PDA

View Full Version : The Michael Vick legal discussion thread


Jay
07-20-2007, 08:20 AM
Started because of:

this thread has been skirting the absolute edge of no longer discussing issues related to the topic at hand. stay on topic. the instant this devolves into a discussion over what "innocent until proven guilty" means or devolves further into whether or not that means anything, there will be suspensions and the thread will be locked. the legal ramifications are entirely irrelevant, as the nfl has shown with recent precedent. discuss the nfl implications, or try your luck with a legal discussion in off-topic.

I am going to make this simple. Like D-Unit said, there are no ifs or buts, Michael Vick is done. He will go to jail. Anyone who thinks otherwise, obviously hasn't read this (http://msn.foxsports.com/id/7035302_37_1.pdf).

Here just one line that is pretty damning, and establishes fully that Michael Vick was 200% involved, behind, supportive and aware of the entire situations:

68. In or about the fall of 2003, PEACE, PHILLIPS, TAYLOR, and VICK sponsored "Tiny" in a fight against the male pit bull sponsored by C.W. #3 (co-operating witness #3). During the fight, C.W. #3 was criticized by an unknown member to the Grand Jury of "Bad Newz Kennels" for C.W. #3's having yelled out VICK's name in front of the crowd during the dog fight.

There is no sense in arguing over suspension, because it has already been established that we all agree that the NFL should wait. It's been three days since the indictment went down. The Federal Government has established an extremely detailed and calculated case against Vick, and he will be in court throughout the season.

So I'm going to soften my stance a little and sit back and wait for everything to unfold, because it will, and it will happen fast. There is not even the most minute amount of reasonable doubt based on the evidence already presented that Vick will be able to prove his innocence, or that he was ignorant to the situation. It has been and will continue to be established that not only did Michael Vick know this was going on, he was one of the driving forces behind it and a very active participant.

It was brought up by Moses that Pacman has admitted to some of his injustices while Vick has steadfastly denied his involvement straight to the face of Roger Goodell, Arthur Blank, the Federal Government and the local VA DA. Somehow, that makes Pacman more deserving of penalty than Vick. Well, get back to me in a few months. Because it will be established that Vick has been lying straight to the face of everyone involved.

Everyone is certainly entitled to their opinion, but just like the NFL is taking a step back before they say anything, I'd encourage those supporting Vick to sit back and let some of the events play out. You're going to feel awfully silly when everything plays out.

Even the black community it taking a step back from Michael Vick. That is pretty damning, considering they usually come to the defense of any of their brothers in their moments of need. They supported the stripper involved in the Duke rape case, even though every ounce of evidence in that case pointed towards her making the story up. Russell Simmons and Al Sharpton (http://getactive.peta.org/campaign/petition_dog_fighting) are calling out for the NFL to distance themselves from Michael Vick:

In the wake of Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick's indictment on charges related to dogfighting, all of Vick's corporate sponsors, Falcons CEO Arthur Blank, and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell received a joint letter this morning from hip-hop mogul Russell Simmons, civil rights leader The Rev. Al Sharpton, and PETA President Ingrid E. Newkirk roundly condemning dogfighting and other forms of violence.

Dogs who survive these fights often sustain serious injuries, such as broken bones and crushed cartilage, and many suffer and die from blood loss, shock, dehydration, exhaustion, or infection hours or days after a fight. The statement calls on people not only to condemn an NFL superstar for his alleged participation in this illegal activity but also to work to end dogfighting in our local communities.

This case will not be run by a DA running for re-election trying to win over the black vote in his community. It will be run by the Federal Government, who only lose cases on technicalities. IE, evidence being collected illegally, etc. In terms of being found innocent of all charges, the Feds are probably lose a case 1 out of every 30,000 times, if not more.

And that's not it for Vick and co. Now the Virginia DA is coming out and saying they will face state charges once their federal trial is over.

So yeah, an NFL suspension is and should be the least of Michael Vick's concerns. He's about to go to Federal "Pound Me In The Ass" Prison, and they won't be digging up Johnny Cochoran to get him out of it...

drowe
07-20-2007, 08:25 AM
i may be living under a rock, but i haven't heard any predictions for what kind of a sentence Vick might be looking at. can somebody fill me in.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-20-2007, 08:27 AM
i may be living under a rock, but i haven't heard any predictions for what kind of a sentence Vick might be looking at. can somebody fill me in.


The maximum is 6 years.

Jay
07-20-2007, 08:27 AM
5-7 years on current charges I believe. They haven't even dipped into tax evasion yet, nor has the Virginia District Attorney added local charges.

Scar
07-20-2007, 08:28 AM
I believe if he's convicted on all charges, he's looking at a 6 year term.

Moses
07-20-2007, 08:34 AM
Vick could easily plea bargain out of jail or pull an O.J. and allow his dream team lawyers to bail him out. To say that he will go to jail no matter what is just stupid.

