Vick indicted

[0roo0roo]

dude makes mel gibson seem like a saint in comparison

bastard needs to diaf.

 

[dennilfloss]

His mug shot was taken yesterday. Should appear on the Internet soon. :camera:

 

[Playmaker]

Originally posted by: cubby1223

Originally posted by: Playmaker
Wow...

He's been indicted.

Whether or not he's convicted aside, the attitude towards him and the immediate assumption of his guilt is absolutely terrifying. While I find dogfighting repulsive, the inability of your average prole to remain at least somewhat unbiased this early on in a legal investigation sickens me, and this thread exemplifies that.

Nothing wrong with assuming guilt. Last time I checked, I'm not a court of law. Seriously, 99% of people indicted by the federal government are convicted. It's simple math. "Early on in a legal investigation"? The investigation has already taken place, starting months ago, and the case now is a near certainty.

The government knows Vick can afford every lawyer in the country, they would not have indicted him unless they had absolute definitive proof.

I never claimed any poster was "a court of law" or any such nonsense. The issue is the media has such an easy time leading the general public like sheep to a sensationalized guilty prejudice. When it comes to the famous/wealthy and legal issues, public opinion runs counter to the ideals that supposedly form the backbone of our nation. In the end, it's the result of petty jealousy. It's just disappointing is all.

You have a link the "99% of people indicted by the federal government are convicted" stat?

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure Vick will be found guilty. It sounds like they're not even going after dogfighting, but a trumped up conspiracy charge where the threshold of reasonable doubt is laughable. I just hope they have some neighbors as witnesses and not a bunch of individuals formerly involved in dogfighting and currently in prison snitching for reduced sentences, although I'm willing to be that's exactly how the case goes down.

 

[Queasy]

Vick told to stay away from training camp

NEW YORK - Michael Vick was ordered by commissioner Roger Goodell on Monday to stay away from the Atlanta Falcons' training camp until the league reviews the dogfighting charges against him.

"While it is for the criminal justice system to determine your guilt or innocence, it is my responsibility as commissioner of the National Football League to determine whether your conduct, even if not criminal, nonetheless violated league policies, including the Personal Conduct Policy," Goodell said in a letter to the quarterback.

The NFL said Vick would still get his preseason pay and Goodell told the Falcons to withhold any disciplinary action of their own until the league's review was completed.

 

[Queasy]

The Falcon's owner will be holding a press conference today at 4PM today as well. I imagine he'll say he's troubled and hopes everyone can move forward...yadda yadda yadda.

Weird summer with sports stories - Vick, NBA ref, Bonds....

 

[KLin]

Vick pleads not guilty

Well duh.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Surprised he hasn't been dropped by his endorsers yet.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Surprised he hasn't been dropped by his endorsers yet.

they have dropped one shoe.


give them time. this is going ot end badly for him.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: Playmaker

Originally posted by: cubby1223

Originally posted by: Playmaker
Wow...

He's been indicted.

Whether or not he's convicted aside, the attitude towards him and the immediate assumption of his guilt is absolutely terrifying. While I find dogfighting repulsive, the inability of your average prole to remain at least somewhat unbiased this early on in a legal investigation sickens me, and this thread exemplifies that.

Nothing wrong with assuming guilt. Last time I checked, I'm not a court of law. Seriously, 99% of people indicted by the federal government are convicted. It's simple math. "Early on in a legal investigation"? The investigation has already taken place, starting months ago, and the case now is a near certainty.

The government knows Vick can afford every lawyer in the country, they would not have indicted him unless they had absolute definitive proof.

You have a link the "99% of people indicted by the federal government are convicted" stat?

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/fed.htm
For 2004 only and for all federal cases. Not specifically the district that Vick is being indicted in.

Adjudication

During 2004, criminal cases were commenced against 92,645 defendants in U.S. district court. Most (88%) were charged with a felony offense. Thirty-seven percent of felony defendants were charged with a drug offense; 36% of all defendants were charged with a public-order offense -- including 19% with an immigration offense and 11% with a weapons offense. Fifteen percent were charged with a property offense.


Cases were terminated against 83,391 defendants during 2004. Most (90%) defendants were convicted. Of the 74,782 defendants convicted, 72,152 (or 96%) pleaded guilty or no-contest.

I can't find the link for the district Vick was indicted in. But I remember reading that it is the fastest federal court (Rocket Docket) and has the highest conviction rate and that the particular prosecutor in this case is batting better than .990 since 2001.

