Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

I bet 90% of Redskins fan thought that Taylor wouldn't start for the Skins in 2005. As the Washington Times article points out:

(1) Taylor's trial likely won't start until 2006.
(2) The league is unlikely to punish Taylor until 2006.
(3) The Redskins are unlikely to bench/suspend Taylor until 2006.

You wanna talk about a negative turning into a positive; whereas before Taylor's arrest it was possible that Taylor would have held out of training camp, now even Taylor is unlikely to hold out (he's got enough bad press).
Moreover, Taylor will probably be playing in 2005 like it's his last season (as it possibly could be). Can you imagine the hits he's going to deliver?

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

There's nothing positive about his arrest.

ST could be innocent. If he is, he will still be looking for a new contract.

If ST accepts a lesser charge(most likely scenario), he will be suspended for 4 games(IMHO). Then, the person/people he assaulted will file a civil suit against him and take what money he has. so ST will hold out in 2006.

Now if ST takes the case to trial, he will not be concerned about football. there is not a black man on this earth that wants his life in the hands of a jury in south. i hate to play the race card, but realisticly, sean will be worried about the jury, not football.

he will try to be a model citizen, but lets face it, ST is a headcase who is more worried about his socks than football. he will revert to his old ways soon enough.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

[QUOTE=jamf]
Now if ST takes the case to trial, he will not be concerned about football. there is not a black man on this earth that wants his life in the hands of a jury in south. i hate to play the race card, but realisticly, sean will be worried about the jury, not football.[/QUOTE]

Racism is not ok, but bigoted ignorant remarks about southerners are, apparently.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

If we cut Sean Taylor and he walk away with this with less than probation...and ends up in history being one of the best Safties in the world...then what......lets see what happens first.......then judge

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

[QUOTE=Ramseyfan]I bet 90% of Redskins fan thought that Taylor wouldn't start for the Skins in 2005. As the Washington Times article points out:

(1) Taylor's trial likely won't start until 2006.
(2) The league is unlikely to punish Taylor until 2006.
(3) The Redskins are unlikely to bench/suspend Taylor until 2006.

You wanna talk about a negative turning into a positive; whereas before Taylor's arrest it was possible that Taylor would have held out of training camp, now even Taylor is unlikely to hold out (he's got enough bad press).
Moreover, Taylor will probably be playing in 2005 like it's his last season (as it possibly could be). Can you imagine the hits he's going to deliver?[/QUOTE]


As well RF I am sure that there can be some kind of a work release program agreement that can be worked out if he does have to do time in 2006 so he can play on sunday's, and if he does do time Gibbs will know longer have a problem contacting him and knowing his whereabout's, I agree thing's are really looking up! :thumb:

P.S. I hear the X-miami player's have a vigerous prison workout program as well, we won't have to worry about him staying in shape either. :headbange

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

[QUOTE=jacobyfan]Racism is not ok, but bigoted ignorant remarks about southerners are, apparently.[/QUOTE]

And particularly inaccurate remarks about "southerners."

A little research led me to discover this little fact:

[b]Of the 2,253,362 citizens of Miami-Dade county, 1,291,737 are Hispanic/Latino, and 457,214 are black.[/b] For those without a calculator handy, that means that 1,748,951 are non-Caucasian, or 77.6%, and that doesn't even count Asians or other ethnicities. So, luckily for Mr. Taylor, less than 1/4 of the jury pool will be made up of these damn racist white southerners you mentioned.

I really do hate to pile on, especially when I know others will follow on top of me, but you honestly should think carefully before "playing the race card," or making other highly incendiary comments, for that matter. Miami is a city. Demographics are certainly not Sean Taylor's enemy in this situation. It's one thing to bring up race as a divisive factor when you are correct, it's completely another when you are totally incorrect about it in addition to possibly insulting people.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

In response to the thread's topic, this comes as no surprise to me, as I have been one of the few Redskins fans in the world (or so it seems anyway) continually trying to convince others that Taylor will face no jail time and will be a factor this year (not so much convincing to do here, but certainly over at old Extremeskins). He committed a crime that even an average Joe would get off from with probation, and he can certainly retain more skilled legal counsel than old average Joe. He may face repercussions from the league, or even conceivably from the Redskins despite their statement to the contrary, but that is it. He will be out there dominating per his usual. And obviously by usual, I mean Willie Parker type hits. Every game.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

[QUOTE=jamf]There's nothing positive about his arrest.

