Sean Taylor formally charged

[Rocco]

Washington Post is reporting that Sean Taylor was formally charged with felony aggravated assault with a firearm today. If convicted, it's a mandatory 3 year sentence.

 

[phillycard]

Good job Sean!

 

[Savage58]

What an idiot! I was wrong on that one, Million dollar ability, 5 cent head.

 

[Russ Smith]

In his defense, he's not been convicted yet. And if you read the ESPN story it's funny how they keep saying he was arrested for a DUI(acquitted but charged for refusing the breathalyzer) and he was accused of spitting on another player(reviewed on tape by NFL who found no evidence of the alleged spitting). you'd think eventually they'd just list the mistakes he HAS made, and stop bringing up the ones he didn't.

But I guess the story reads better if you throw in the DUI and spitting, the average person reading won't even notice the outcome of those two.

AS I said before, his attorney boldly predicting they would drop the charges might be premature, what kind of lawyer does something that cocky when they don't know for sure?

We'll see, it's basically a group of guys saying Taylor did it, and a group saying he didn't, who knows what the outcome will be but he's facing 3-16 years.

 

[CardinalMike]

In his defense, he's not been convicted yet. And if you read the ESPN story it's funny how they keep saying he was arrested for a DUI(acquitted but charged for refusing the breathalyzer) and he was accused of spitting on another player(reviewed on tape by NFL who found no evidence of the alleged spitting). you'd think eventually they'd just list the mistakes he HAS made, and stop bringing up the ones he didn't.

Why would you refuse a breathalizer unless you had been drinking?

Cardinal Mike!!

 

[TigToad]

A fine question

You know, I totally agree with you on this. My wife would not, however. The summer after 9/11 my wife and I were driving to Vegas. Before driving over Hoover Dam, you have to pull off the highway into a check point. At that time, it was run by military men with assault rifles and bomb sniffing dogs. About every fourth car they were pulling over and searching for bombs. I remember getting into a discussion, while waiting in line, with my wife. She was saying that we should not let them search our car without a warrant. My mentality was one of, we have nothing bad for them to find, let them do their 2 minute search and move on with our trip. She finally agreed that it was my car and I could let them do what I wanted. Fortunately, they just waved us through. I still don't really understand her position on this, but she may be the type of person who would refuse a breathalizer too, even if she was innocent. Of course, she isn't the type of person to drink and drive in the first place. Thankfully.

Why would you refuse a breathalizer unless you had been drinking?

Cardinal Mike!!

 

[40yearfan]

. Of course, she isn't the type of person to drink and drive in the first place.

Don't worry. You can fix that.

 

[slanidrac16]

In no way shape or form am I supporting Taylor here, but isn't it a "Little" ironic that Taylor is facing a mandatory 3 years in jail while a guy like Little gets the sentence he got for killing someone? With the court system and the lawyers, Taylor will play in 05 and 06 before any of this gets taken care of unless he pleads down to a lesser charge of battery in which case he will not have to serve any jail time and MAYBE a 2 game suspension.

I'll never understand athletes that get charge with concealed weapons. First of all, why do any of them go anywhere near a place where they think they need a gun? Damn. They got money, fame and I'm sure a nice crib. Why not bring the party home?

I understand the attraction of nightclubs and the hot spots but that scene changes when you hit the big time.

That being said, thank God that Green and Graves didn't take that loose cannon.

 

[Russ Smith]

Why would you refuse a breathalizer unless you had been drinking?

Cardinal Mike!!

I don't know the whole story but the claim was Taylor felt he was being harassed when he was pulled over and he refused because he had already passed the field sobriety taste (walking a straight line or something similar) and felt the cop was just harassing him by demanding he take the breathalyzer.

I'd have to look it up to see why but basically they dropped the charges against him completely except for the failure to take the breathalyzer.

I guess my point is ESPN in particular keeps throwing that stuff in instead of just dealing with the current charge which is bad enough IMHO. No matter what Taylor comes out of this looking like an idiot.

 

[Redheart]

... because he had already passed the field sobriety taste (walking a straight line or something similar) and felt the cop was just harassing him by demanding he take the breathalyzer...

That is a good one.

The cop is the judge if someone "passes" the field-sobriety test; they look for certain well-defined body responses, or lack of. If the cop wanted a breathalyzer test, it was because Taylor failed the field-sobriety test first and now the cop was after evidence that would convict.