Don't get crazy with the math either. 92,645 were filed in 2004 (not necessarily completed) but of the 83,391 cases that were completed in 2004 (and may have been filed in earlier years), 90% wound up as a conviction.

 

[sierrita]

Originally posted by: Playmaker

Originally posted by: cubby1223

Originally posted by: Playmaker
Wow...

He's been indicted.

Whether or not he's convicted aside, the attitude towards him and the immediate assumption of his guilt is absolutely terrifying. While I find dogfighting repulsive, the inability of your average prole to remain at least somewhat unbiased this early on in a legal investigation sickens me, and this thread exemplifies that.

Nothing wrong with assuming guilt. Last time I checked, I'm not a court of law. Seriously, 99% of people indicted by the federal government are convicted. It's simple math. "Early on in a legal investigation"? The investigation has already taken place, starting months ago, and the case now is a near certainty.

The government knows Vick can afford every lawyer in the country, they would not have indicted him unless they had absolute definitive proof.

I never claimed any poster was "a court of law" or any such nonsense. The issue is the media has such an easy time leading the general public like sheep to a sensationalized guilty prejudice. When it comes to the famous/wealthy and legal issues, public opinion runs counter to the ideals that supposedly form the backbone of our nation. In the end, it's the result of petty jealousy. It's just disappointing is all.

You have a link the "99% of people indicted by the federal government are convicted" stat?

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure Vick will be found guilty. It sounds like they're not even going after dogfighting, but a trumped up conspiracy charge where the threshold of reasonable doubt is laughable. I just hope they have some neighbors as witnesses and not a bunch of individuals formerly involved in dogfighting and currently in prison snitching for reduced sentences, although I'm willing to be that's exactly how the case goes down.

Ah, so "the media" is leading people like sheep to assume he's guilty.

Who's leading you to the assumption that the charges are "trumped up" and he'll be found guilty, but only because of false testimony by "snitches"?

 

[Juno]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: ballmode
One more black QB ruining it for the rest of the other black qb's... looks like only Vince Young/McNair/McNabb can salvage the claim...

Warren Moon is probably shaking his head too

at least the Colts have one less team to worry about

COLTS SUPER BOWL CHAMPS 2007!!! WOO WOO

WTF are you talking about? I can't think of another black QB who has ever been in trouble like this...

Cordell Stewart... good guy
Warren Moon (as you noted)... Good guy
Vince Young... Good guy
Donovan McNabb... Good guy
Steve McNair (minor things)... Good guys
Cleo Lemon... a nobody, but never in trouble
Seneca Wallace... Good guy
Tavarus Jackcon... Good guy
Byron Leftwich... Good guy
David Gerrard... Good guy
Doug Williams... Good guy
Randall Cunningham... Good guy
Andre Ware... Bust... But Good guy
Rodney Peete... Good guy
Jamarcus Russell... Rookie... but noting to indicate he's anything but a good guy
Troy Smith... Chris Leak... Same thing...



Find me another black QB who has done anything remotely like this.

quincy carter, he got busted a lot.

 

[Queasy]

Co-defendant may cooperate with Feds to get Vick

One of the men facing federal dogfighting charges along with Falcons quarterback Michael Vick is discussing a plea deal with federal prosecutors, which could spell bad news for Vick.

Tony Taylor, 34, of Hampton, Va., has a plea agreement hearing scheduled for 9 a.m. Monday in the U.S. District Court in Richmond before Judge Henry E. Hudson. Meanwhile, court records show a sealed order signed by Hudson was issued in the case Friday, which might or might not be related to Taylor's plea.

The plea hearing could mean that Taylor, who pleaded not guilty to the charges Thursday, has agreed to cooperate with federal prosecutors. Vick and the two other co-defendants in his case also pleaded not guilty Thursday.

"This could be very bad news for Vick," said Steven D. Benjamin, a veteran criminal defense attorney from Richmond who has represented many clients before Hudson. "If he is pleading guilty, he is cooperating with the government."

 

[Capt Caveman]

Stick a fork in him, he's well-done.

 

[Playmaker]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: Playmaker

Originally posted by: cubby1223

Originally posted by: Playmaker
Wow...

He's been indicted.

Whether or not he's convicted aside, the attitude towards him and the immediate assumption of his guilt is absolutely terrifying. While I find dogfighting repulsive, the inability of your average prole to remain at least somewhat unbiased this early on in a legal investigation sickens me, and this thread exemplifies that.

