Sean Taylor dies at age 24

[Skinsfan]

his own lawyer said they "proved" it in a court of law.... I'm certain you will come back with some good spin on that one, so I will go ahead an acknowledge that lawyers have a reputation for being as unsavory as criminals... that being said, the person that said ST pulled a gun on him has somewhere in the neighborhood of 6-10 convictions against him. So basically, its one guys word against another.... a hardened criminal's word versus a lawyers word.... both far from trustworthy i am sure... but lets consider this... no one can ever be found INNOCENT, technically.... to my knowledge, there are 3 possible RULINGS in a court of law.... GUILTY, NOT GUILTY, or DISMISSAL. To my mind, dismissal is the closest you can come to innocent.... That means even the prosecution doesnt think it has a case against the defendant.... and thats what happened with ST.

[Skinsfan]

Well, if Flyersfan's friend from his university days made a public statement that Flyersfan was quite fond of anal rape back a few years prior, one might reasonably speculate that the charges were dropped because of a botched prosecution, rather than "proof" that it didn't happen...particularly if several actual prosecutorial missteps were made.

Your first post was regarding racial slurs and the phrase "calling a spade a spade" which, as described by the historical narrative you provided , deals in facts and not speculation. Matter of fact, i would think "calling a spade a spade" would almost be the antithesis of speculation.

Let's then say that Person A makes such a reasonable speculation on an internet gambling forum. Then let's say Person B (who has never actually met Flyersfan and yet has some weird attachment to him) comes along, drops about seven F bombs in a post calling Person A a HOMOPHOBE, and rants on and on about the homophobic nature of his remarks.

I wonder why you guys are hung up on the "never have met" argument. It makes no sense to me. Virtually the entire DC Metro area is taking this very hard.... Now, I am not overly knowledgeable in psychiatry or whatever, but i would imagine that the fact that so many people are emotionally attached to this situation sort of refutes the idea that if you never personally met someone you shouldnt be upset... Who knows, perhaps you are just ahead of the times... I suppose the entire population of the United States should be chided for their dismay and depression they experienced when JFK was assassinated. I mean, how many people actually met and knew him?

I would think Person B is being more of a douchebag than Person A, but that's just me.

It goes without saying why you would think that.

[Mappo]

Your first link contains no information that demonstrates that it was "proven in a court of law" that no weapon was wielded, as you initially maintained. If you had bothered to read your own link, you would see that, if anything, it backs up what I said...which is that a plea agreement was reached, which is hardly "proof" that a weapon was not brandished by Taylor.

And nothing screams as an impartial source for truth like a paid advocate.

If the previous crowd of people that ST hung around with were fine, upstanding citizens, why did ST feel the need to withdraw from their friendships when he had his daughter? Why would Rolle have stated that this group had it "in" for ST and were targeting him and heavily implied that they may have had a hand in his murder? Obviously, Rolle never explicitly used the word "thug," but if you can't read between the lines in the below statement, you are either pretending to be dense or are, in actuality, quite dense.


Meanwhile, Rolle said, "This was not the first incident. They've been targeting him for three years now."

Rolle said many former "friends" had it in for Taylor, who was trying to build a more stable life. "He really didn't say too much," Rolle said, "but I know he lived his life pretty much scared every day of his life when he was down in Miami because those people were targeting him. At least, he's got peace now."

Rolle said he hadn't talked to Taylor in a while, and that the Redskin had withdrawn from the crowd he hung around with to build a new life with his girlfriend and young daughter.

"They say it was a burglary. It absolutely was not a burglary," he said. "Sean, he had a large group of friends, and he no longer hung out with those friends, so you never know where this came from."

Friend: Taylor's death not random burglary - The Boston Globe

[birdsfan5]

It's shameful how this discussion has turned. Regardless of the circumstances this is nothing but a terrible tragedy and should not be a cause for any hatred among people. Sean Taylor was a great football player, but the real tragedy here is not that he will no longer play the game but that he was taken from his newly born daughter. No matter who Taylor was involved with or what things he may have done in his past there is no doubt in my mind that his killing was of the most unjustifiable evil.

Please stop arguing amongst yourselves and show remorse and regret for his family, the circumstances again have no bearing on any of us and we should all be sorry for those that loved and cared for him. Of which there were many, I go to UM and have seen nothing but support for him and mostly for those survived by him. Please show some respect and leave all your grudges, differences, and petty name calling out of this.

