Taylor Issue Over!!!

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Wow .

Yes, I hate the G-men.

[mcalderone10]

G-men just wish they were the skins they keep takin everyone we get rid of

[MTK]

Sounds like ST could still face a 1-2 game suspension.

Link

[mcalderone10]

doubt it. Did ray ray get a suspension for that murder trial?

[CooleyAsCanBe]

Originally Posted by wolfeskins

what does pleading "no contest" mean ? i know that pleading "guilty" means that you are saying you did the crime but in what ways is "no contest" different ?

From law.com's dictionary.

in criminal law, a defendant's plea in court that he/she will not contest the charge of a particular crime, also called nolo contendere. While technically not an admission of guilt for commission of the crime, the judge will treat a plea of "no contest" as such an admission and proceed to find the defendant guilty as charged. A "no contest" plea is often made in cases in which there is also a possible lawsuit for damages by a person injured by the criminal conduct (such as reckless driving, assault with a deadly weapon, aggravated assault), because it cannot be used in the civil lawsuit as an admission of fault. "No contest" is also used where there has been a "plea bargain" in which the defendant does not want to say he/she is guilty but accepts the sentence recommended by the prosecutor in exchange for not contesting the charge (which is often reduced to a lesser crime). It is standard practice for the judge to ask either the attorneys or the defendant, "Is there a factual basis for the plea?" before accepting it and finding the defendant guilty.

[hooskins]

Originally Posted by CooleyAsCanBe

From law.com's dictionary.

in criminal law, a defendant's plea in court that he/she will not contest the charge of a particular crime, also called nolo contendere. While technically not an admission of guilt for commission of the crime, the judge will treat a plea of "no contest" as such an admission and proceed to find the defendant guilty as charged. A "no contest" plea is often made in cases in which there is also a possible lawsuit for damages by a person injured by the criminal conduct (such as reckless driving, assault with a deadly weapon, aggravated assault), because it cannot be used in the civil lawsuit as an admission of fault. "No contest" is also used where there has been a "plea bargain" in which the defendant does not want to say he/she is guilty but accepts the sentence recommended by the prosecutor in exchange for not contesting the charge (which is often reduced to a lesser crime). It is standard practice for the judge to ask either the attorneys or the defendant, "Is there a factual basis for the plea?" before accepting it and finding the defendant guilty.

ah yes UVa law at its best lol

[Redskins8588]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Nice try but you don't have to plea "No Contest" and pay a $1000 fine per school and give ten speechs for not doing a crime .

The $1000 per school and speeches are for the assult charges which Taylor never denied. So to you I say, "Nice try!!"

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Nice try but you don't have to plea "No Contest" and pay a $1000 fine per school and give ten speechs for not doing a crime .

unless you want to avoid trial and actually be available on sundays for nfl games this year :P

losing his paychecks and time would cost far more than 10k$. people plead out all the time, and unless you have evidence or you've talked to ST about it, don't assume you know everything about the case from the biased info that grieco leaked to newspapers. he's a crook and the people accusing taylor are career criminals as well.

best case, he really was a victim, worst case, everyone involved was a thug, in which case its a wash.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Thank you , Thank you , I read this one like a book !Almost to a T I said this is what would happen .Now I will admit I don't like Taylor and he is a punk ...a good football player but he is an ass and he is guilty but the prosecutor screwed up so he walks .

Taylor a punk? C'mon, get real!

Your team is undeniably full of punks!!

[TheInspector]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Exactly. Where in the rules does it say that the NFL will impose a fine and/or suspend a player for a certain number of games for being accused of a crime, even after charges are dropped?

Unfortunately, the charges were not dropped. The trial will proceed as usual, however the two sides have agreed not to argue in court. After the trial, Sean will not be found guilty, but he will also NOT be acquited. So basically, the NFL can decide to do whatever they want--fine, suspend, or nothing.

I'll bet they suspend him for at least 1 game.

[dirthogs311]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Great news, really glad it's over and done so he can get back to concentrating on football.

My only question is, can't this dude afford a suit for court??

taylor on thursday..... now if he could just find a tie

[dirthogs311]

In other news: The Bruise Bros. will be in business this fall::FIREdevil

[hurrykaine]

Originally Posted by scowan

No way that Sean misses any games due to any of this. The charges have basically been dropped. If there is no case and no admitance of guilt, then why would there be any punishment from the league?

There is still the misdemanour charge. The league could give him a 1 game suspension (2 at the most, but unlikely), but the question is WHEN will the league decide to do it. It could be immediately, in which case I'm not worried about him sitting out the Vikings game. If the league takes its own sweet time, it could drop the 1 game suspension hammer for a crucial mid-season division game.

[CooleyAsCanBe]

Originally Posted by hooskins

ah yes UVa law at its best lol

I plan on doing the same thing for the bar in July.

[ChillWill]

A one game suspension is a far harsher sentence in dollars than the court imposed. It would not seem fair to me and I would bet that the Players Union would argue this point as well.