Nothing wrong with assuming guilt. Last time I checked, I'm not a court of law. Seriously, 99% of people indicted by the federal government are convicted. It's simple math. "Early on in a legal investigation"? The investigation has already taken place, starting months ago, and the case now is a near certainty.

The government knows Vick can afford every lawyer in the country, they would not have indicted him unless they had absolute definitive proof.

You have a link the "99% of people indicted by the federal government are convicted" stat?

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/fed.htm
For 2004 only and for all federal cases. Not specifically the district that Vick is being indicted in.

Adjudication

During 2004, criminal cases were commenced against 92,645 defendants in U.S. district court. Most (88%) were charged with a felony offense. Thirty-seven percent of felony defendants were charged with a drug offense; 36% of all defendants were charged with a public-order offense -- including 19% with an immigration offense and 11% with a weapons offense. Fifteen percent were charged with a property offense.


Cases were terminated against 83,391 defendants during 2004. Most (90%) defendants were convicted. Of the 74,782 defendants convicted, 72,152 (or 96%) pleaded guilty or no-contest.

I can't find the link for the district Vick was indicted in. But I remember reading that it is the fastest federal court (Rocket Docket) and has the highest conviction rate and that the particular prosecutor in this case is batting better than .990 since 2001.

Don't get crazy with the math either. 92,645 were filed in 2004 (not necessarily completed) but of the 83,391 cases that were completed in 2004 (and may have been filed in earlier years), 90% wound up as a conviction.

Interesting. Does that 99% (er...90%?) hold for individual's pleading not guilty as well?

 

[Playmaker]

Originally posted by: sierrita

Originally posted by: Playmaker

Originally posted by: cubby1223

Originally posted by: Playmaker
Wow...

He's been indicted.

Whether or not he's convicted aside, the attitude towards him and the immediate assumption of his guilt is absolutely terrifying. While I find dogfighting repulsive, the inability of your average prole to remain at least somewhat unbiased this early on in a legal investigation sickens me, and this thread exemplifies that.

Nothing wrong with assuming guilt. Last time I checked, I'm not a court of law. Seriously, 99% of people indicted by the federal government are convicted. It's simple math. "Early on in a legal investigation"? The investigation has already taken place, starting months ago, and the case now is a near certainty.

The government knows Vick can afford every lawyer in the country, they would not have indicted him unless they had absolute definitive proof.

I never claimed any poster was "a court of law" or any such nonsense. The issue is the media has such an easy time leading the general public like sheep to a sensationalized guilty prejudice. When it comes to the famous/wealthy and legal issues, public opinion runs counter to the ideals that supposedly form the backbone of our nation. In the end, it's the result of petty jealousy. It's just disappointing is all.

You have a link the "99% of people indicted by the federal government are convicted" stat?

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure Vick will be found guilty. It sounds like they're not even going after dogfighting, but a trumped up conspiracy charge where the threshold of reasonable doubt is laughable. I just hope they have some neighbors as witnesses and not a bunch of individuals formerly involved in dogfighting and currently in prison snitching for reduced sentences, although I'm willing to be that's exactly how the case goes down.

Ah, so "the media" is leading people like sheep to assume he's guilty.

Who's leading you to the assumption that the charges are "trumped up" and he'll be found guilty, but only because of false testimony by "snitches"?

My distaste for how the federal government utilizes the conspiracy charge is out of the scope of this thread. However, like I said, I'm all for keeping an open mind and allowing the burden of proof to rest with the prosecution. My assumption, and I hope it will not hold true, is that, in securing the conviction, the prosecution will parade convicted felons and co-defendants looking to knock years off their sentences...

The general public doesn't care, as they just want to see the celebrity go down. The prosecutor doesn't care, as justice and political (gubernatorial?) aspirations certainly don't coincide with justice (assuming here, but look at the track record of federal prosecutors who suddenly have name recognition). Perhaps it's a bit cynical, but that's reality.

 

[Fern]

Some prison team is gonna have a heck of a QB.

I've heard that they are looking to indict him for similar activities in other states (Ariz IIRC). Plus, Fed Racketering charges too (I guess for the gambling)

If he'd a been a regular schmoe with no dough he would have only been able to participate in this at a small/low level. Prolly no big charges. His great amounts of money have allowed him to do this on a big scale, bringing big scale problems along with it.