Thank you.

your right no need to fight over this.

[Mappo]

The above reply was directed at your first post, not your next two, as I didn't see them.

One can be declared innocent of a charge, in fact, if one decides to make a case of it. However, if one desires to be declared innocent, the burden of proof then falls on you to prove your innocence (as opposed to guilty/not guilty, where the burden of proof falls on the prosecution).

Regardless, it was YOU who made the initial claim that ST was "proven in a court of law" as a "matter of public record" to have not wielded the gun. This is demonstrably false.

[Skinsfan]

First of all, to address the Rolle comments.... apparently, ST had not seen Rolle since college.... can't confirm that, but an anonymous Redskins was quoted on a local radio show making those comments... plus, his last remark "It absolutely was not a burglary" seems to be false, at least for the moment. By THEY he is obviously referring to the people who stole his ATV, and have not bothered him since.... and the person he got in an altercation with was a high school rival, not a friend or associate. Personally, I think Rolle is speculating.... never did he say the friends he withdrew from were bad influences. I use to have 5 very close friends.... we hung out virtually every day until I became engaged to my future wife... I removed myself from them.. because I had higher priorities.... doesn't mean they were bad people.... it's called LIFE it happens to everyone.

Actually, it does not back up you said.... a plea agreement was reached on simple battery and simple assault (for the fist fight), the AGGRAVATED ASSAULT was dropped..... AGGRAVATED means he used a weapon. Being that there is no such thing as being found INNOCENT in a court of law, I would say having the charged DROPPED is close enough. How is there merit in the charges when the prosecution goes from 46 years in prison to a slap on the wrist and probation?

As far as impartial sources go.... where is your source that he actually did pull a gun on someone?

[Skinsfan]

The above reply was directed at your first post, not your next two, as I didn't see them.

One can be declared innocent of a charge, in fact, if one decides to make a case of it. However, if one desires to be declared innocent, the burden of proof then falls on you to prove your innocence (as opposed to guilty/not guilty, where the burden of proof falls on the prosecution).

Regardless, it was YOU who made the initial claim that ST was "proven in a court of law" as a "matter of public record" to have not wielded the gun. This is demonstrably false.

The charge was dropped.... same thing bro... especially to me when i have 7-8 beers in me.... please dont be a hypocrit.... you mention reading between the lines and being dense... same applies to you.... you know EXACTLY what it means when the prosecution drops the charge....

I'm actually interested in this declaration of innocence.... you have a link?

[Mappo]

As to the emotional attachment thing, I don't think anyone here is claiming that having an emotional response of sadness to this situation is somehow inappropriate. In fact, many have stated that if player on the team that they rooted for died, they would also certainly feel sad.

That being said, I think making quick accusations of racism, dropping F bombs left and right, typing EVERY other WORD in ALL caps LIKE a MORON!!!!1111!!!1q11 in response to speculation as to the circumstances of ST's death demonstrates a bit of a strange and unhinged attachment.

[Skinsfan]

As to the emotional attachment thing, I don't think anyone here is claiming that having an emotional response of sadness to this situation is somehow inappropriate. In fact, many have stated that if player on the team that they rooted for died, they would also certainly feel sad.

That being said, I think making quick accusations of racism, dropping F bombs left and right, typing EVERY other WORD in ALL caps LIKE a MORON!!!!1111!!!1q11 in response to speculation as to the circumstances of ST's death demonstrates a bit of a strange and unhinged attachment.

I would think the same thing about someone who triples his post count responding to someone you consider to be nothing but a douchebag.... why even bother responding to me.

And it wasn't in response to speculation as to the circumstances... it was to those speculations being masked as fact. once again, the details.... you've got a great spin machine going... you should consider politics.

Heading out to lunch... would be more than glad to continue this later, but then again, I am a douchebag and you certainly wouldn't want to develop a strange and unhinged attachment.

[CuseFan10]

Skins - Thanks for the apology. I had no idea why you lashed out about me by "racist", but now I see you thought me using "to call a spade a spade" was racist. I certainly don't think of the phrase as such. In my own words, I look at it as meaning "let's look at something/someone as what it/they really is/are". I looked it up because I was curious, and the first three results that came up were adamant about the phrase not being racist. One said, "To speak plainly - to describe something as it really is." Which is what I meant.

