TALK ABOUT A SMOKE SCREEN
Mr. Taylor, I did not intend to get involved in the issue with your son because I do not believe candidate’s children should be brought into a political race. Although I do have questions about your son’s innocence, I was going to stay out of it. Until that is, I read this preposterous and slanderous email. It is easy to follow along; my statements are in bold and slightly larger print than your rant. Pay close attention Mr. Taylor, we are entering the classroom now. Thank you for bringing lunch. In case any of you readers missed it, the smaller and lighter print in this posting is the email that Mr. Taylor sent out to his supporters. To our Supporters and Friends, Recently, Clay County politics reached an all-time low. The chief law enforcement officer in this County who is entrusted with enforcing the laws of our state, has chosen to violate those very laws for his own political benefit. This is a plot so sinister it is hard to believe. Mr. Taylor, you are accusing Sheriff Beseler of a crime. You have done so in print and broadcast that to the public. Mr. Taylor, exactly what law has Sheriff Beseler violated? If you are going to accuse publicly the chief law enforcement officer in this county with a crime, I am certain you can both cite the crime and produce the evidence. I am a strong advocate of victims' rights, but only when the accuser is a true victim. An unbiased investigation was completed (PRIOR to my candidacy) by the Clay County Sheriff’s Office under the direction of the chief law enforcement officer of our County. That investigation presented no charges against my son because there were insufficient facts to show any wrongdoing. My son was never arrested or prosecuted! Mr. Taylor, your disreputable character is equaled only by your arrogance. How arrogant can one person be to say that these girls are not victims? It is no wonder your son walks about with such haughtiness. The apple truly does not fall far from the tree. Two years later and only after I announced my candidacy, the chief law enforcement officer of the County reopened this closed investigation and requested both the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and the State Attorney's Office investigate the matter. The chief law enforcement officer of the county, Sheriff Beseler, DID NOT RE-OPEN ANYTHING. The last rape allegation against your son was referred to FDLE for investigation, without any involvement whatsoever by the Clay County Sheriff’s Office, because you were a candidate and Sheriff Beseler did not want anything to appear improper. AGAIN, NOTHING – NOTHING was RE-opened. A former FBI Agent with an impeccable reputation administered a polygraph examination on my son regarding all allegations, which he PASSED! Passed, says who? If that is true Mr. Taylor, you certainly should not mind sharing with us the examiner’s report to include what questions he asked. How about this Mr. Taylor, how about subjecting the test to the scrutiny of another examiner? If in fact your son passed, certainly, you should not have a problem with that and if the examiner is willing to stand by his test he certainly will not have a problem with another examiner scrutinizing his work. You mentioned that the examiner’s reputation is impeccable but you did not mention whether or not he is a qualified and certified polygraph examiner and if he is where did he get his training and by who is he certified. Therefore, this investigation also presented no charges against my son because there were insufficient facts to show any wrongdoing. And, once again my son was never arrested or prosecuted! No arrest and no charge does not equal innocence! For the past 8 months we have heard rumors a story would surface near the end of the election in an attempt to discredit my integrity. These unsupported allegations have been released in a clear attempt to hurt my family and force me out of the race, which WILL NOT HAPPEN! When the State Attorney's Office and Florida Department of Law Enforcement declined to prosecute my son, the Sheriff’s Office chose, against existing state law, to release confidential juvenile information to the media. Let us be very clear about facts here Mr. Taylor. First, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) has nothing to do with the decision to prosecute so do not bring their name into that side of the equation. All FDLE does is investigate then present the facts to the State Attorney’s Office. In some cases, the State Attorney’s Office actually conducts the investigation, as you so well know. Here are the FACTS surrounding ALL of the investigations regarding your son. FACT – EVERY investigation involving your son was EXCEPTIONALLY CLEARED. FACT – For a case to be exceptionally cleared there must be PROBABLE CAUSE FOR AN ARREST. Without probable cause, a case CANNOT be exceptionally cleared. An exceptional clearance REQUIRES three things. 1. You must have positively identified the suspect. 