L.T. to plead not guilty on Tuesday

Hall of Fame linebacker Lawrence Taylor, who faces multiple charges stemming from an encounter with an underage prostitute, will appear in court on Tuesday for his arraignment.

As we all learned from Joe Pesci’s exchange with Herman Munster, there are only two possible answers:  guilty or absolutely, 100 percent not guilty.

Taylor will choose the latter, as every defendant who has not worked out a plea deal with the prosecution always does.

“I am saying that he did not have sexual intercourse, as it’s defined in
the penal law, with this person,” lawyer Arthur Aidala told Jane McManus of ESPNNewYork.com.

Taylor’s defense apparently will be based on the notion that, while he paid $300 to the 16-year-old runaway-turned-prostitute, there was no intercourse or sexual contact.  Instead, Taylor will attempt to create reasonable doubt based on the notion that he voluntarily exited The Contest.

On the surface, it may seem like a major stretch, especially since Aidala conceded early on that there was contact between Taylor and the girl.  In a radio interview with WFAN’s Mike Francesa, Aidala said, “The evidence is gonna show that there was some contact between the two
and that they did not have sex
.”  Aidala then clarified that by “sex”
he meant intercourse.

As we thereafter explained, other types of non-intercourse sex could get Taylor convicted of a felony.

Still, keep in mind that, despite a mountain range of evidence pointing to O.J. Simpson’s guilt in 1995, the end result was that, in the eyes of the justice system, he was absolutely, 100 percent not guilty.  So there’s hope for Taylor — he doesn’t need to prove conclusively that no sex occurred.  He needs only to raise a reasonable doubt.

13 responses to “L.T. to plead not guilty on Tuesday

  1. as cheech and chong used to say… “your honor, I plead insanity. I was just crazy about that girl”

  2. Given Taylor’s precarious financial position there is no way he can present an “OJ” level defense.
    And don’t think the prosecution doesn’t know that….

  3. Florio, I warned you, but you wouldn’t listen. Yesterday I told you that there was no Michael Vick posts ready to move onto the first page because the last one was at the end.
    Did you listen? NO!! and now, you see what you get.
    You wanted it this way, and now you get what you wanted. Some men, you just can’t reach
    Let’s get us some fresh Michael Vick, even if you have to make sumpin’up

  4. Tinkle: Or how about the end of that tiny yet hilarious comedy bit: “Bailiff, whack his peepee!!!!!”

  5. “If the grip don’t fit!” “You must aquit!”
    ” If the glove isn’t love, weather it’s under or above!” “Without erection, there’s no connection!”

  6. I am saying that he did not have sexual intercourse, as it’s defined in the penal law, with this person,” lawyer Arthur Aidala told Jane McManus of ESPNNewYork.com.
    He said Penal…..

  7. Mike Florio said:
    As we all learned from Joe Pesci’s exchange with Herman Munster, there are only two possible answers: guilty or absolutely, 100 percent not guilty.
    Taylor will choose the latter, as every defendant who has not worked out a plea deal with the prosecution always does.
    —————————————————-
    Oh the irony…

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!