Am I misinformed about Taylor? Maybe I very well could be, but it is my opinion that he was probably not the best of people and seems to have some ties to some bad people... That was simply all I meant. I also agree with I think Rothko, who brought up the point about his money and how it's easy to get please and out of your problems with high priced lawyers when you opposition has public defendants.

Good luck with your plays today. :thumbs:

[Nigel Tufnel]

Wow. Very intriguing thread here. I'm not going to pass judgment on ST until more time passes and more information comes to light...if it ever does. I would like to make a couple of friendly comments, however, based on my own experience and profession.

First, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Trying to change an opinion of someone who is resolute in their beliefs is an exercise in futility. Its my opinion that if an exchange of ideas results in people being called names and telling people to kill themselves, one's time should be spent on more worthwhile things.

Skins, I realize that you are very emotional right now and feel that a player on your favorite sports team is being victimized and unfairly judged. However, you have stated in this thread, "So many sheep here listen to ESPN's rants and ravings and don't actually know the truth..." Later in the thread, you post a favorable editorial on ST from whom? None other than ESPN. From experience, it is generally not a good idea to trash or undercut a source and then later use said source to back your position. I guess my question would be, so, are we sheep to follow ESPN rants or ravings or not? It seems that based on your feelings on this issue you are being selective in choosing which ESPN stories are rants and to ignored and which should be used to bolster your position. Your ESPN story paste means little to me since you posted we should all ignore ESPN and not be sheep. Are you a sheep now since you found an ESPN post that was favorable to ST?

As for ST's previous criminal dealings....well, from experience I can tell you one thing is for sure....proving someone committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt and whether or not someone actually did said crime are two very, very different things. Just because someone was found "not guilty" or a case was dismissed does not mean that they are "innocent." It simply means that the Prosecution was unable to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. (e.g. OJ Simpson can say that he was found "not guilty" of killing his wife and Mr. Goldman...he cannot, however, say that he was found to be "innocent.") Can all police and prosecutors be trusted? Hell, no. But more often than not, where there is smoke, there is fire. And I agree...if ST was "innocent" of the charges surrounding the facts from his felony trial, he had the money and means to fight the charges to the end for a complete dismissal. Instead, he chose to plead to a couple of Misdemeanor charges. "Innocent" people with money don't plead to charges when they are "innocent."

On a lighter note, I take exception to your comments on lawyers....you are an anti-attorneyite. LOL.

May ST rest in peace. When you are a celebrity, you get paid the big bucks and get perks unlike anyone else in the world. That's the pro of it. The con is that your life is placed under a microscope and people will have opinions about you, whether justified or not.

ST's little girl will live her life without knowing her father. At least she will live a comfortable life financially and will have access to things a lot of other people don't have. On the flipside, I agree with those who have brought up the young men and women who are dying every day in our military. There are young boys and girls who will never know their mother and father....and many of them are left with very little financially as a result of their parent's sacrifice and death.

The emotion of this will subside in time. Time is the great healer. As for what really happened? In the big picture, does it really matter? A life was lost and that is tragic. But fighting over opinions....well, you won't get any closure doing that.

[Skinsfan]

Wow. Very intriguing thread here. I'm not going to pass judgment on ST until more time passes and more information comes to light...if it ever does. I would like to make a couple of friendly comments, however, based on my own experience and profession.

First, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Trying to change an opinion of someone who is resolute in their beliefs is an exercise in futility. Its my opinion that if an exchange of ideas results in people being called names and telling people to kill themselves, one's time should be spent on more worthwhile things.

Skins, I realize that you are very emotional right now and feel that a player on your favorite sports team is being victimized and unfairly judged. However, you have stated in this thread, "So many sheep here listen to ESPN's rants and ravings and don't actually know the truth..." Later in the thread, you post a favorable editorial on ST from whom? None other than ESPN. From experience, it is generally not a good idea to trash or undercut a source and then later use said source to back your position. I guess my question would be, so, are we sheep to follow ESPN rants or ravings or not? It seems that based on your feelings on this issue you are being selective in choosing which ESPN stories are rants and to ignored and which should be used to bolster your position. Your ESPN story paste means little to me since you posted we should all ignore ESPN and not be sheep. Are you a sheep now since you found an ESPN post that was favorable to ST?