Fern

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Originally posted by: Playmaker

My distaste for how the federal government utilizes the conspiracy charge is out of the scope of this thread. However, like I said, I'm all for keeping an open mind and allowing the burden of proof to rest with the prosecution. My assumption, and I hope it will not hold true, is that, in securing the conviction, the prosecution will parade convicted felons and co-defendants looking to knock years off their sentences...

The general public doesn't care, as they just want to see the celebrity go down. The prosecutor doesn't care, as justice and political (gubernatorial?) aspirations certainly don't coincide with justice (assuming here, but look at the track record of federal prosecutors who suddenly have name recognition). Perhaps it's a bit cynical, but that's reality.

Well off course the only people they can get to testify are either felons or co-conspiritors trying to cop a deal, thats very common in these type cases.
These activities are highly illegal and secretive and held in clandestine locations and spectators as well as participants are breaking the law. Do you expect some upstanding local businessman or other highly regarded citizen to steep foward and say he saw Vick at a dog fight? That's only going to happen if they are implicated and cutting their own deal.

What the FEDs should have is a mountain of circumstancial evidence that connects Vick to the money and operations of the kennels and perhaps even cell phone records and recorded conversations, which will probably make the eye witness testimony less important.

 

[Playmaker]

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy

Originally posted by: Playmaker

My distaste for how the federal government utilizes the conspiracy charge is out of the scope of this thread. However, like I said, I'm all for keeping an open mind and allowing the burden of proof to rest with the prosecution. My assumption, and I hope it will not hold true, is that, in securing the conviction, the prosecution will parade convicted felons and co-defendants looking to knock years off their sentences...

The general public doesn't care, as they just want to see the celebrity go down. The prosecutor doesn't care, as justice and political (gubernatorial?) aspirations certainly don't coincide with justice (assuming here, but look at the track record of federal prosecutors who suddenly have name recognition). Perhaps it's a bit cynical, but that's reality.

Well off course the only people they can get to testify are either felons or co-conspiritors trying to cop a deal, thats very common in these type cases.
These activities are highly illegal and secretive and held in clandestine locations and spectators as well as participants are breaking the law. Do you expect some upstanding local businessman or other highly regarded citizen to steep foward and say he saw Vick at a dog fight? That's only going to happen if they are implicated and cutting their own deal.

What the FEDs should have is a mountain of circumstancial evidence that connects Vick to the money and operations of the kennels and perhaps even cell phone records and recorded conversations, which will probably make the eye witness testimony less important.

The way they talk about the prevalence of these fights and the brazen way in which the dogs were supposedly disposed of on Vick's property (especially the original home, which appears to be on a relatively small lot), I find it hard to believe they can't find a single neighbor who witnessed Vick, given the claims of his heavy involvement.

Although if they do have recordings that is certainly more credible than the shady witnesses they'll likely parade, but I haven't read about that yet.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Playmaker

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy

Originally posted by: Playmaker

My distaste for how the federal government utilizes the conspiracy charge is out of the scope of this thread. However, like I said, I'm all for keeping an open mind and allowing the burden of proof to rest with the prosecution. My assumption, and I hope it will not hold true, is that, in securing the conviction, the prosecution will parade convicted felons and co-defendants looking to knock years off their sentences...

The general public doesn't care, as they just want to see the celebrity go down. The prosecutor doesn't care, as justice and political (gubernatorial?) aspirations certainly don't coincide with justice (assuming here, but look at the track record of federal prosecutors who suddenly have name recognition). Perhaps it's a bit cynical, but that's reality.

Well off course the only people they can get to testify are either felons or co-conspiritors trying to cop a deal, thats very common in these type cases.
These activities are highly illegal and secretive and held in clandestine locations and spectators as well as participants are breaking the law. Do you expect some upstanding local businessman or other highly regarded citizen to steep foward and say he saw Vick at a dog fight? That's only going to happen if they are implicated and cutting their own deal.

What the FEDs should have is a mountain of circumstancial evidence that connects Vick to the money and operations of the kennels and perhaps even cell phone records and recorded conversations, which will probably make the eye witness testimony less important.

The way they talk about the prevalence of these fights and the brazen way in which the dogs were supposedly disposed of on Vick's property (especially the original home, which appears to be on a relatively small lot), I find it hard to believe they can't find a single neighbor who witnessed Vick, given the claims of his heavy involvement.

Although if they do have recordings that is certainly more credible than the shady witnesses they'll likely parade, but I haven't read about that yet.

I said from the beginning of this that they only way they are going to get Vick is if they get someone to turn on him. The indictment reads like they got at least one person to turn and they just got another one to turn with a co-defendant taking a plea deal.

