Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Charges Against Taylor: Sit Tight, It's Not Over Yet

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-21-2005, 03:48 PM   #16
Pro Bowl
 
skinsguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina
Posts: 6,765
Re: Charges Against Taylor: Sit Tight, It's Not Over Yet

I wonder what Matlock would do?
__________________
"Fire Up That Diesel!"
skinsguy is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 06-21-2005, 05:23 PM   #17
Camp Scrub
 
intheRIC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3
Re: Charges Against Taylor: Sit Tight, It's Not Over Yet

I fail to see how Matlock stayed in business. You never saw a single file on his desk - did he have more than the one client?
intheRIC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2005, 07:38 PM   #18
MVP
 
12thMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: washington, D.C.
Posts: 11,458
Re: Charges Against Taylor: Sit Tight, It's Not Over Yet

Can I just say for the record, and I'm in no way qualified to interpret the law or legal proceedings....but I do know from personal experience that a grand jury is not used in all felony charges.
12thMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2005, 07:55 PM   #19
The Starter
 
monk81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 2,029
Re: Charges Against Taylor: Sit Tight, It's Not Over Yet

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsguy
I wonder what Matlock would do?

__________________
"It's absolutely criminal, in my opinion, that Monk has yet to be enshrined (in the Pro-Football Hall of Fame)" Dan Arkush PFW
monk81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2005, 07:56 PM   #20
The Starter
 
monk81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 2,029
Re: Charges Against Taylor: Sit Tight, It's Not Over Yet

Quote:
Originally Posted by intheRIC
I fail to see how Matlock stayed in business. You never saw a single file on his desk - did he have more than the one client?
Welcome INTHERIC........and I think the only pay he ever got was an occasional chili dog............
__________________
"It's absolutely criminal, in my opinion, that Monk has yet to be enshrined (in the Pro-Football Hall of Fame)" Dan Arkush PFW
monk81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2005, 07:58 PM   #21
The Starter
 
monk81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 2,029
Re: Charges Against Taylor: Sit Tight, It's Not Over Yet

I wish Sean Taylor would just get his act together and show up at Redskin Park on time for training camp..............
__________________
"It's absolutely criminal, in my opinion, that Monk has yet to be enshrined (in the Pro-Football Hall of Fame)" Dan Arkush PFW
monk81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2005, 08:23 PM   #22
MVP
 
mooby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: NoVa
Age: 27
Posts: 12,201
Re: Charges Against Taylor: Sit Tight, It's Not Over Yet

well he can't now that he's excused. i have a great idea, why don't we make a sean taylor forum, where everyone can talk about everything from his play last year to his legal troubles in the offseason.
mooby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2005, 06:05 AM   #23
I like big (_|_)s.
 
TheMalcolmConnection's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Lexington, Virginia
Age: 33
Posts: 17,692
Re: Charges Against Taylor: Sit Tight, It's Not Over Yet

Wwmd.
__________________
Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.
TheMalcolmConnection is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2005, 08:20 AM   #24
The Starter
 
PSUSkinsFan21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 38
Posts: 1,340
Re: Charges Against Taylor: Sit Tight, It's Not Over Yet

Quote:
Originally Posted by paulskinsfan
Im gonna post one more time on this topic and then I quit, cause we are here to discuss the Skins, not the law. Ramseyfan you are wrong. Every single felony charge, is decided upon by a grand jury, regardless of if its a murder, drug possession, forgery, whatever. Now it may be different in FLA, but in WVA, VA, Colorado, California, MOST STATES, a grand jury is impaneled every term to hand down indictments on ALL felony charges. The grand jury here handed down 12 indictments last term for meth lab charges alone.
While I am not intimately familiar with the particulars of West Virginia law, I'm sorry but you, paulskinsfan, are actually the one that is wrong here. Ramseyfan is right. The main purpose of a grand jury is to act as an investigation for the prosecution. It becomes particularly useful when a police investigation is not sufficient to gather evidence, because the grand jury has a subpoena power that the police do not have. For this reason, the types of cases that hinge on documentary evidence (i.e. corruption, other white collar crimes) are typically best suited for grand jury testimony. To say that "every single felony charge, is decided upon by a grand jury" is just flat wrong in any jurisdiction I've seen. There is no constitutional right to a grand jury and I'm aware of no state that requires the prosecution to submit a case to the grand jury before filing charges and proceeding with prosecution.

I know it's not in our nature to admit when we are wrong, but I think everyone interested in this thread should know that Ramseyfan got it right.

ps. If you'd like my bar ID #, I too will be happy to provide it.
__________________
"Hail to the Redskins!" and "Fight on State!"
PSUSkinsFan21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2005, 09:07 AM   #25
Registered User
 
paulskinsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: West VA
Posts: 726
Re: Charges Against Taylor: Sit Tight, It's Not Over Yet

Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUSkinsFan21
While I am not intimately familiar with the particulars of West Virginia law, I'm sorry but you, paulskinsfan, are actually the one that is wrong here. Ramseyfan is right. The main purpose of a grand jury is to act as an investigation for the prosecution. It becomes particularly useful when a police investigation is not sufficient to gather evidence, because the grand jury has a subpoena power that the police do not have. For this reason, the types of cases that hinge on documentary evidence (i.e. corruption, other white collar crimes) are typically best suited for grand jury testimony. To say that "every single felony charge, is decided upon by a grand jury" is just flat wrong in any jurisdiction I've seen. There is no constitutional right to a grand jury and I'm aware of no state that requires the prosecution to submit a case to the grand jury before filing charges and proceeding with prosecution.