ST could be innocent. If he is, he will still be looking for a new contract.

If ST accepts a lesser charge(most likely scenario), he will be suspended for 4 games(IMHO). Then, the person/people he assaulted will file a civil suit against him and take what money he has. so ST will hold out in 2006.

Now if ST takes the case to trial, he will not be concerned about football. there is not a black man on this earth that wants his life in the hands of a jury in south. i hate to play the race card, but realisticly, sean will be worried about the jury, not football.

he will try to be a model citizen, but lets face it, ST is a headcase who is more worried about his socks than football. he will revert to his old ways soon enough.[/QUOTE]

How in the world would he ask for a new contract?!

"I just got done with my trial, possibly being suspended a few games and NOW I DEMAND that you give me a new contract."

I REAAAAALLY don't think that is a likely scenario. And I agree with e16bball, don't play the race card unless you know the facts. Taylor's representation will destroy any court-appointed attornies those other schmucks can afford.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

[QUOTE=e16bball]In response to the thread's topic, this comes as no surprise to me, as I have been one of the few Redskins fans in the world (or so it seems anyway) continually trying to convince others that Taylor will face no jail time and will be a factor this year (not so much convincing to do here, but certainly over at old Extremeskins). He committed a crime that even an average Joe would get off from with probation, and he can certainly retain more skilled legal counsel than old average Joe. He may face repercussions from the league, or even conceivably from the Redskins despite their statement to the contrary, but that is it. He will be out there dominating per his usual. And obviously by usual, I mean Willie Parker type hits. Every game.[/QUOTE]

Actually he allegedly comitted a gun crime in a state that imposes a mandatory minimum of 3 years. If he's guilty, neither the average Joe nor ST will get off on probation.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

[QUOTE=jamf]There's nothing positive about his arrest.

ST could be innocent. If he is, he will still be looking for a new contract.

If ST accepts a lesser charge(most likely scenario), he will be suspended for 4 games(IMHO). Then, the person/people he assaulted will file a civil suit against him and take what money he has. so ST will hold out in 2006.

Now if ST takes the case to trial, he will not be concerned about football. there is not a black man on this earth that wants his life in the hands of a jury in south. i hate to play the race card, but realisticly, sean will be worried about the jury, not football.

he will try to be a model citizen, but lets face it, ST is a headcase who is more worried about his socks than football. he will revert to his old ways soon enough.[/QUOTE]

To site administrators, I know I said I'd never get personal, but hopefully you'll see how it's deserved in this instance.

JAMF, you're a moron.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

On the thread subject, I do see a positive out of the situation. Taylor is going to have major troubles off the field this year, as the trial will be hanging over his head all season long. I think he'll look at football as his escape from his troubles. Once he gets on the field practicing and playing in games, I think he'll realize that he needs football in his life so he's not constantly thinking about his trial and the potential for jail. I think he'll play with passion this year.

I don't think this legal issue has any bearing on his desires for a new contract.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

I agree with Schneed that this could be a big wakeup call for ST and make him realize how important football should be to him.

I think the only bearing it could have on the new contract is that it takes away his bargaining power. Rosenhaus has to know that no team is going to renegotiate and shell out millions more in bonus money for a player that could be looking at significant jail time. If I'm the skins, I gotta say to Sean: "look, we'd love to pay you more, but we can't make that kind of investment until we know how your legal issues shake out." Imagine giving the guy another 7 million, just to have him spend 3 years in jail. Whether we think he'll actually ever see jail time or not, the skins can play that card if ST thinks about renegotiating.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

[QUOTE=PSUSkinsFan21]I agree with Schneed that this could be a big wakeup call for ST and make him realize how important football should be to him.

I think the only bearing it could have on the new contract is that it takes away his bargaining power. Rosenhaus has to know that no team is going to renegotiate and shell out millions more in bonus money for a player that could be looking at significant jail time. If I'm the skins, I gotta say to Sean: "look, we'd love to pay you more, but we can't make that kind of investment until we know how your legal issues shake out." Imagine giving the guy another 7 million, just to have him spend 3 years in jail. Whether we think he'll actually ever see jail time or not, the skins can play that card if ST thinks about renegotiating.[/QUOTE]

Yeah and on that note, the almighty dollar may be exactly what ends up getting through to Taylor. When he realizes that nobody will want to pay him while he's a legal risk, then just maybe he'll learn to keep his nose clean. I sure hope so.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

I'm just glad that he might get a chance to play football. He is our playmaker on defense like reed and lewis are for the ravens. our defense will not be as good as it was last year without taylor. also i think that if anything he will get probation. just as long as he did not have a gun.

