his stolen ATV's or his house and car getting shot up. People need to start taking responsibility for their actions. I have no clue if ST is guilty or innocent. I dont' have all the evidence to make that call. But as far as I know the only thing the people he allegedly pointed the gun at are guilty of is livinig in the ghetto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macd36 Posted February 28, 2006 Author Share Posted February 28, 2006 :laugh::laugh:NO CHANCE! When was the last time you saw an athlete go to jail for something like this? As long as he didnt kill anyone, he'll get fined and have to do some communiuty service. End of Story..."he's going to jail":blahblah:FREE SEAN TAYLOR:helmet: if convicted carries a manatory sentence of 2 yrs ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frunobulax Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 It's just to bad that Johnnie Cochran is no longer with us I could hear Cochran now: "If he can hit, you must acquit!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingdaddy Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 I could hear Cochran now:"If he can hit, you must acquit!" Or, "If he can spit, you must acquit"!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeownU Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 newsflash: he's going to jail. we need a safety unfortuntely. No way. These guys don't go to jail. You got money, and celebrity, you don't go to jail. I don't know if the guy is guilty or not. Even if he is, he won't go to jail. Its just how the system works. I wouldn't sweat it if I were you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onedrop Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 First of all the DA does not tell the police who to investigate. The police will invistigate the case and make arrests, then forward the information to the DA for prosecution. The DA did not tell the police....hold off on investigating this until I take Taylor to trial. Think about it for a minute. Arrests have to be made search warrents obtained so they can get evidence. So they have the bullets. Bullets are crappy evidence when you have no GUN to match them to. If they would have had probalble cause to obtain a search warrent then they would have gotten it by now and searched the homes and vehicles of the suspects. Since none of that has happened do you really think that those guns are just sitting around the house waiting for the police to come find them. I guarentee those guns used to shoot up ST house and car are LONG gone.No arrests have been made, so you cannot say that they are the ones who shot up his house and car. While I think they have knowledge of who shot up his house and car, I can't prove it. What really bothers me about the whole thing is people are trying to come up with far fetched excuses as to why he didn't do it. Of couse the blame has been shifted to some one who may or may not have a ciminal histroy but is poor. The three people he allegedly threatened with a gun may not have had anything to do with his stolen ATV's or his house and car getting shot up. People need to start taking responsibility for their actions. I have no clue if ST is guilty or innocent. I dont' have all the evidence to make that call. But as far as I know the only thing the people he allegedly pointed the gun at are guilty of is livinig in the ghetto. it matters not how much evidence the police collect. the DA's office decided if and when to prosecute. the DA is holding off simply to go after the big name defendant first. the house involved was not ST's but a friends. and it does not have any bearing on ST's case because his vehicle and or the house were shot up after ST allegedly waived a gun. which, by the way, was never found. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onedrop Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 No way. These guys don't go to jail. You got money, and celebrity, you don't go to jail. I don't know if the guy is guilty or not. Even if he is, he won't go to jail. Its just how the system works. I wouldn't sweat it if I were you. j. lewis spent some time in the pokey. and dont forget about mike tyson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbuzz1962 Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 In most cases like this, the judge or jury will weigh heavily on his past. If this is his first offense, and the evidence is questionable, he will probably get a pass, if convicted, it will probably be of a lesser charge without mandatory jail time. I am sure the DA will determine how strong a case this is, and may end up with a plea agreement and fines. If he has a past history of violence or a criminal record, he is in for a long trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbuzz1962 Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 No way. These guys don't go to jail. You got money, and celebrity, you don't go to jail. I don't know if the guy is guilty or not. Even if he is, he won't go to jail. Its just how the system works. I wouldn't sweat it if I were you. Don't you think this guy should change his screen name? No way would I use that in a forum of a team who smashed you twice in the same season. Also, we were the reason they did not make the playoffs due to the tiebreaker we had on them. I would use something like UownUs. Or Anus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailYeah Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 it matters not