Vick's attorneys are going to have to come out with something stunning at this point I think. Like maybe Duke Lacrosse stunning.

I was listening to the 2 Live Stews on the way home a bit today and Ryan (the brother that played in the NFL) said his sources said there isn't anything there. So.... <shrug>

 

[KLin]

vick is screwed...

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: KLin
vick is screwed...

Yeah, he's pretty much twisting in the wind at this point. He's left with the choice of whether to fight this and face stiffer charges (and punishment) or plea down to as little jail time as possible so he can continue his football career when he gets out.

 

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: preslove

Originally posted by: DrPizza

Originally posted by: preslove
The ironic thing is that pit bulls only exist because of dog fighting. Pit bulls were bred for dog fighting. Not that I condone the act, but it is kind of weird that it is illegal use an animal for the very act for which it was created.

I have a World War II Japanese sword in my garage. Should it be legal for me to kill a few people with it, since that's what it was created for?

Dude, I just find it interesting that this animal was created for this very brutal act by Englishmen & ghetto blacks continue to practice it underground. Hell, I think pit bulls shouldn't be allowed in urban areas. That's why I said I don't condone it.

I didn't think you would condone such a thing. My point was merely that there's nothing weird at all about it now being illegal. Here's another one: it's now illegal to ride a horse on the road in many areas, particularly highways. But, originally, the main purpose of horses was transportation.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: jjsole
Marcus Vick has never looked so saintly.

HA!

Marcus Vick: The Diet Coke of Football Thugdum.

 

[Queasy]

Update 8/20: Link

Falcons quarterback Michael Vick is expected to plead guilty during in his federal dogfighting case during a court hearing Monday.

The federal judge in the case, Henry E. Hudson, is planning to announce Vick's plea agreement hearing date this afternoon in Richmond, a courthouse source said.

****************************************************************

Smoking Gun - has the details of one co-defendant.

AUGUST 17--Ratcheting up the pressure on Michael Vick, two of the NFL star's cohorts today pleaded guilty to federal dogfighting charges, leaving the athlete alone--at least for the time being--to face trial. During an appearance this morning in U.S. District Court in Richmond, Virginia, Quanis Phillips and Purnell Peace each copped to a felony conspiracy rap and signed plea agreements pledging to cooperate with federal investigators. In nearly identical fact summaries, both Phillips and Peace stated that the dogfighting ring's "operation and gambling monies were almost exclusively funded by Vick." Additionally, both men fingered Vick in the execution earlier this year of about eight dogs that performed poorly in test fighting sessions. Phillips and Peace each told investigators that Vick participated in killing the dogs, which were hung or drowned, and that the animals "died as a result of the collective efforts" of the trio.

AJC - more details.

Vick posed for a photo with three co-defendants and a female pit bull they were about to sponsor in a dogfight in North Carolina four years ago, according to a 12-page summary of facts Peace signed as part of his plea.

That document says Peace, Vick and two other co-defendants ? who referred to themselves as "Bad News Kennels" ? traveled from Virginia to North Carolina with a female pit bull named "Jane" to participate in a dogfight against another pit bull owned by an organization called "Lockjaw Kennels."

"Prior to this fight," the statement says," all four 'Bad News Kennels' members took a picture with 'Jane.' "

It is unclear whether federal prosecutors have a copy of that photo.

In a separate document signed by Peace, prosecutors allege that Vick paid Peace $3,000 a month to take care of their pit bulls on Vick's property in rural Surry County. Peace became the primary caretaker of the dogs after Taylor left the operation following a disagreement with Phillips, the statement says.

Both Peace and Phillips pleaded guilty to a single count of conspiracy to cross state lines to engage in illegal gambling; to sponsor a dog in an animal fighting venture; and to buy, transport and receive dogs for animal fighting.

 

[slpaulson]

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: jhu
it doesn't matter whether or not we eat dogs. it's animal killing all the same. the killing of most types of animals is somehow socially accepted whereas the killing of one particular animal isn't. don't you see the contradiction in this?

It is not the same. There is a huge difference in the killing of domesticated animals for sport/human entertainment versus the killing of "wild" animals for sustanance (cows, sheep, pigs are not technically domesticated). If you can't see that then you should take your hippy, vegan, tree-huggy mantra somewhere else.

How are cows, sheep, and pigs not technically domesticated?

I do agree with your argument about killing for sustenance though.