Taylor's 2005 Season Likely Unaffected by Charges

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

what PSU said.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

I agree with Ramseyfan. It takes a big man to actually admit that kind of thing.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

That was very big of you jamf, your stock just zoomed up the charts in my mind. Instead of getting defensive, you thought about your remarks and clarified things for us. Thanks for clearing that up.

Yeah I definitely agree, way to go jamf

[jacobyfan]

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

That was very big of you jamf, your stock just zoomed up the charts in my mind. Instead of getting defensive, you thought about your remarks and clarified things for us. Thanks for clearing that up.

I concur.

[PSUSkinsFan21]

Originally Posted by e16bball

The sequence of events, while not irrelevant, is really insignificant in the result of this trial. I have some experience in this sort of thing, and I have spoken to some people who have significantly more. My personal opinion, one which was strongly echoed by these more expert persons, is that Taylor will receive some combination of or all of the following: community service, probation, and fine. The key fact is that, while we all "know" Taylor to be kind of an idiot and perhaps a "thug," he has no criminal record. Due to this clean record, he will receive probation; that is, after all, the point of probation. The law makes provisions for the fact that a person can make a stupid decision that is out of character and doesn't warrant punishment that will affect the rest of their life. Of course, if they commit another crime, and thereby demonstrate a criminal tendency, the first comes back on them as well. The State Atty in this case will agree to a plea bargain that basically eliminates the 10-20-Life rule, which only applies to certain felony convictions. Aggravated assault is one of these, but simple assault is not, so I expect Taylor to cop to the simple assault and possibly the simple battery in order to take jail time out of the picture. The state will agree to this because A) their case is flimsy and B) Taylor will have a top-of-the-line lawyer on hand. The state does not want to risk a straight acquittal, so they will go along with a decent plea.

I think you are confusing the issues here. First of all, I'm not sure what "experts" you have spoken to, but I can assure you that IF he is found guilty of aggravated assualt with a gun, he MUST serve AT LEAST 3 years in jail. This is a mandatory minimum........it's mandatory. I don't know how else to put it. His prior record (or lack thereof) will not allow him to escape the mandatory minimum. The judge simply cannot stray below what is required by statute in sentencing. So regardless of his prior record, probation is not an option IF he is convicted of aggravated assault.

Now whether there is a plea bargain is going to depend, first and foremost, on the strength of the DA's case. And the strenth of the DA's case rests almost entirely on the sequence of events and the credibility of the witnesses. If Taylor pulled his gun before being shot at or threatened in kind, the DA's case is strong and ST could be in some trouble. If the witnesses have been in and out of jail in the past and would make for horrible witnesses, or if ST only pulled his gun after being shot at, THEN the DA may be willing to plea bargain. If the DA has a strong case against a big-name NFL player though, don't expect him to want to be accommodating right off the bat with ST.

I just think it's contradictory to say in one sentence "The sequence of events, while not irrelevant, is really insignificant in the result of this trial." and then say later that "The state will agree to this because A) their case is flimsy..." The strength of any case depends first and formost on the facts of the case (with availability of credible witnesses a close second). Trust me, I'm speaking from experience here.