backrow
07-12-2005, 05:11 PM
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.
Plea RejectedPages :
[1]
2
backrow 07-12-2005, 05:11 PM 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 07-12-2005, 05:14 PM http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/12/AR2005071200959.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 07-12-2005, 05:17 PM 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 07-12-2005, 05:44 PM 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 07-12-2005, 06:10 PM 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 07-12-2005, 06:20 PM 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 07-12-2005, 06:51 PM hopefully this is the begining of some very good news. mooby 07-12-2005, 06:56 PM 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 07-12-2005, 07:19 PM 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 07-12-2005, 07:57 PM 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. |
|
EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum