Sean Taylor's Murderer Gets 57.5 Years

Talk about the Washington Redskins here. Do you bleed burgundy and gold?
Fire in the Sky
Posts: 4729
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 7:31 am
Location: Surfside

Sean Taylor's Murderer Gets 57.5 Years

Postby SkinsFreak » Thu Jan 23, 2014 5:19 pm

The man convicted of murder in the 2007 shooting death of Sean Taylor in Miami was sentenced Thursday.

Eric Rivera, 23, was sentenced to 57.5 years in state prison following his conviction in November on second-degree murder and armed burglary charges.

"I'm truly sorry for your loss," Rivera told Taylor's family member's Thursday in court.

Taylor, 24, who was a Pro Bowl safety for the Washington Redskins and former University of Miami star, died from the injuries he received in the botched invasion of his home in November 2007.

Rivera admitted in a videotaped confession to police days after Taylor's death that he fired the fatal shot after kicking in the bedroom door.

In the confession, Rivera said the group of five young men, all from the Fort Myers area, had driven to Taylor's house planning to steal large amounts of cash he kept inside. They thought Taylor would be out of town at a game against Tampa Bay, but didn't realize until it was too late that he was home with a knee injury.

Taylor's then-girlfriend, Jackie Garcia Haley, and their 18-month-old daughter were also home at the time. They were not hurt.

Four other men were also charged in the case and three will be tried later. Venjah Hunte, 25, pleaded guilty to second-degree murder and burglary charges in a deal that calls for a 29-year prison sentence.

Rivera, who testified in his own defense at his trial, claimed it was Hunte who brought the 9mm handgun and who shot Taylor. Rivera insisted that he was not told about the burglary plot until the group was driving across Alligator Alley toward Miami, and that he stayed in the car outside Taylor's house the whole time.

The murder weapon was never found. Police say it was stuffed in a sock and thrown into the Everglades.

Taylor was shot in the upper thigh, damaging his femoral artery and causing massive blood loss. Witnesses say Taylor was shot when he confronted the group with a machete outside his bedroom. A medical examiner said he was essentially dead on arrival at a hospital on Nov. 26, 2007, although doctors did manage to restart his heart for a while.

Aside from Rivera's confession, police found shoe prints outside Taylor's home that matched sneakers some in the group were wearing that night. Witnesses testified Rivera was seen driving a rented black Toyota Highlander believed used in the crime, and another witness said the group of five had burglary tools when they came to her house after Taylor was shot.

Taylor, a first-round Redskins draft pick in 2004, signed an $18 million contract with the team and was becoming one of the NFL's top defensive players when he was slain. Several witnesses, including Garcia Haley, testified that he liked to keep large amounts of cash around his Miami house.

One of the men charged in the slaying, 25-year-old Jason Mitchell, attended a birthday party a few weeks earlier at the house for Taylor's half-sister, Sasha Johnson — who lived in Fort Myers and knew Rivera. She testified that Taylor gave her a purse containing $10,000 in cash at the party, which was witnessed by all the guests.

That event put the wheels in motion for the burglary plot, witnesses said. Rivera himself testified that some in the group thought they would get between $100,000 and $200,000 to split up.

Also charged and awaiting trial are Mitchell, Charles Wardlow, 24, and Timothy Brown, 22.


http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/Eric-Rivera-Man-Convicted-in-Murder-of-Sean-Taylor-to-Be-Sentenced-241623561.html

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10340041/man-gets-57-years-prison-sean-taylor-death

This has been big news here in South Florida. Today's sentencing has been leading the news all day. I still can't believe he didn't get charged with 1st degree murder. He was 17 when he killed Sean, so he'll be almost 75 years old when he's eligible for parole. C'ya!

cleg
Posts: 2635
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 10:58 am
Location: Deep in the Heart of Giants Territory

Re: Sean Taylor's Murderer Gets 57.5 Years

Postby cleg » Thu Jan 23, 2014 7:06 pm

It is just sad all the way around. In no means do I think the sentence is too light or severe but what bothers me is that ST was such a young man and he was killed so senselessly. The people involved I am sure had not intention of killing anyone but they did and have to live with the consequences. What scares me as I have kids rapidly approaching the age of these guys and thinking back on my youth - stupid kids. Lots of lives ruined. Just a shame all the way around.
Drinking the Kool-Aid again...

|||
Posts: 4306
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:34 am
Location: SANTA ANA,CA

Re: Sean Taylor's Murderer Gets 57.5 Years

Postby HEROHAMO » Fri Jan 31, 2014 8:22 am

The way I dealt with this is. I know he died protecting his family. So thats got to get you a ticket to heaven. I am also glad that his daughter and wife were not harmed. We all are going to die one day anyhow. I always think of what could of been. But hey I have accepted it. Yup I just accept that he is in heaven now. He gave it his best when he was here. Thats all anyone could ever ask for. Anyhow may justice be served. I hope we can get a saftey who can play at least half as good as ST was.
Sean Taylor starting free safety Heavens team!