2. You must know where the suspect is. 3. You must have probable cause to make the arrest. Probable cause is reasonable, trustworthy information sufficient to warrant a prudent man or woman to believe that the suspect had committed an offense. If there is no probable cause the case is unfounded, NOT exceptionally cleared. The following is a quote from one of the reports; “there are sufficient facts to support an arrest of the suspect in this case. That folks, is PROBABLE CAUSE. In the cases of your son Mr. Taylor, the STATE ATTORNEY’S OFFICE DECLINED TO PROSECUTE. The State Attorney’s Office (Harry Shorstein and company) CHOSE not to prosecute. It WAS NOT because there was a lack of evidence. There was evidence; there was evidence sufficient to warrant an arrest but IN SPITE OF THE PROBABLE CAUSE EVIDENCE, THE STATE ATTORNEY’S OFFICE CHOSE NOT TO PROSECUTE. Furthermore, the Clay County Sheriff’s Office NEVER released any reports showing your son’s name or any other juvenile’s name. All juvenile information was redacted prior to being released. Let me repeat something from my post from several days ago. Prior to being released, everything that was released was first reviewed by legal counsel at the Sheriff’s Office and then subjected to two additional judicial reviews, one higher than the other, prior to the release of any information. AGAIN, any information that was released was a response to a public records request. Mr. Taylor, I challenge you to produce one single document that the Clay County Sheriff’s Office released with juvenile information in it that had not been redacted! This was done even though the State Attorney's Office and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement decided this information was not subject to public disclosure. Once the records were released to the media, incredibly, the Sheriff’s Office asked for them back after my attorney wrote a letter explaining the applicable law. Of course, those records were relied upon in great detail and taken out of context in the plotted character assassination of me, my son and family. What information Mr. Taylor, was taken out of context? By all means, please post the reports and point out to us what information was taken out of context. There is no character assassination here Mr. Taylor. For an assassination to occur there must be a target. As a result of these illegal and vindictive actions against me and my family, and because those actions were against well-established state law, I am today consulting with my advisors to determine the most appropriate course of action. My son’s reputation is being attacked only because he is my son. Mr. Taylor, your son created his thug reputation. What is happening is not an attack, sir, it is a REVELATION. These vile actions for political gain have convinced me more than ever before that change is needed! The citizens of Clay County deserve a Sheriff who will enforce the law to protect everyone and not break it! And your morally reprehensible actions have convinced me more than ever that you do not deserve to be the Sheriff of Clay County. Lastly, there is no place in politics for personal attacks on families! Sheriff Beseler’s own son was arrested on May 11, 2008 on felony charges of shooting a shotgun twice through the door of a home with people inside (CCSO Report Number 2008-15543). While many have asked that we use this incident to our own political gain, we have not! Personal attacks on families have no place in politics! If you do not call this a personal attack Mr. Taylor, what do you call it? There you go again Mr. Taylor, getting your facts from that source I will not mention here. For the record, Mr. Taylor, SHERIFF BESELER DOES NOT HAVE A SON. Mr. Taylor, why can’t you tell the truth, just once? Is it because the truth is not in you sir? For the record, Sheriff Beseler’s wife from a previous marriage has a son and that man is 34 years old. Sheriff Beseler does not have any connection with that individual except through a former marriage, again, it is not his son, and he does not have any contact with him whatsoever. Know what there Mr. Taylor, I am so glad that you went against what you purport as the advise not to use the arrest. It just gave the voters another opportunity to see your true character. The title of the blog I am responding to is probably the most appropriately titled blog ever posted SMOKE SCREEN Once again VOTERS of Clay County, you have seen the desperate and despicable act of a desperate, despicable POLITICIAN. The false allegations you have made Mr. Taylor is just one more example of your willingness to stop at nothing. I ask you VOTERS, good, decent people of Clay County. How could anyone with a speck of decency stoop to such unscrupulous tactics? Mr. Taylor would have you believe that his son is the victim here and that those girls whose lives have been ruined are the perpetrators. Nothing is more telling about his character than his statement that he is a strong advocate of victim’s rights but only when the accuser is an actual victim. Anyone, anyone reading that statement should be morally outraged. VOTERS, are you as insulted as I am that this man would think we are so ignorant that we will swallow this hype without checking for ourselves? VOTERS of Clay County, if you are as insulted as I am, if you feel as violated as I do, please voice it. Voice it here, voice it on the telephone, voice it in your emails, voice it in your personal conversations, voice it to Mr. Taylor himself, (375-2642 and PLEASE, tell him Sun Tzu told you to call) voice it by withdrawing your support from this unprincipled UNION lackey but most importantly VOICE IT IN THE VOTING BOOTH ON AUGUST 26! Class is over Mr. Taylor, lunch was delicious. We must do it again sometime! Sun Tzu Related: SunTzu's blog | login or register to post comments | printer friendly version | Tags: mike taylor | sheriff's office
Submitted by Angela on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 2:52pm.