I think Taylor knew that and knew he was DUI. He did just what a lawyer would tell him to do, refuse the test and take the loss of your licence. They had to drop the charges because there was no evidence that would convict...

Translation: Millionaire-Slimeball driving DUI gets away with it.

No matter what, Taylor is an idiot.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

That is a good one.

The cop is the judge if someone "passes" the field-sobriety test; they look for certain well-defined body responses, or lack of. If the cop wanted a breathalyzer test, it was because Taylor failed the field-sobriety test first and now the cop was after evidence that would convict.

I think Taylor knew that and knew he was DUI. He did just what a lawyer would tell him to do, refuse the test and take the loss of your licence. They had to drop the charges because there was no evidence that would convict...

Translation: Millionaire-Slimeball driving DUI gets away with it.

No matter what, Taylor is an idiot.

Given the same circumstances, and what you know: What would you do differently from the "Millionaire-Slimeball driving DUI"?

 

[Redheart]

Given the same circumstances, and what you know: What would you do differently from the "Millionaire-Slimeball driving DUI"?

You bet!

I would be riding in a Limo, cleaning my shot-gun.

 

[Russ Smith]

That is a good one.

The cop is the judge if someone "passes" the field-sobriety test; they look for certain well-defined body responses, or lack of. If the cop wanted a breathalyzer test, it was because Taylor failed the field-sobriety test first and now the cop was after evidence that would convict.

I think Taylor knew that and knew he was DUI. He did just what a lawyer would tell him to do, refuse the test and take the loss of your licence. They had to drop the charges because there was no evidence that would convict...

Translation: Millionaire-Slimeball driving DUI gets away with it.

No matter what, Taylor is an idiot.

Shane can correct me if I'm wrong but you don't even have to FAIL a test to be cited. In fact you can PASS a breathalyzer and still be cited if in the eyes of the police, you are driving impaired.

I just read the Washington Times article on the acquittal. what it says is Taylor was going 83 in a 55 zone when pulled over. The cop immediately suspected he had been drinking because he said he smelled alcohol so he asked Taylor to take the breathalyzer, and Taylor refused and then took 6 field sobriety tests. The video of the tests was shown during the trial and based on it, Taylor was acquitted since the judge ruled that in "most" of the tests Taylor showed no signs of being impaired. The worst test was Taylor leaving out j, m and n while doing the alphabet(sounds stupid but I'm betting a lot of NFL players can't recite the alphabet).

Taylor claimed the cop had not read him the long version of the breathalyzer test that explained if he refused it, he'd lose his license for a year, the judge sided with the cop that although it wasn't audible(on camera mounted in cop car) that it took enough time that he believed Taylor was aware of the implication of refusing, and simply had "selective memory". Several of taylor's teammates were on hand but only Laveraneus Coles testified because shortly after his testimony the judge ruled from the video to dismiss the charges.

Coles testified that he saw Taylor at the club and said he didn't smell of alcohol and he'd not seen Taylor drinking at all that night. Taylor was stopped less than an hour after the last time Coles testified he'd talked to him. That testimony, and the video, was enough for the judge to rule that Taylor was not impaired.

Taylor's lawyer said they would appeal the breathalyzer but I don't know if they really did. His lawyer was quoted as saying that Taylor didn't understand that refusing to take the test was a citation and loss of license, and he didn't take it because it was clear from the way the cop was talking to him, that he'd already decided taylor was drunk. He did the field sobriety tests because the cop told himfailure to do them was an offense. Do I believe everything Taylor said, no, do I believe a cop pulling over a 21 year old early in the morning going nearly 30 MPH over the speed limit might decide he's drunk before he's even done anything to show that he is(Beyond speeding which many of us do sober every day), of course I believe that.

Maybe he did pay someone off or maybe his teammates did decide to lie under oath and say he hadn't been drinking, but a judge made the final decision based on the video of the sobriety tests. maybe the judge is a Redskin fan, I don't know and neither does anybody else.

I should upfront admit that the reason this bothers me is not that I like Taylor as a player, but that I myself have been subject to (as a passenger) watching a friend be pulled over for suspicion of DUI and treated as completely guilty when I knew for a fact she hadn't had a drink all night. She passed 3 sobriety tests and a breathalyzer, the cop eventually let us go but demanded that I drive because he still felt she shouldn't be driving. In her case she was driving too slowly which I guess is a really common sign of DUI, but that's just how she drives, she drives slow in broad daylight too. So i can certainly believe that it is possible Taylor was innocent, but as long as ESPN and others keep bringing it up, more and more people will just assume he was guilty of the DUI too.