21 Forever

"The show must go on."

the 'mudge
Posts: 14330
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 10:15 pm
Location: Curmudgeon Corner, Maine

Re: Sean Taylor's Murderer Gets 57.5 Years

Postby Countertrey » Fri Jan 31, 2014 5:44 pm

Eric Rivera is still breathing.


That sucks.
"That's a clown question, bro"
- - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman
"But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man
That he didn't, didn't already have"
- - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1925
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 2:36 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Sean Taylor's Murderer Gets 57.5 Years

Postby emoses14 » Sat Feb 01, 2014 7:14 am

Countertrey wrote:Eric Rivera is still breathing.


That sucks.

You know, in the right circumstances (e.g. Premeditation, serial killing, child murder 1, etc.), I am on board with an eye for an eye. But I have to believe that punishment is to be reserved for only the most heinous of crimes. Despite the pain caused by Taylor's homicide, I think it is painfully clear that his death was unintentional. It doesn't bring him back or make it any easier to accept, but it matters for the guilty men's sentencing, to me. Sean was shot in the leg when the low lifes there to rob him were surprised by his presence during a burglary. That his femoral was shot is just maddening. I don't defend their actions, but putting the shooter to death in these circumstances doesn't seem warranted, however desired it may be.
I know he got a pretty good zip on the ball. He has a quick release. . . once I seen a coupla' throws, I was just like 'Yeah, he's that dude.'"

-Santana Moss on Our QB

the 'mudge
Posts: 14330
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 10:15 pm
Location: Curmudgeon Corner, Maine

Re: Sean Taylor's Murderer Gets 57.5 Years

Postby Countertrey » Sat Feb 01, 2014 2:11 pm

emoses14 wrote:
Countertrey wrote:Eric Rivera is still breathing.


That sucks.

You know, in the right circumstances (e.g. Premeditation, serial killing, child murder 1, etc.), I am on board with an eye for an eye. But I have to believe that punishment is to be reserved for only the most heinous of crimes. Despite the pain caused by Taylor's homicide, I think it is painfully clear that his death was unintentional. It doesn't bring him back or make it any easier to accept, but it matters for the guilty men's sentencing, to me. Sean was shot in the leg when the low lifes there to rob him were surprised by his presence during a burglary. That his femoral was shot is just maddening. I don't defend their actions, but putting the shooter to death in these circumstances doesn't seem warranted, however desired it may be.
Unintended... bs.

Why would you bring a gun to rob a house that you believe was unoccupied?
Why would you bring a gun to commit any crime in which you don't intend to use it?
Why would you pull the gun when you realize that the house is, in fact, occupied?
Why would you point the gun if you do not understand the implications?
Why would you pull the trigger?

BS.
If you carry, and pull a gun in the commission of a crime, you know what you are doing.

Taylor no longer lives.
This POS does.
That is NOT justice.

Eric Rivera still breathes.

That sucks.
"That's a clown question, bro"
- - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman
"But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man
That he didn't, didn't already have"
- - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1004
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 8:56 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Sean Taylor's Murderer Gets 57.5 Years

Postby Hooligan » Sat Feb 01, 2014 2:41 pm

Unintentional? He decided to bring a gun, then pointed it at someone and pulled the trigger! How is that in any way unintentional?
"Even a stopped clock is right twice a day."

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1925
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 2:36 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Sean Taylor's Murderer Gets 57.5 Years

Postby emoses14 » Sat Feb 01, 2014 11:47 pm

Because having a gun, shooting someone and killing them are not the same thing? Intending to shoot a person and intending to kill them, also not the same thing. Is this really a question?