Exceptionally cleared: - If the State Attorney declines prosecution due to lack of information, then you may not clear this case by exception. The reason for this is the agency has not fulfilled the proper qualifications for an exceptional clearance. - If the State Attorney declines prosecution due to a low likelihood of conviction, then you may clear this case by exception. The reason for this is the agency fulfilled the proper qualifications for an exceptional clearance, and for reasons beyond law enforcement control the State Attorney's decision was not to prosecute. This information was provided by FDLE is this correct information.
Submitted by SunTzu on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 3:15pm.
Angela: I realize the post was long and you may have become confused so I am going to repeat the requirements for exceptionally clearing a case and what probable cause is. If you do not understand after this, I cannot help you, sorry. FACT – For a case to be exceptionally cleared there must be PROBABLE CAUSE FOR AN ARREST. Without probable cause, a case CANNOT be exceptionally cleared.An exceptional clearance REQUIRES three things. 1. You must have positively identified the suspect. 2. You must know where the suspect is. 3. You must have probable cause to make the arrest. Probable cause is reasonable, trustworthy information sufficient to warrant a prudent man or woman to believe that the suspect had committed an offense. If there is no probable cause the case is unfounded, NOT exceptionally cleared. Submitted by Angela on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 3:56pm.
A clearance by exception is when an arrest can’t be claimed because there’s some reason beyond law enforcement control that prevents the arrest from occurring. To clear a pending case by exception you must be able to successfully answer yes to all of the following questions: • Has the investigation definitely established the identity of the offender? • Is there enough information to support an arrest, charge and prosecution of the offender? • Do you know the exact location of the offender so that you could take him into custody now? (This means you must know his physical location not just the address where he has resided) • Is there some reason beyond law enforcement control that stops you from arresting, charging and prosecuting the offender? I understand about the probable cause statement. People are arrested all the time because to be arrested you have to have probable cause. Otherwise it would be an illegal arrest. I was asking about the 4th item: Is there some reason beyond law enforcement control that stops your from arresting, charging and prosecuting the offender? Otherwise as you state you have probable cause to arrest but the State Attorney is preventing the arrest of the individual. Right Submitted by Faith on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 4:03pm.
That boy of Mr.Taylors personally offended my daughter and her friends one day at school. He talks down and uses disgusting language to girls. I was very upset when she told me of this incident and said not to worry. It will eventually take care of itself. And it Has! VICTORY!!!!! Perhaps the Nanny should pay a visit to the Taylor household.
Submitted by Sam on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 4:25pm.
I have heard the same thing about his young man. I have one son who graduated from FIHS and one still attending. They have both said the same thing about this boy. I'm very happy I have boys! And the girls at this school are lucky he has graduated.
Submitted by SunTzu on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 4:58pm.