I know it's not in our nature to admit when we are wrong, but I think everyone interested in this thread should know that Ramseyfan got it right.

ps. If you'd like my bar ID #, I too will be happy to provide it.
Guys, I really don't want to waste everyone's time on this non-Redskin issue. After looking in the Criminal Procedure Manual, it states that slightly more than half the states use a Grand Jury System for all felonies. In fact, it is in West Virginia's freakin constitution which states:

"No person shall be held to answer for treason, felony or other crime, not cognizable by a justice, unless on presentment or indictment of a grand jury."

See Article 3, section 4 of the WVA Constitution.

Now I am originally from VA, and I believe that is the law there as well, although I haven't practiced criminal law there. Now, if its used in roughly half the states, then its not used in roughly half the states. Florida may very well not use the Grand Jury on all felonies, but WVA and many other states do. If you wanna debate criminal law, Im all over it. So now, you admit you were wrong PSU SkinsFan21. It may not be the law in FLA, but it is the law in half the country.
paulskinsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2005, 09:37 AM   #26
The Starter
 
PSUSkinsFan21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 38
Posts: 1,340
Re: Charges Against Taylor: Sit Tight, It's Not Over Yet

Quote:
Originally Posted by paulskinsfan
Guys, I really don't want to waste everyone's time on this non-Redskin issue. After looking in the Criminal Procedure Manual, it states that slightly more than half the states use a Grand Jury System for all felonies. In fact, it is in West Virginia's freakin constitution which states:

"No person shall be held to answer for treason, felony or other crime, not cognizable by a justice, unless on presentment or indictment of a grand jury."

See Article 3, section 4 of the WVA Constitution.

Now I am originally from VA, and I believe that is the law there as well, although I haven't practiced criminal law there. Now, if its used in roughly half the states, then its not used in roughly half the states. Florida may very well not use the Grand Jury on all felonies, but WVA and many other states do. If you wanna debate criminal law, Im all over it. So now, you admit you were wrong PSU SkinsFan21. It may not be the law in FLA, but it is the law in half the country.
Well, like I said:
"To say that "every single felony charge, is decided upon by a grand jury" is just flat wrong in any jurisdiction I've seen. There is no constitutional right to a grand jury and I'm aware of no state that requires the prosecution to submit a case to the grand jury before filing charges and proceeding with prosecution."

I don think I'm actually wrong if you look at what I said. I said I wasn't aware of any jurisdiction in which grand jury testimony was required. Now I am.
There still is no U.S. Constitutional right to have the case submitted to the grand jury.
And while I was aware of no state that requires the prosecution submit the case to the grand jury when I drafted that message, now I am.

So you see, in the states in which I've practiced, submitting the case to a grand jury is NOT REQUIRED. In states you've practiced in, it is. So I guess we are both right.

However, you're general statements to Ramseyfan was that he was "wrong" because every felony gets submitted to a grand jury, without qualification. If you're willing to admit that you shouldn't have assumed the law of WV applied to all states (which is the only way Ramseyfan would be "wrong" here), then I'll admit that you educated me on WV law. Again though, next time I'd suggest stating that Ramseyfan would be wrong under WV law. In fact, Ramseyfan is right in certain jurisdictions.
__________________
"Hail to the Redskins!" and "Fight on State!"
PSUSkinsFan21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2005, 09:50 AM   #27
The Starter
 
PSUSkinsFan21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 38
Posts: 1,340
Re: Charges Against Taylor: Sit Tight, It's Not Over Yet

Point of clarification: There is no U.S. Constitutional right to grand jury indictment for STATE crimes. Of course federal crimes are a different matter. Just clarifying so you don't shove the 5th amendment down my throat for not being specific.
__________________
"Hail to the Redskins!" and "Fight on State!"
PSUSkinsFan21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2005, 09:52 AM   #28
Registered User
 
paulskinsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: West VA
Posts: 726
Re: Charges Against Taylor: Sit Tight, It's Not Over Yet

You are correct, the right to presentment to a Grand Jury is not a constitutional right under the US constitution, but as you know, States can afford more rights to their citizens than the US constitution, as long as the two do not conflict. In some jurisdictions Ramseyfan is correct, in about half he is not. You are also correct that I should not assume that FLA law was that of WVA, VA, Colorado, California, etc. I think my biggest issue with Ramseyfan's position was that he stated that Grand Juries are used exclusively in federal cases, and clearly they are not. Moreover, my experience with law enforcement is that they charge a Defendant with anything and everything under the sun, whether or not the evidence warrants it, in hopes that something will stick. Therefore, whether or not the charges against Taylor have merit probably won't be given serious consideration if they have even a scintilla of evidence against him. I apologize to all non-lawyers out there who have endured this thread, it is boring as hell and I didn't mean for a legal debate to go this far, so from now on Im only posting Skins material, I promise.
paulskinsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2005, 09:57 AM   #29
Registered User
 
paulskinsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: West VA
Posts: 726
Re: Charges Against Taylor: Sit Tight, It's Not Over Yet

My prediction on Taylor is that they will go forward with charges filed against him, and eventually, given the fact that the victims were turds, Taylor's friend who was with him is a turd, and to be honest, Taylor himself is a turd, eventually this thing will plead out to a misdemeanor or two.
paulskinsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2005, 09:59 AM   #30
The Starter
 
PSUSkinsFan21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 38
Posts: 1,340
Re: Charges Against Taylor: Sit Tight, It's Not Over Yet

Acutally, by my count, only 14 states require grand jury indictment for ALL felonies. Far cry from "MOST STATES"

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/sco9806.pdf


And yes, the dead horse has officially been beaten. Sorry, I'm really bad at letting things go (as most people on this site can attest to).

I understand your taking issue with RF's "federal only" comment. I'm on your side there.
__________________
"Hail to the Redskins!" and "Fight on State!"
PSUSkinsFan21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.42363 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25