 

[Redheart]

Shane can correct me if I'm wrong but you don't even have to FAIL a test to be cited. In fact you can PASS a breathalyzer and still be cited if in the eyes of the police, you are driving impaired.

I just read the Washington Times article on the acquittal. what it says is Taylor was going 83 in a 55 zone when pulled over. The cop immediately suspected he had been drinking because he said he smelled alcohol so he asked Taylor to take the breathalyzer, and Taylor refused and then took 6 field sobriety tests. The video of the tests was shown during the trial and based on it, Taylor was acquitted since the judge ruled that in "most" of the tests Taylor showed no signs of being impaired. The worst test was Taylor leaving out j, m and n while doing the alphabet(sounds stupid but I'm betting a lot of NFL players can't recite the alphabet).

Taylor claimed the cop had not read him the long version of the breathalyzer test that explained if he refused it, he'd lose his license for a year, the judge sided with the cop that although it wasn't audible(on camera mounted in cop car) that it took enough time that he believed Taylor was aware of the implication of refusing, and simply had "selective memory". Several of taylor's teammates were on hand but only Laveraneus Coles testified because shortly after his testimony the judge ruled from the video to dismiss the charges.

Coles testified that he saw Taylor at the club and said he didn't smell of alcohol and he'd not seen Taylor drinking at all that night. Taylor was stopped less than an hour after the last time Coles testified he'd talked to him. That testimony, and the video, was enough for the judge to rule that Taylor was not impaired.

Taylor's lawyer said they would appeal the breathalyzer but I don't know if they really did. His lawyer was quoted as saying that Taylor didn't understand that refusing to take the test was a citation and loss of license, and he didn't take it because it was clear from the way the cop was talking to him, that he'd already decided taylor was drunk. He did the field sobriety tests because the cop told himfailure to do them was an offense. Do I believe everything Taylor said, no, do I believe a cop pulling over a 21 year old early in the morning going nearly 30 MPH over the speed limit might decide he's drunk before he's even done anything to show that he is(Beyond speeding which many of us do sober every day), of course I believe that.

Maybe he did pay someone off or maybe his teammates did decide to lie under oath and say he hadn't been drinking, but a judge made the final decision based on the video of the sobriety tests. maybe the judge is a Redskin fan, I don't know and neither does anybody else.

I should upfront admit that the reason this bothers me is not that I like Taylor as a player, but that I myself have been subject to (as a passenger) watching a friend be pulled over for suspicion of DUI and treated as completely guilty when I knew for a fact she hadn't had a drink all night. She passed 3 sobriety tests and a breathalyzer, the cop eventually let us go but demanded that I drive because he still felt she shouldn't be driving. In her case she was driving too slowly which I guess is a really common sign of DUI, but that's just how she drives, she drives slow in broad daylight too. So i can certainly believe that it is possible Taylor was innocent, but as long as ESPN and others keep bringing it up, more and more people will just assume he was guilty of the DUI too.

I see. It's maybe a little bit of both the cop and Taylor.

So...why didn't Taylor just take the breathalizer, again? That is the key question, isn't. Field-sobriety tests are based on judgement, the breathalizer is definitive.

Common sense tells you Taylor was DUI and ESPN keeps bringing it up because it further shows the behavior and character of this millionaire.

 

[jmr667]

Shane can correct me if I'm wrong but you don't even have to FAIL a test to be cited. In fact you can PASS a breathalyzer and still be cited if in the eyes of the police, you are driving impaired.

.

Most states have 2 different laws. One for DWI (Driving While Intoxicated) which carries severe penalties and requires proof of a blood alcohol content higher than some legal limit. The other law is DUI (Driving Under the Influence) which is typically less severe penalties (loss of license instead of jail time). A person can be sited for DUI anytime a police officer believes they are in an impaired state due to alcohol or drugs (even prescription or over-the-counter medication).
To keep people from refusing the breathalyzer or blood tests for DWI to get off with ONLY the DUI some states have made it illegal to refuse the breathalyzer test.

See what happens when you get too many traffic tickets and have to take too many defensive driving courses? You end up with all this kind of knowledge stuck in yer brain.