"Innocent until proven."--Sean Taylor

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

I'm just glad that he might get a chance to play football. He is our playmaker on defense like reed and lewis are for the ravens. our defense will not be as good as it was last year without taylor. also i think that if anything he will get probation. just as long as he did not have a gun.

"Innocent until proven guilty."--Sean Taylor

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10]Yeah and on that note, the almighty dollar may be exactly what ends up getting through to Taylor. When he realizes that nobody will want to pay him while he's a legal risk, then just maybe he'll learn to keep his nose clean. I sure hope so.[/QUOTE]

Amen!

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

Well, it is true that in some Southern areas, racism is probably a bigger problem than other areas, however you can't lump the entire south into a category of being full of whites who are racist.

Florida is by far - NOT one of those areas. Actually, I would assume that Florida probably has one of the highest concentration of non-white people. I don't believe this has anything to do about race - it has alot to do about stupidity! Even if Sean Taylor is found inocent, me thinks that he got himself into this situation whether if the end result was that Sean was the victim or the instigator.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

[QUOTE=skinsguy]I don't believe this has anything to do about race - it has alot to do about stupidity! Even if Sean Taylor is found inocent, me thinks that he got himself into this situation whether if the end result was that Sean was the victim or the instigator.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. I just don't understand how hard it would have been to dial 911? If you really think you got the guys who stole the ATVs, how are the police not your first call? No matter his guilt or innocence, the fact that he was even there is just pure stupidity.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

e16 makes a great point with those stats. i will admit that i made an ignorant comment about miami-dade county.

unfortunatly race is a factor in some areas of the south and i think ST will be concerned about it.

If you feel the need to flame on, please keep the board clean and send it to my PM.i think i have room for 13 more pm's

I'm sorry for grouping the Whole south as racist. that was clearly a mistake, i should've worded things differently.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

In some areas of the south, I agree jamf - but Florida isn't one of them.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

[QUOTE=jamf]I'm sorry for grouping the Whole south as racist. that was clearly a mistake, i should've worded things differently.[/QUOTE]

apology accepted.

[QUOTE=jamf]unfortunatly race is a factor in some areas of the south and i think ST will be concerned about it.[/QUOTE]

What I want you to realize is that this is a problem [i]EVERYWHERE[/i] not just in the south. Small, mostly white towns [i]anywhere you go[/i] and a few large ones have problems. And it's not just whites, either. Get any place that is 90% the same and they'll be distrustful of those who are different.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

[QUOTE=jacobyfan]There is racism everywhere. You really need to stop using sterotypes. Cinncinati, for example has more problems than any decent size city in the south. Drop your ignorant sterotypes, please. You seem to have this notion in your head:

"Southern white people are more likely to be racists"

You need to get it out because it's bullshit. You're showing your ignorance when you keep trying to defend your bigoted statements.[/QUOTE]


Well said!! (for an inbred, country-music listening, waffle-eating hillbillie from Tennessee...)


**note: sarcasm**

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

[QUOTE=Ade Jimoh Fan Club]Well said!! (for an inbred, country-music listening, waffle-eating hillbillie from Tennessee...)


**note: sarcasm**[/QUOTE]

lol. I need to make up some place you're from so I can do the same :)
Maybe I should assume France... Southerners don't like the French either, you know... :rolleyes:

AND WE EAT PANCAKES!!!!

mainly.

Also Biscuits.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

I don't trust the south or the north. And the east coast is either hot and nasty or cold and snowy. Left coast is where the action is at man and the chicks are beautiful too.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

[QUOTE=jacobyfan]lol. I need to make up some place you're from so I can do the same :)
Maybe I should assume France... Southerners don't like the French either, you know... :rolleyes:

AND WE EAT PANCAKES!!!!

mainly.

Also Biscuits.[/QUOTE]


Actually, I ate breakfast at the "Pancake Pantry" in Nashville, TN, so I guess I should have known better. My bad :laughing-

Two tables over - Air McNair was there with his family enjoying some flapjacks - no joke!