how much evidence the police collect. the DA's office decided if and when to prosecute. the DA is holding off simply to go after the big name defendant first. the house involved was not ST's but a friends. and it does not have any bearing on ST's case because his vehicle and or the house were shot up after ST allegedly waived a gun. which, by the way, was never found. Exactly. The DA chooses when to prosecute. And the only way the bullets would have a bearing on ST's trial is if they were brought in to evidence in a trial against the witnesses (if we can assume they are the same people) before Taylor's trial and then used in his trial by the defense in order to discredit their word. But, alas, the DA actually went to law school and seems to know what he's doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onedrop Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 Exactly. The DA chooses when to prosecute. And the only way the bullets would have a bearing on ST's trial is if they were brought in to evidence in a trial against the witnesses (if we can assume they are the same people) before Taylor's trial and then used in his trial by the defense in order to discredit their word. But, alas, the DA actually went to law school and seems to know what he's doing. agreed. that is why the DA is prosectuing the ST case first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 I have a bad feeling about this, even though looking at it I don't really see how he can go to jail. Have they even found this alleged gun? There isn't really any evidence against Taylor. It's his word against the word of a couple of guys who have also allegedly stolen Taylor's property and shot up his SUVs. I mean Mike Doss of the Colts actually fired his weapon, and he got nothing but community service. I think when it comes down to it the prosecution will cave in because Taylor's legal team will just outmatch them. But I still have an eery feeling about it, I don't know but I am nervous... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sacase Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 agreed. that is why the DA is prosectuing the ST case first. Wanna put money that the three people who taylor allegedly pointed a gun at won't be charged EVER with stealing his ATV''s or shootin at his car? You guys are just making things up. This is too funny. The reason Mike Doss got only community service is because he was not in FLORIDA. In florida the MANDATORY minimum is 3 years for this type of crime. If he was in another state he would probally get community service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thespaniard Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 Wanna put money that the three people who taylor allegedly pointed a gun at won't be charged EVER with stealing his ATV''s or shootin at his car? You guys are just making things up. This is too funny. I'm pretty sure if the evidence is there they will go after them. Why wouldn't they? Do you know something about the case that the rest of us do not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sacase Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 I'm pretty sure if the evidence is there they will go after them. Why wouldn't they? Do you know something about the case that the rest of us do not? You seem so sure that they are guilty I would think you would put money on it. Now you are saying IF the eveidence was there.....lol Whatever man. The only way you can defend ST is for the people who he allegedly pulled a gun on to be criminals. That is your ONLY defense at all, and it is a flawed one at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sableholic Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 You seem so sure that they are guilty I would think you would put money on it. Now you are saying IF the eveidence was there.....lol Whatever man. The only way you can defend ST is for the people who he allegedly pulled a gun on to be criminals. That is your ONLY defense at all, and it is a flawed one at that. ... your only proof is that you think that ST is guilty... kettle meet pot. and on another note, show me where thespaniard said that the other people were guilty for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 The reason Mike Doss got only community service is because he was not in FLORIDA. In Florida the MANDATORY minimum is 3 years for this type of crime. DING! This has been mentioned on here repeadedly since this story originally broke last year. Why people here refuse to acknowledge the fact that Florida has 'If you pull a gun' law & the fact that it carries a mandatory minimun sentence. Those of you citing the Mike Doss case please explain how you know so much about a guy that plays for the Colts & his legal issues & yet you claim to be Redskins fans & can't comprehend this part about Taylor's legal issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thespaniard Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 You seem so sure that they are guilty I would think you would put money on it. Now you are saying IF the eveidence was there.....lol Whatever man. The only way you can defend ST is for the people who he allegedly pulled a gun on to be criminals. That is your ONLY defense at all, and it is a flawed one at that. I never said they were guilty. I just said if the evidence is there, like the bullet holes in STs car, the DA will try to convict them. That is what DAs do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.