 

[Russ Smith]

I see. It's maybe a little bit of both the cop and Taylor.

So...why didn't Taylor just take the breathalizer, again? That is the key question, isn't. Field-sobriety tests are based on judgement, the breathalizer is definitive.

Common sense tells you Taylor was DUI and ESPN keeps bringing it up because it further shows the behavior and character of this millionaire.

Taylor's story is he wasn't told that refusing the breathalyzer was going to result in an offense and lost of license. Since he was convinced the cop already thought he was drunk, he refused to blow. Remember as Wally has already told us, taylor's dad is a police chief in Florida, which is probably why the judge ruled that he didn't believe Taylor wasn't aware of the implications of refusing. But it's quite possible that Taylor felt there was no advantage to taking the test, I have no idea if I weren't drunk I'd certainly take it. That's precisely what I advised my friend to do that night she hadn't been drinking so I told her just cooperate. What scared me that night is I know for a fact if I had not been there, she'd have spent the night in jail because he only let her go because I was there and able to drive home. Had I not been there she's have spent the night in jail for drinking bottled water in a casino (thunder valley) for 3 hours. My personal theory is we were in a casino, everyone drinking and smoking, the cop smelled "party" on her and just refused to believe she was telling the truth.

Taylor passed the field sobriety tests to the judges satisfaction, but the cop that pulled him over arrested him saying he FAILED the tests. Now if it had been me, at that point if I was innocent, I'd have demanded to take the breathalyzer since as you said there's no bias involved in that test.

the judge used the tape from the arresting cop's car camera and decided that the cop was incorrect in citing Taylor and dismissed all charges except refusing the breathalyzer.

 

[Southpaw]

Why would you refuse a breathalizer unless you had been drinking?

Cardinal Mike!!

because it is an invasion of your privacy if you have or have not been drinking and any competent lawyer will tell you not to blow no matter what your condition.

 

[Southpaw]

Posted on Sun, Jun. 26, 2005

IN MY OPINION

Away from UM, Hurricanes are a furious storm

DAN LE BATARD

[email protected]

Mike Doss fires a gun outside a nightclub. It is not a reflection on Ohio State.

Onterrio Smith loses a year for dehydrated urine and a Whizzinator. It is not a reflection on Oregon.

Jason Williams wrecks a motorcycle and his career. It is not a reflection on Duke.

So why is it that the University of Miami gets smeared for the transgressions of its former footballers?

Is UM coach Larry Coker supposed to be a babysitter several years after they leave college, too?

Redskins safety Sean Taylor is a lunatic. Clinton Portis calls him the craziest Hurricane in program history -- quite a distinguished list, that one -- and Portis is hardly alone in nominating him. So the surprise isn't that Taylor faces three prison years for trying to solve his problems with gun waving. The surprise is that he never had a public incident of any kind under Coker's watch.

Kellen Winslow II did something stupid. Makes sense that the same things that help make him a good football player -- fearlessness, recklessness, insanity -- would seep into other parts of his personality and push him toward motorcycle stunts. But it was still stupid, and Stupidity was not Winslow's major at UM. Why does he get to be the poster child for UM post-graduate behavior more than, say, Ken Dorsey or Jonathan Vilma or Ed Reed or Vince Wilfork?

IS IT JEALOUSY?

Part of it is because success breeds jealousy. Part of it is because Miami's past is littered with soul-selling. Part of it is because UM's football culture gives birth to swashbuckling pirates, and that swagger works better in the end zone than it does in the nightclubs. And part of it is because Miami has more high-profile players in the NFL than any other school, and some of them are bound to get in trouble.

Terrell Owens, for example, might be more of a reflection on Chattanooga if the school were producing baby T.O.'s by factory line. Miami, remember, unleashed an unprecedented number of first-round picks on the NFL in a recent three-year span. All over NFL Sundays, you have Reggie Waynes running patterns against Phillip Buchanons, then talking about the VIP room at Club B.E.D. while walking back to their huddles in the third quarter.

This is a savage sport played by savage men. Some parts of you have to be a little off to make your living surviving collisions. It is a lifestyle filled with violence and rage and irrationality, and drinking and drugging to numb those things. It is unreasonable to expect all that stuff to remain neatly within those yard markers without ever spilling over into a place where police have to handcuff it.