Killing a person isn't the only reason a person has or carries a gun, whether to the commission of a crime or otherwise. Pulling the trigger does not equal intent to kill, certainly not pre meditation to kill. This pos deserves every minute of his sentence. My only point was that I don't agree he should get the death penalty. Even though it was a homicide during the commission of a felony.

Sean Taylor, son, father, human being is dead. That sucks.
Last edited by emoses14 on Sun Feb 02, 2014 12:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
I know he got a pretty good zip on the ball. He has a quick release. . . once I seen a coupla' throws, I was just like 'Yeah, he's that dude.'"

-Santana Moss on Our QB

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1004
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 8:56 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Sean Taylor's Murderer Gets 57.5 Years

Postby Hooligan » Sat Feb 01, 2014 11:56 pm

emoses14 wrote:Because having a gun, shooting someone and killing them are not the same thing? Intending to shoot a person and intending to kill them, also not the same thing. Is this really a question?


He chose to bring a lethal weapon, not pepper spray or a taser, then made the decision to use that deadly weapon against another person. I wouldn't run someone over with my car with the intent of just wounding them, then throw my hands up and say "I didn't mean to kill him!".
"Even a stopped clock is right twice a day."

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1925
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 2:36 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Sean Taylor's Murderer Gets 57.5 Years

Postby emoses14 » Sun Feb 02, 2014 12:12 am

Hooligan wrote:
emoses14 wrote:Because having a gun, shooting someone and killing them are not the same thing? Intending to shoot a person and intending to kill them, also not the same thing. Is this really a question?


He chose to bring a lethal weapon, not pepper spray or a taser, then made the decision to use that deadly weapon against another person. I wouldn't run someone over with my car with the intent of just wounding them, then throw my hands up and say "I didn't mean to kill him!".


Yes you would. If your intent was to wound them and you actually killed them, you absolutely would. Your analogy fails only because you don't specify whether you were driving 10mph or 60. Which is relevant to the use if the gun in this case. If this pos shot Sean in the head or even chest, the inference of intent is stronger, if it wasn't the case that Sean wasn't supposed to be in that home, you might infer intent. But having the gun, using it and shooting Sean in the leg doesn't get the intent to kill. It's not that black and white, unfortunately. Just like your hitting a guy with your car doesn't mean you meant them dead, your speed, distance from which you began the run down, etc. factor in. It isn't. . . Wait this is off my initial point.

I only believe that Sean's death was premeditated or intended, the burglary was. As a result I was responding to CT's point that it sucked the dude was still breathing, without actually disagreeing that it sucked.
I know he got a pretty good zip on the ball. He has a quick release. . . once I seen a coupla' throws, I was just like 'Yeah, he's that dude.'"

-Santana Moss on Our QB

the 'mudge
Posts: 14330
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 10:15 pm
Location: Curmudgeon Corner, Maine

Re: Sean Taylor's Murderer Gets 57.5 Years

Postby Countertrey » Sun Feb 02, 2014 3:51 pm

emoses14 wrote:Because having a gun, shooting someone and killing them are not the same thing? Intending to shoot a person and intending to kill them, also not the same thing. Is this really a question?.

No... it is not a question... the purpose of a gun is to KILL Pulling the trigger of a gun while pointing it at someone is EXTREMELY likely to result in their death. If you do not intend to KILL... you do not carry the gun in the commission of a crime. Crime+Gun+Shoot= KILL= INTENT. The consequence should be death.
He should die...

He won't...


That sucks.

When I was a soldier, I knew that, if I had to pull the trigger... my intent was to ensure that whomever I was aiming at would NEVER shoot back. I worked as a cop for a few years... my thinking was the same. If I pull the trigger, my intent is to shoot center of mass. In fact... if I EVER point a fire arm at an individual, if it's necessary for me to pull the trigger... I am aiming at center mass... every time. No one shoots to wound... period.

If you carry a gun, and have not considered this... then you are an idiot... and must be held to the highest standard... kill someone in the commission of a crime... you should die... REGARDLESS the weapon used. You had no right to be there... you had no right to be taking the actions you were taking... you had no claim of self-defense... you took a life... you pay. PERIOD.

Only someone whom believes movies are real would consider "aiming" at a leg or an arm as a viable "strategy"... or would consider it to mitigate the actions of a criminal with a gun.

The possibility that an idiot did not consider that likelihood does not mitigate the consequences for the target...yet you think that somehow it mitigates the responsibility of the shooter... what crap.