As for ST's previous criminal dealings....well, from experience I can tell you one thing is for sure....proving someone committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt and whether or not someone actually did said crime are two very, very different things. Just because someone was found "not guilty" or a case was dismissed does not mean that they are "innocent." It simply means that the Prosecution was unable to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. (e.g. OJ Simpson can say that he was found "not guilty" of killing his wife and Mr. Goldman...he cannot, however, say that he was found to be "innocent.") Can all police and prosecutors be trusted? Hell, no. But more often than not, where there is smoke, there is fire. And I agree...if ST was "innocent" of the charges surrounding the facts from his felony trial, he had the money and means to fight the charges to the end for a complete dismissal. Instead, he chose to plead to a couple of Misdemeanor charges. "Innocent" people with money don't plead to charges when they are "innocent."

On a lighter note, I take exception to your comments on lawyers....you are an anti-attorneyite. LOL.

May ST rest in peace. When you are a celebrity, you get paid the big bucks and get perks unlike anyone else in the world. That's the pro of it. The con is that your life is placed under a microscope and people will have opinions about you, whether justified or not.

ST's little girl will live her life without knowing her father. At least she will live a comfortable life financially and will have access to things a lot of other people don't have. On the flipside, I agree with those who have brought up the young men and women who are dying every day in our military. There are young boys and girls who will never know their mother and father....and many of them are left with very little financially as a result of their parent's sacrifice and death.

The emotion of this will subside in time. Time is the great healer. As for what really happened? In the big picture, does it really matter? A life was lost and that is tragic. But fighting over opinions....well, you won't get any closure doing that.

A couple of things:

1) Good post... you make many excellent points.
2) I really meant to say "listen to ESPN radio" but forgot to add the radio... hence the "listen"... specifically I was talking about Colin Cowherd (which i mentioned early in this thread i believe).
3) I guess you can argue both sides of the gun charge thing, but keep in mind that the plea was made in part to prevent ST from missing the 2006 football season. You don't think that innocent people plead to charges when the situation is right? I guess ST could have decided to go to trial and win outright, but the cost may have been part or ALL of his season.... which would have led to serious financial consequences... returning signing bonus... etc.... in the end, it's just an expected value equation he and his lawyer had to "figure" out. Considering ST was not overly concerned with his public image (I speculate here, but feel it is accurate based on ST's reluctance to do interviews), I can see how it was in his best interest to plead out to ensure he played football in 2006.

I guess my problem is this... one person with a criminal record a mile long accused ST of brandishing a weapon... which was never proven in a court of law... and everyone takes his word for it.

[Skinsfan]

Skins - Thanks for the apology. I had no idea why you lashed out about me by "racist", but now I see you thought me using "to call a spade a spade" was racist. I certainly don't think of the phrase as such. In my own words, I look at it as meaning "let's look at something/someone as what it/they really is/are". I looked it up because I was curious, and the first three results that came up were adamant about the phrase not being racist. One said, "To speak plainly - to describe something as it really is." Which is what I meant.

Am I misinformed about Taylor? Maybe I very well could be, but it is my opinion that he was probably not the best of people and seems to have some ties to some bad people... That was simply all I meant. I also agree with I think Rothko, who brought up the point about his money and how it's easy to get please and out of your problems with high priced lawyers when you opposition has public defendants.

Good luck with your plays today. :thumbs:

I can see how i was out of line, but i disagree with the spade comment.... if everyone is so adamant about it not being a racial slur, there must be a large group of people who feel it is. Plenty of racial and other slurs had no conotation to the slur when the word was originally created.... the word "***" comes to mind. But anyhow, neither here nor there.

I would like to point out that this guy did not have public defendants. It was the DA or whatever they call the prosecution down there, which would be involved in all criminal cases (I think you are confusing things with how a civil case works).

And... not sure here, but I believe that ST's lawyer was not high priced.... I believe he was the family lawyer from before the time ST went pro.... His father was a policeman so i can't imagine them being overly wealthy before ST went pro... but i don't know that for a fact.

[Shamrock]

"Shamrock, go kill yourself"

Classy....you're such a zero bro....you muct have more hormones running through your body than 10 pregnant chicks. What are you knitting today?

[Skinsfan]

"Shamrock, go kill yourself"

Classy....you're such a zero bro....you muct have more hormones running through your body than 10 pregnant chicks. What are you knitting today?

You are lecturing me on class? I made no comment to you and you direct this to me:

Hey Skinsfan, **** off.

Dude, get a ******* life.

Skinsfan, go **** yourself cuz