So, given how many UM players have gone pro, some of them are going to stray. It is a mathematical inevitability. Look at how much criminal history and aberrant behavior just the Dolphins have in their huddle. But it isn't fair for Ohio State to get a pass on Doss or Duke to get one on Williams when they did essentially the same things that now have Taylor and Winslow smearing UM.

CONTROL UNDER COKER

Actually, it is astounding that UM has had so little public embarrassment under Coker, with Antrel Rolle's bogus arrest and Andre Johnson's term-paper shenanigans being the biggest public relations hits while any of these athletes were in school. Jeremy Shockey and Portis were wild children at UM, but everything that surrounded them in the huddle, like the quiet leadership and passion of Reed, kept that part of them muted until they arrived at the comparative freedom of the pros.

USC might become the new UM, but the Hurricane culture remains staggering and unlike anything else in college football. Vince Wilfork and Jonathan Vilma and D.J. Williams and Andre Johnson and Ray Lewis all say they regret leaving school a year early, despite the financial windfall, because the pros were so cold compared to what they had in college. And now many of those Hurricanes are getting in yet more trouble for gravitating back toward that now for workouts on campus.

There is a growing list of UM players like Shockey and Taylor and Willis McGahee and Edgerrin James skipping ''voluntary'' workouts so they can work out with former Canes at UM. It gives the impression that Miami's selfish guys aren't team players. But there's a perfectly valid explanation for that: Santana Moss says the UM offseason workouts are harder than anything he has ever seen in the pros.

STORM LIKE NO OTHER

Still, this gets them in trouble with their current employers, and creates more of that UM-against-the-world divisiveness. Makes sense that dictator coaches paying these guys millions would want them to work out with, you know, fellow employees. But the Hurricanes are a storm like no other, all lightning and thunder, a combination of huge wind and huge wins, and that storm moves at its own pace and on its own path, without possibility of containment.

All we can do is watch it move across the NFL with open-mouthed awe.

And hope no one gets hurt.

 

[Russ Smith]

What did Taylor do to get the craziest guy in UM history tag?

 

[Southpaw]

According to the police report, Taylor drove his blue 2005 Yukon Denali sport utility vehicle with Caughman into West Perrine, a high-crime neighborhood just south of downtown Miami. Several friends trailed in another car. Taylor believed that two men from the area had stolen his two ATVs, each worth roughly $7,000.

Police said Taylor got out of the car after spotting the men in front of one of their homes and pointed a handgun while demanding his ATVs. No shots were fired, police said. Taylor returned 10 minutes later with more friends, police said. This time, Taylor got out of the car and hit one of the individuals, Ryan Hill, 21, with his fist while Caughman chased another person with a bat, the police report said. After a tussle, Taylor and his group again left the scene, police said.

They went to a home owned by the mother of one of Taylor's friends, where Taylor had been parking his ATVs. A few minutes later, several shots were fired into the home and at the two cars -- including Taylor's Denali -- parked outside, according to people involved in the case who requested anonymity because a police report on this incident hasn't been filed. No one was hurt. Police retrieved shell casings from at least two different weapons, but no arrests have been made. Police consider the shooting a separate investigation.

Carhart said the shooting would be a key part of Taylor's defense.

"They are just blowing smoke when they say that they are still investigating the other case," Carhart said. "I am confident the state attorney's office hasn't seen all the witnesses or examined all the evidence.

"There's every reason to believe the people who claim to be victims are the actual perpetrators of serious crimes. And the state had to choose one side or the other. Hopefully, [the decision] is not because of Sean Taylor's high profile."

 

[Russ Smith]

Interesting but it's also just as believable that Taylor and his group did what is alleged and then the victims retaliated and shot up his SUV.

I hope for Taylor's sake he's telling the truth, if he pointed the gun his career could be over before it really got started.

 

[Southpaw]

Something I've noticed as a common rationale for this type of behavior, is that it always seems to be the " bad neighborhood's fault". The people can't help it, it's the neighborhood.

 

[CorporalCardinal]

Something I've noticed as a common rationale for this type of behavior, is that it always seems to be the " bad neighborhood's fault". The people can't help it, it's the neighborhood.

That's no excuse, he knew what type of "bad neighborhood" it was, the fact is this guy is just an idiot. He put himself in a postion he shouldn't have been in and if he was my kid I'd be kicking his butt from here to jail.