ouvan59 Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 this happens in like every trial. Dont' expect much to come of it... Defense attornies filing motions to dismiss may happen every trial but the "victims" all getting arrested for serious felonies doesn't. I would be more worried if this were a bench trial instead of a jury but I will be absolutely floored if a jury convicts Taylor with these 3 as the star witnesses for the prosecution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSJHWT Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 I doubt they'll dismiss it though. It's pretty standard to try and get them to drop the charges before a trial. There's really no reason not to. I do find it extremely hard to believe the prosecutor wasn't aware that his witnesses were recently arrested for various charges. I mean a high profile case like this that he's obviously going for full charge? I don't buy it. Even so, I'm not sure if a judge would not allow the case to go forward even if the attourney witheld information. I bet the attourney will get reprimanded by the judge though. I don't think it will go over very well with a jury how hard they are going after Taylor. 16 years in prison based on the words of three complete thugs? If the prosecutor knowingly held back that info, the judge would HAVE to throw out the case, by law. However, since he's claiming he didn't know, it'll be very hard if not impossible for STs lawyers to prove he knew. I don't see this motion succeding, but only because they can't prove it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawrence Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Good Luck Sean Taylor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey T Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 I think this puts the whole "Beyond a reasonable doubt" thing in the spotlight.These other kids are punks also. Who are you going to believe? Are you implying that Taylor is a punk? Do you even know him? By your implication, I could also call you a punk for your snoddy remarks about something you have no more information about than the rest of us, but I won't :laugh: Thusfar, it seems as though Taylor has shown to be a man who defended his property and the right to possess it. He does the same when he protects our endzone against intruders. Would you have it any other way? :doh: Please don't go cerebral on me. Does not apply here and I hate holier than thou attitude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skin Steelers Fan Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Though I am a Skins fan I hope justice prevails. I mean if we let every player off just because they are an NFL player then it just sends a message that if you are famous and have a lot of money then its ok to commit a crime. So heres to justice. Which ever way it goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmiJo Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 "Sharpstein said that the three primary alleged victims have all had recent arrests that the defense uncovered during its own investigation, including one involving a stolen all-terrain vehicle. Taylor has claimed that the victims in his case fired on his property and stole two all-terrain vehicles from him. Grieco did not dispute the information Sharpstein provided concerning the arrests, but said he does not anticipate a plea bargain." The PA has no shot in hell of winning this case at this point. His quotes are lip service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powerANDgut Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 The witnesses ARE the so-called victims. They said ST flashed a gun at them. ST says they flashed a gun at him. Since the incident, all of them have been arrested for felonious offenses while ST has been punishing players on the field, not a criminal offense:). Since there's no tangible evidence, it all comes down to their testimonies. Whoever has more credibility will prevail. Right now it's ST Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grhqofb5 Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 If the prosecutor knowingly held back that info, the judge would HAVE to throw out the case, by law. However, since he's claiming he didn't know, it'll be very hard if not impossible for STs lawyers to prove he knew. I don't see this motion succeding, but only because they can't prove it. A judge doesn't HAVE TO do anything here. If a witness has committed a crime that involves dishonesty or deceit, that issue may be raised on cross examination by opposing counsel. EDIT: Previous crimes may also be inquired into on cross if they were felonies punishable over 1 year in prison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsSuperBowl21 Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Though I am a Skins fan I hope justice prevails. I mean if we let every player off just because they are an NFL player then it just sends a message that if you are famous and have a lot of money then its ok to commit a crime.So heres to justice. Which ever way it goes. Its NOT justice if a prosecutor has the oppurtunity to bring down a big name and make a name for himself...at the expense of a human beings freedom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllAboutSkins08 Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 i don't know how effective this motion to dismiss is gonna be, but i really hope it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsSuperBowl21 Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 all law buffs out ther need to help me understand what exactly is going on... ...Sean Tayler saw armed people stealing his vehicles of his property and he waived a gun at them then beat there asses? Who brought him to trial? I know only he knows what really went on but based on every single source this was the most plain way i could state my confusion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-Dog Night Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 All those years of watching Law and Order are finally paying off! You're the prosecuting attorney. The star witnesses of your case get arrested...again...for the same thing they were arrested for earlier in the case you are trying to prosecute. I'm no Perry Mason, but this strikes me as a setback for the DA's office. Question for any actual lawyers out there: let's say the case isn't dismissed; can these new arrests be used in the trial by the defense lawyers in an attempt to further damage the credibility of the witnesses? Or must the DA file a motion to try and exclude this information? If so, what are the chances of that happening? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussieskin Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 I would have thought that it would have been the prosecuting attorney to make it his business to know the character of the people he is relying on to win a case. This PA is now in a bind, he failed to perform his duty, and for that reason the case should be thrown out, afterall it could be disputed that he failed to inform the defence simply becuase it damaged his case. Hail all things redskins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-Dog Night Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Ah, it looks like grhqofb5 answered my question. Of course, I don't know if he's really a lawyer of if he just stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stat2883 Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 I know next to nothing about law or how trials work so I'll just say what everyone else is good luck Sean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bedlamVR Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 What is it they say ignorance is no defence. The PA should, or someone in his office, should have and in my oppinon would have known about these arrests and purposly did not inform the Taylor camp . This is not some nobody on a nothing charge but a high high profile national sports star being made an example of .... its a circus not justice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skin Steelers Fan Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Its NOT justice if a prosecutor has the oppurtunity to bring down a big name and make a name for himself...at the expense of a human beings freedom Hey if its a setup then Sean should be free. I just want the truth (haha you can't handle the truth). You also got to remember that a lot of people who are high profile get off with crimes just because they are high profile people. This should not occur. So If sean is Innocent then let him go but if he is guilty then I want the punishment to fit the crime.:eaglesuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
korserra Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Even if this motion has zero chance to succeed it is still very useful for the defense. It creates free publicity before trial that ST's accusers are criminals. This will inevitably get to the jury pool and create doubt and sympathy. It also forces the DA to stand up in front of the judge and claim that he didn't know about any of this. Judges are not naive but they are human and they will be reluctant to support a DA that appears dishonest or incompetent. Even if this doesn't buy the defense a dismissal it may still get them another ruling down the road. The motion is also an important weapon in the battle for public opinion. Ray Lewis plead guilty to a charge in a murder case but he still has a pretty good reputation in large part because the defense made the prosecution look like complete idiots. Being acquitted is merely the start of the rest of ST's life and it's going to matter how it looks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIDETHEWALRUS Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Are you implying that Taylor is a punk? Do you even know him? By your implication, I could also call you a punk for your snoddy remarks about something you have no more information about than the rest of us, but I won't :laugh: Thusfar, it seems as though Taylor has shown to be a man who defended his property and the right to possess it. He does the same when he protects our endzone against intruders. Would you have it any other way? :doh: Please don't go cerebral on me. Does not apply here and I hate holier than thou attitude i won't go cerebral on you. Sean Taylor has had a history of going against the grain. Wheter it is skipping the rookie symposium, getting a DUI or getting arressted and charged with felonies. Taylor has not shown himself to be a man. Men pick their battles and his involvement demonstrates that he has not figured this out yet. If this were an entirely BS charge, then there would be many many more of them circulating every famous person. Taylor's ability to jack up someone on the football field does not make him anything special in civil life. We are all bound by the same laws and knocking the hell out of TO doesn't give him a get out of jail free card. I hope he gets off, but to call someone a punk because they correctly identified a kid who exhibits punk like behavior is way off base. BTW...Free Sean Taylor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoudMouth12thMan Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 The DA has a pretty weak case. These guys are stupid idiots that went on Taylor's property and stole things that didn't belong to them. Although ST overreacted and should have let the police handle it, these guys are misfits. I think we all may be surprised how the information or lack of releasing it will affect the case. Sounds like a big misstep on the DA's part. Not a lawyer, but I play one on t.v. :laugh: HTTR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuwanda Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 They waste our money for **** like that? Unbelievable. Please jail this punk named Grieco for being so stupid. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robotfire Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Though I am a Skins fan I hope justice prevails. I mean if we let every player off just because they are an NFL player then it just sends a message that if you are famous and have a lot of money then its ok to commit a crime.So heres to justice. Which ever way it goes. I agree, but I REALLY hope justice falls in the direction of Sean Taylor. 45 years is NOT justice, it's ridiculous. I'm just not sure if he's really guilty or if some jerks are trying to make a name for themselves.Clint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEANTAYLOR21 Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 i hope it gets dismissed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitnskins Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Did they ever find the gun that they are alleging Sean Taylor of waiving at these punks that stole his ATV's. Or is that just more hearsay?!?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Since there's no tangible evidence, it all comes down to their testimonies. Whoever has more credibility will prevail. Right now it's ST Been reading the threads and I think things are looking up but by no means is ST out of the woods....A trial costs money and the DA would not be spending tax payers money on a trial if he didnt think he has a shot at a conviction...There was another thread on this a few days ago and we had some people with a law background comment that they believe that the DA may be basing his case on things that ST said in his statements to police after the incident...This is the only thing that worries me...But if ST was smart he talked to the lawyers before he turned himself in and they coached his statements...Man I hope he did this....Remember he didnt turn himself in until a day or two later... My gut feeling is that both sides posture up until the time of the trial and a deal is cut with no jail time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.