Criminals of this type are stupid... but they know that pulling the trigger kills. I, on the other hand, am NOT stupid, and am not going to buy any attempt to convince me that it is possible to NOT know that shooting someone is very likely to kill him.

Hopefully, the MURDERERS (all of them) he will encounter a large, angry, sexually frustrated, Sean Taylor fan, and spent the next 50 years as his "companion".
"That's a clown question, bro"
- - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman
"But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man
That he didn't, didn't already have"
- - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America

DarthMonk
Online
Posts: 4221
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 4:58 pm

Re: Sean Taylor's Murderer Gets 57.5 Years

Postby DarthMonk » Sun Feb 02, 2014 4:01 pm

emoses14 wrote:
Hooligan wrote:
emoses14 wrote:Because having a gun, shooting someone and killing them are not the same thing? Intending to shoot a person and intending to kill them, also not the same thing. Is this really a question?


He chose to bring a lethal weapon, not pepper spray or a taser, then made the decision to use that deadly weapon against another person. I wouldn't run someone over with my car with the intent of just wounding them, then throw my hands up and say "I didn't mean to kill him!".


Yes you would. If your intent was to wound them and you actually killed them, you absolutely would. Your analogy fails only because you don't specify whether you were driving 10mph or 60. Which is relevant to the use if the gun in this case. If this pos shot Sean in the head or even chest, the inference of intent is stronger, if it wasn't the case that Sean wasn't supposed to be in that home, you might infer intent. But having the gun, using it and shooting Sean in the leg doesn't get the intent to kill. It's not that black and white, unfortunately. Just like your hitting a guy with your car doesn't mean you meant them dead, your speed, distance from which you began the run down, etc. factor in. It isn't. . . Wait this is off my initial point.

I only believe that Sean's death was premeditated or intended, the burglary was. As a result I was responding to CT's point that it sucked the dude was still breathing, without actually disagreeing that it sucked.


I understood you. I respect that you went out on a bit of a limb - especially as beloved as ST is around here. I thought you explained yourself well. I think your next-to-last sentence has a small typo. You probably wanted a "not" somewhere in it.
Hog Bowl III, V Champion (2011, 2013)

Hognostication Champion (2011, 2013)


Scalp 'em, Swamp 'em,
We will take 'em big score!
Read 'em, Weep 'em Touchdown,
We want heap more!

the 'mudge
Posts: 14330
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 10:15 pm
Location: Curmudgeon Corner, Maine

Re: Sean Taylor's Murderer Gets 57.5 Years

Postby Countertrey » Sun Feb 02, 2014 5:41 pm

BTW... my response would be the same... whether a beloved football player, or a minimum wage grocery bagger.
A death that results from the commission of a felony should result in the maximum penalty available...
The death penalty is available in Fla... and should have been invoked. The use of the handgun in the commission of this particular felony was all I need to prove intent.
"That's a clown question, bro"
- - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman
"But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man
That he didn't, didn't already have"
- - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America

Skins History Buff
Posts: 4836
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2004 5:36 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: Sean Taylor's Murderer Gets 57.5 Years

Postby welch » Sun Feb 02, 2014 6:49 pm

Countertrey wrote:BTW... my response would be the same... whether a beloved football player, or a minimum wage grocery bagger.
A death that results from the commission of a felony should result in the maximum penalty available...
The death penalty is available in Fla... and should have been invoked. The use of the handgun in the commission of this particular felony was all I need to prove intent.


I lean toward the death penalty for serial killers and contract killers, on grounds that they have no connection to human society. Many other killings are spur of the moment, thoughtless, bursts of anger. The principle would be that we don't want to share oxygen with someone who kills a stranger for payment, or who is a sociopath, but the death penalty is no deterrant to someone who has lost his temper -- in that instant.

Killing during the commission of a crime, though...this required taking a lethal weapon to the burglary. It involved saying, essentially, "give me the money or I will kill you". The threat to kill is, I'd judge, the same as intent to kill. [For the college students here, I borrowed the last thought from Thomas Hobbes, "Leviathan"]. Thought-out. Calculated. Not much mitigation.

If there is some scale of guilt in this, I might be persuaded that someone who sat in the car while others went into Taylor's house might be less guilty than the person who shot Taylor. Given that five people conspired to commit the crime and that each seems to claim "I was just a bystander", it seems impossible to determine who did what.

Conclusion: all are equally guilty.

Return to Hog Wash - Washington Redskins Football