Plea Rejected

[backrow]

This afternoon, the Washpost reports S. Taylor rejected a proposed plea bargain with the prosecutor. I'm sorry, I don't know how to link.

[SmootSmack]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...071200959.html

Thanks for the info backrow. I've been waiting to hear what was going to happen today. I think the really big news is that the other guy didn't take the plea and agree to testify against Taylor either.

Some may say that's just because he was intimated by ST's peeps. But could it be that maybe Swoop is innocent?

[BrudLee]

Since the plea included a three-year prison term (which is likely the most he'd get if convicted), it's little wonder the "deal" was rejected.

[Daseal]

Plea Bargains normally don't do anything but save the DA time. Sometimes people (especially celebrities) will get decent plea's. Often, they aren't any better than you'd get (in many cases worse) if you go through with the trial.

[BigSKINBauer]

Early reports said that he would deny the plea but thank god that the other guy also denied. The prosecutors have nothing on taylor they are trying to get that guy to go for it but he won't so they have nothing now.

[JWsleep]

It sounds like the FLA mandatory sentence rule is a big problem here. The prosecutor claims his hands are tied--3 years was the LOWEST he could offer by law. So it's innocent or three years. Of course the DA could drop the felony altogether, but I guess he'd look like a real ass now going to a misdemeanor. So much of this is the pride of prosecutors. The see a celeb, and they feel they have to prove how tough they are. Look at the pathetic Michael Jackson case.

As for the other guy (from Baltimore--what a surprise! Probably a ravens fan...), he was offered a complete free pass to testify against Taylor, it sounded like. THat's a very good sign for Sean, I think. Sean and his boy say, "No gun." The other guy(s) say gun. But we know that the other guys shot a gun themselves, so they're in a weak spot.

Further, it's always struck me as so weird that the time line is that Taylor waved the gun first, and THEN came back without the gun and hit the guy. That, as anyone can tell, is ass backward. If you wave a gun, you better realize that your enemy is going to arm himself as well. So why did they come back unarmed? And the guys they attacked DID get a gun, only later? What? Why didn't they have it when Taylor came back for the 2nd time with the fist/bat attack?

Here's what may have happened. Taylor and his baltimore goon attack with fist and bat, and leave. Then the guys they attack shoot at Taylor's house. To cover their asses, they say, hey, Taylor waved a gun, it's (sort of) self defense.

SInce there are 2 charges against Sean, my guess is that he won't get hit on the gun thing. BUt he may well get assault. Still, he didn't have a bat, so isn't it a misdemeanor? WHo knows. In FLA, it may be a hanging offense.

What a mess!

[wolfeskins]

hopefully this is the begining of some very good news.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by JWsleep

It sounds like the FLA mandatory sentence rule is a big problem here. The prosecutor claims his hands are tied--3 years was the LOWEST he could offer by law. So it's innocent or three years. Of course the DA could drop the felony altogether, but I guess he'd look like a real ass now going to a misdemeanor. So much of this is the pride of prosecutors. The see a celeb, and they feel they have to prove how tough they are. Look at the pathetic Michael Jackson case.

As for the other guy (from Baltimore--what a surprise! Probably a ravens fan...), he was offered a complete free pass to testify against Taylor, it sounded like. THat's a very good sign for Sean, I think. Sean and his boy say, "No gun." The other guy(s) say gun. But we know that the other guys shot a gun themselves, so they're in a weak spot.

Further, it's always struck me as so weird that the time line is that Taylor waved the gun first, and THEN came back without the gun and hit the guy. That, as anyone can tell, is ass backward. If you wave a gun, you better realize that your enemy is going to arm himself as well. So why did they come back unarmed? And the guys they attacked DID get a gun, only later? What? Why didn't they have it when Taylor came back for the 2nd time with the fist/bat attack?

Here's what may have happened. Taylor and his baltimore goon attack with fist and bat, and leave. Then the guys they attack shoot at Taylor's house. To cover their asses, they say, hey, Taylor waved a gun, it's (sort of) self defense.