Angela:By no means do I intend this as an insult to your intelligence but let me briefly explain the workings of the State Attorney's Office. In most cases, if the State Attorney or one of his assistants does not believe that they can WIN a case, they will not touch it. They will tell you that they do not want to waste the taxpayer’s money trying a case if they have a low probability of winning it. On its face, that may sound logical. Let us look for a moment what the word trial means. In law it is the determination of a person's innocence or guilt by due process of law as in, he had a fair trial and the jury found him guilty/innocent. However, in these cases there were no trials. A jury did not have the opportunity to find this individual guilty or innocent. I will give you another impression, and it is an impression shared by many of not the majority of law enforcement officers in this area, of why the State Attorney's Office will exceptionally clear a case. It is because they do not want their record of accomplishment, their STATS to be damaged. They do not have the intestinal fortitude to try a case because if they lose, their STATS are blemished. That is without a doubt one of the most frustrating things about being a law enforcement officer in this area, the lack of intestinal fortitude on the part of the State Attorney to try a case. What about due process for the victims? Where is their due process if these cases are never taken to trial? They are denied that because some Assistant State Attorney (ASO) (that sounds close to a compound word I am familiar with) does not want to take a chance on losing. After all, they have a reputation to maintain. NO chance of winning is one thing but SOME CHANCE of winning should be the only criteria needed to take a case to trial. There is another reason they exceptionally clear a case, they are simply too lazy to try it. That is an impression I have heard expressed by many law enforcement officers. There is yet another reason the State Attorney might not try a case and we may very possibly be seeing it unfold before our very eyes. The eyes of justice are supposed to be blind but in many cases, far too many cases, I think Lady Justice is peeking. Submitted by Angela on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 5:09pm.
The family has stated that FDLE submitted enough to get a conviction. However, the State Attorney has declined to have him arrested, charged. or prosecuted. I think the victim's family should get that information and take it to the FBI because a prosecutor can abuse a power. I think based off the investigation they should be able to see if this is politically and/or personally decided. Instead of based off the facts of the investigation and not having enough information to arrest and prosecute. They have a Federal Attorney General located in Jacksonville that can take this information there as well. They will be able to assist the family too. They can review all the documents and make a determination. Submitted by Elliesway on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 5:12pm.
I would just like to tell you how much I enjoy your blogs. You always make it a joy to read. I usually agree with all you write. Keep them coming. You have fans out here who love to see it.
Submitted by SunTzu on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 6:47pm.
Thank you very much Ellisway for the kind words. Encourage your friends to post comments and weigh in as well. Sun Tzu
Submitted by Observer on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 6:53pm.
Well as much as you would like to include the Feds for your claims to fame, they will never bother with this case. They have more worldly matters to tend to. This state has many non corruptable prosecutors. Surely they are close by (St. Augustine). That's not right. I'll take it back. The ones we have now are not corruptable, they consider stats, a reasonable probabilty of convicition. Submitted by Angela on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 7:15pm.
I think it would only benefit law enforcement because even they have continually called to have the SA investigated. If the family has the information they say they do then I think they'll bite. Equally, if Shorstein made the right decision. Then they will let them know. So then no matter which State Attorney it will have the same result. I have been printing copies of these blogs. So, I can take them to the FBI and will be submitting them to the Attorney General's Office. I will be submitting a copy of the article that was written in Folio. I think it clearly shows a pattern of abuse or some type cover up. We have a wide array of opinions and thoughts for them to review.
Submitted by Observer on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 7:24pm.
We'll see. I think my statement will hold true. Question - If they don't bite on it are they corrupt? Submitted by Angela on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 7:25pm.
No, I just have to keep sending enough over there to get something done. I think they are still around and watching.
Submitted by Marsha on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 7:30pm.
I've enjoyed reading your blogs, especially this one. Between that and a conversation I had earlier today to try and clear some things up in my mind your latest blog has been very helpful in helping me reach my own personal conclusions on the entire matter. Probable cause should open things up, not shut them down.