Viva le France,
Les Ade

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

You guys should watch Team America...great movie.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

[QUOTE=dirtbag2112]You guys should watch Team America...great movie.[/QUOTE]

Freedom isn't free... there's a hefty fuckin' fee

I love that movie, the songs are great

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

I just watched that the other night and the funniest part is when they are throwing up and it starts spraying. The timing was just PERFECT.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

This is one weird thread.... :Smoker:

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

The manequin sex was by far the funniest scene - especially when he had her bent over in the jackhammer position. :laughing2

Durka Durka Jihad Durka Jihad!

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

And the poo scene! LOL

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

WT also indicates that shots were fired at ST, which is the first I have heard.
This makes a HUGE difference to Sean's defense.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

i have a feeling that there wont even be a trail, i read somewhere that there was a second phase of the fight and one of the people shot at taylor. the police decide if they want to prosectue taylor or not, i dont think it will happen. or if it does, i bet he finds a way not to be found guilty

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

PSU Skins, what do you think about shots being fired at Sean in helping his defense?

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection]PSU Skins, what do you think about shots being fired at Sean in helping his defense?[/QUOTE]

Really just depends on when they were fired.

If ST pulled the gun in the initial confrontation and waived it around, then got fired at, the shots probably don't have any bearing on the ST's defense. In fact, the other guys would have a strong self-defense argument that they feared ST was going to shoot them, so they had to fire at him in self-defense.

Certainly if the shots were fired before ST ever pulled his gun, he's absolutely home free. Pulling his gun out after being fired on would make for a very solid self-defense argument.

Now let's assume the shots were fired in the second confrontation, but that the other guys showed ST their guns in the first confrontation: In this situation, again, ST could claim that he only pulled his gun in self defense when he saw that the other men were armed. Again, he's home free.

Really it all just depends on the sequence of events. The key factor is going to be who was the first one to either threaten deadly force, or fire shots at the other. Whoever pulled their gun first is going to be the one that the prosecutor is going to go after. After a gun has been pulled or shots have been fired, then the prosecution's case gets much weaker because formidable (sp?) self defense arguments arise.

Do you see it the same way RamseyFan?

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

I'm also thinking about this. Since they proved that Sean did not discharge a weapon and if they prove that the other people did, isn't it Sean's word against theirs? And if they DID indeed fire a shot, it would make their case that much weaker.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

Well, yes and no. Again, it's all going to come down to the sequence of events. If ST pulls his gun in confrontation #1........then comes back for more........now those guys all know he's packing. It could be reasonable for them to fire on him in self-defense if they believe he's going to shoot at them. In that case, the jury is probably going to sympathize more with the guys who just got confronted by a rather large man with a gun, and the other guys don't make bad witnesses (in this scenario).

Also remember that the criminal case is not a case of the other guys versus ST. Rather, it's going to be a case of the State versus ST. Yes, the other guys would be called as witnesses at ST's trial by the prosecution, but it's not a matter of the other guys having a case against ST. It will be their word versus his as witnesses, however, and that's where the facts will either make or break the case against ST. If ST pulled his gun first, and then the other guys shot at him, ST probably doesn't really have a self defense argument because he was the one that initiated the "gun play", if you will. If these other guys fired on or threatened ST first, then they would make terrible witnesses, ST would have a strong self-defense argument, and the prosecution probably would drop the case. It's all going to hinge on then the guns came out.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

If he just wouldn't have come back the second time, it would be much easier to defend. If THEY pulled the guns first, why in the hell would he have come back NOT packing?

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

If they pulled the guns first, why in the hell would he have come back period?

That's why I'm concerned about the likely sequence of events. Obviously we're not dealing with rational and reasonable individuals (on either side), but I find it really hard to believe that ST would have come back if either the other guys flashed guns in the first confrontation, or shot at him in the first confrontation........and those might be the only scenarios that get ST off.

COMPLETE SPECULATION on my part, but doesn't it seem much more likely that ST surprised the other guys in the first confrontation, pulled a gun to scare the hell out of them, hit one of them with his fist, had his buddy chase one with a baseball bat...........and THEN came back for a second round (perhaps with more reinforcements) after a long enough time that the other guys could round up their guns and fire on ST as soon as they saw him? I hope I'm wrong, because he's screwed in that scenario. But I just can't figure out how he would have pulled his gun and not fired it AFTER being fired on by the other guys? Anything is possible I suppose. If he was dumb enough to confront them himself in the first place, he's dumb enough to go back and risk getting his head blown off I suppose.

Re: Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges
 

You know who we haven't heard from yet? SC.

I bet he would be having a FIELD day.