SInce there are 2 charges against Sean, my guess is that he won't get hit on the gun thing. BUt he may well get assault. Still, he didn't have a bat, so isn't it a misdemeanor? WHo knows. In FLA, it may be a hanging offense.

What a mess!

Something is defiently not right, if Taylor waived a gun at these guy's then left, then after having been shot at why would he go back without a gun, knowing these guy's have guns and are willing to use them?

I am encouraged by the way the prosecuter used his words, he seemed to be lightening up on Sean, perhaps he's seen enough evidence to figure which direction this case is going, which is in taylors favor.

Something tells me nothing is going to come out of this, basically the prosecution will wave it's hands in the air and chalk the whole thing up to a basic pissing contest that they will never really get to the bottom of.

[mooby]

hopefully. what i don't get is that they are treating the guys retailiating and shooting up s.t.'s house and car as a seperate case. imo that should be treated worse than the whole pointing the gun thing.

[PSUSkinsFan21]

Originally Posted by mooby

hopefully. what i don't get is that they are treating the guys retailiating and shooting up s.t.'s house and car as a seperate case. imo that should be treated worse than the whole pointing the gun thing.

They are two separate cases because two separate crimes were committed. The fact that they shot at ST's house might be a worse offense, but it does nothing to exhonorate him for allegedly pulling a gun on someone prior to the shooting.

As best I can tell, it seems as though the prosecution must believe that it needs ST's friend's testimony. If it can't get it, then I would still expect the prosecution to eventually drop the charge down to a misdemeanor and take a plea from ST for that. If the prosecution can get ST's friend's testimony, then I think ST is looking at a trial and a prosecution that won't budge. I really believe much of ST's future hinges on just how good of a "friend" this bat-wielding guy is.

[SKINSnCANES]

ya know, after Ray Lewis went to jail he came back jacked and has dominated the league ever since...mabye jail is what he needs to acutally practice, lol. Not that he needs it though, hes still goign to be a beast out there.

[JWsleep]

Sean's friend could have pled out with a misdemeanor today, but he didn't. Sounds like he going to stick by Sean (at least as of right now!).

Wow. The hopes of our potential HOF-er hang on the whims of a bat-weilding thug from Baltimore. Talk about hanging with the wrong crowd!

[BigSKINBauer]

again that "bat wielding thug" i believe has already said to police that no one had any weapons. He isn't saying that he did, it is very possible he had nothing either. I think the lawyer said that they can't accept the plea agreament due to moral reasons. I am glad he passed. They want the "truth" to come out. This is definatly the biggest positve for Taylor in the last few weeks.

I really thought that edwards guy would take the deal but he didn't and it shows how desperate they are for witnesses and proof. Taylor should be a free man.

This adds more to what i thought. I truly think that Taylor is telling the truth. When you ASSUME you make an ASS out of U and ME(TAYLOR). I also assumed in the early stages that he did, but more and more i think he is telling the truth. There is very little reason to believe he did what he is charged for. Taylor is no thug. He never did anything illegal in his life. He went to a private prep school. Was good at school. His friends and family look legitimally stunned, doesn't sound like BS.

He woulda never taken that lie detector test unless he thought he was innocent. I don't care if it isn't completely accurate but taylor took that test on his own will, no one forced him. His friend isn't gonna take a get out of jail free card, if taylor was guilty it would be quite tempting to take that card and walk.

[Daseal]

I agree, they have no case against ST and his co-defendant's lawyer said the exact same thing weeks ago. He said his client said there was no weapon (at least on the ST side of the confrontation. I agree, the whole story sounds a bit bogus. ST will be in camp, dominate this year, go to court to see the charges thrown out, and then dominate the next year.

Hopefully this taught him to watch himself a bit.

[Redskins8588]

Does is bother anyone else a little that ST's lawyer keeps bring up the lie detector results? Yeah, I am glad that the results are in ST's favor and that ST willing took the test, but if that is the only piece of evidence the lawyer can come up with, and its not addmisable in court then I think that is a little bit scary....