Submitted by Observer on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 7:35pm.
I sure under the current Sheriff and the new prosecutor getting elected (AC) we'll never see that occur in our county. Carry on my wayward [daughter] there'll be peace when you are done lay your weary head to rest don't you cry no more (Kansas). Good Luck you’re a true steward of justice.
Submitted by Angela on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 7:54pm.
Yes my thoughts exactly her close ties to law enforcement and the Sheriff. That should scare the people enough to get them out to vote. It will be locked down tight. A different day, different person, different story. All with a common theme. But then of course it could be Shorstein is right not enough to prosecute. And this was just a politically motivated article to as Sun Tzu would say destroy the enemy. Bring them under his control and force them to follow him. You gotta love America! Submitted by ProLEO on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 7:58pm.
Just a question. If Rick Beseler has nothing to do with his step son, why was he @ the debate @ Ridgeview wearing his daddies t-shirt? And why does Rick brag about 3 Kids and 4 grand kids in his advertising.They were just talking about his shot gun case in the GCS Post Office on Friday. You can defend your Sheriff but tell the truth.
Submitted by SunTzu on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 8:56pm.
ProLeo: I am speaking the truth as I know it. I do not know the answer to your question because I do not know the facts. I have no knowldege of a relationship between the person in question and Sheriff Beseler but I will find out what I canand let you know. By the way, is this nitpicking question all you have to offer? Submitted by ProLEO on Sun, 08/03/2008 - 9:39pm.
No I have one more. You say you are one of the Magnificent 7,yet you also say you have "umteen years " w/ the SO, which is it?
Submitted by SunTzu on Mon, 08/04/2008 - 10:45pm.
I sincerely apologize ProLeo. I worngfully presumed you had enough intelligence to recognize sarcasm.
Submitted by SunTzu on Mon, 08/04/2008 - 10:48pm.
The individual you speak of has never been to a debate. The person you saw that you wrongfully identified as Sheriff Beseler's son was most likely his son-in-law. Hope that answers your question. Any more? Submitted by russ7867 on Tue, 08/05/2008 - 6:23pm.
The WINNER in the 2nd Round BY KNOCKOUT! SUUUUNNNNN TZUUUUUUU!!!
Submitted by ProLEO on Tue, 08/05/2008 - 7:35pm.
You are right I should have recognized the sarcasm from the resy of your posts. Also,it may have been the Son-in Law,they probably favor each other. I have only seen the son in his 4 or5 mug shots so I could be mistaken. I willnot bother you w/ anymore questions until closer to the election.
Submitted by SunTzu on Wed, 08/06/2008 - 5:59am.
ProLeo: Why would you think Sheriff Beseler's step son and son-in-law would look anything alike? Hey, why wait, ask away now. It really isn't a bother and besides, I enjoy conversing with you.
Submitted by clarity on Wed, 08/06/2008 - 7:01am.
I just had to log on and tell you I enjoy your posts and information. Thank you for presenting information for people to decide for themselves. More people should read these blogs and get informed. One question, who would you support for State Attorney and why? I need more info before I can make my choice, and you seem to have good info. People are talking about ...Here are the recent blog postings with the most comments. |
Who's online
There are currently 1 user and 71 guests online.
Online usersRecent comments |
I bet you open a can of worms with this post! I agree whole heartedly with you. I believe someone posted in an earlier blog that it was going to be a shame when all voters are not made aware of these allegations. That some people will go to the polls based solely on all the signs they've seen placed around town and the flyers that they have received in the mail. Thank you for clearing up "exceptionally cleared". As I've said in earlier posts, I find it hard to believe that we have this many victims of this young man and he has never been charged. Anyone can understand a parent protecting their child but doesn't there come a time when the parent says enough is enough. Where there is smoke there is fire. And again, I refer people back to the blog posted by the mother of one of the victims, it will open your eyes.