Brent
07-20-2007, 08:41 AM
I think there are several charges against him so my question is, which, if any, are felonies and which are misdemeanors?

drowe
07-20-2007, 08:53 AM
wow, so, pretty much marcus is the GOOD vick at this point.

Jay
07-20-2007, 09:27 AM
Vick could easily plea bargain out of jail or pull an O.J. and allow his dream team lawyers to bail him out. To say that he will go to jail no matter what is just stupid.

Well, then a plea bargain is an admission of guilt, so the NFL would then suspend him, probably for more than a year. He won't do that, because that admission of guilt would be used against him in the local trial brewing in Virginia once the feds are done with him.

Beating the feds straight up is a once in a lifetime occurrence. His chances are about a million to one. On top of that, he is the big fish in this very little pond. The feds are going to get the other three defendants to out Vick and are much more likely to offer them deals.

I'll put it this way, if Michael Vick somehow beats this and faces no jail time and does not have to give a single admission of guilt, it will be the single greatest story in the history of the Federal court system. Books will be written, movies will be made and his lawyers will be rich beyond their wildest dreams. But it's a fairy-tale pipe-dream. I will eat my words, apologize profusely and negative rep myself into the red if that happens. I'll donate an entire weeks pay to the the charity of Moses choosing if that happens.

That's how much of a slam dunk this is. This isn't Scott Norwood in the Super Bowl with a gimme that will somehow be shanked. That 18 page document I linked in the first post is so detailed with at least 20 instances over the last 6-7 years of Vick being 100% involved in all of this, it makes Pacman Jones look like a good dude.

http://a628.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/01133/72/63/1133223627_m.jpg

That's my buddy. It's pretty clear why I am so passionate about this case. It's not that I am anti-Michael Vick or anti-Atlanta Falcons, it's because what he has done is so horribly wrong and I just could never imagine my little dude going through something like that, or ever doing something to intentionally hurt him. I don't feel like I am being bias because of it, because the facts presented speak for themselves.

This proves the character we are dealing with. Also, it was said that the "Ron Mexico" thing went away. Of course it did, and of course he didn't go to jail, because it was a civil lawsuit:

On April 24, 2006 Vick's attorney revealed that the lawsuit had settled out of court with a undisclosed settlement.

Guilty. Bad dude. Flips off his own fans. History of being a bad dude. It's all just coming to light now. It's unfortunate.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-20-2007, 09:43 AM
Well, then a plea bargain is an admission of guilt, so the NFL would then suspend him, probably for more than a year. He won't do that, because that admission of guilt would be used against him in the local trial brewing in Virginia once the feds are done with him.

Beating the feds straight up is a once in a lifetime occurrence. His chances are about a million to one. On top of that, he is the big fish in this very little pond. The feds are going to get the other three defendants to out Vick and are much more likely to offer them deals.

I'll put it this way, if Michael Vick somehow beats this and faces no jail time and does not have to give a single admission of guilt, it will be the single greatest story in the history of the Federal court system. Books will be written, movies will be made and his lawyers will be rich beyond their wildest dreams. But it's a fairy-tale pipe-dream. I will eat my words, apologize profusely and negative rep myself into the red if that happens. I'll donate an entire weeks pay to the the charity of Moses choosing if that happens.

That's how much of a slam dunk this is. This isn't Scott Norwood in the Super Bowl with a gimme that will somehow be shanked. That 18 page document I linked in the first post is so detailed with at least 20 instances over the last 6-7 years of Vick being 100% involved in all of this, it makes Pacman Jones look like a good dude.

http://a628.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/01133/72/63/1133223627_m.jpg

That's my buddy. It's pretty clear why I am so passionate about this case. It's not that I am anti-Michael Vick or anti-Atlanta Falcons, it's because what he has done is so horribly wrong and I just could never imagine my little dude going through something like that, or ever doing something to intentionally hurt him. I don't feel like I am being bias because of it, because the facts presented speak for themselves.

This proves the character we are dealing with. Also, it was said that the "Ron Mexico" thing went away. Of course it did, and of course he didn't go to jail, because it was a civil lawsuit:



Guilty. Bad dude. Flips off his own fans. History of being a bad dude. It's all just coming to light now. It's unfortunate.


Hold on there, just because he payed the girl off doesn't mean he's guilty. It means he just wanted to move on. By that logic, Kobe Bryant is a rapist.

Cashmoney
07-20-2007, 09:46 AM
and the waterbottle

Cashmoney
07-20-2007, 09:48 AM
Hold on there, just because he payed the girl off doesn't mean he's guilty. It means he just wanted to move on. By that logic, Kobe Bryant is a rapist.

why would you pay someone off if you are innocent though. if you truly were innocent then youre just giving in to what this person wanted in the first place.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-20-2007, 09:52 AM
why would you pay someone off if you are innocent though. if you truly were innocent then youre just giving in to what this person wanted in the first place.


Because they don't want it to go on longer, and have their reputations completely trashed. Even if they are innocent, with their celebrity, the media would make a huge deal about it.

Cashmoney
07-20-2007, 09:58 AM
Because they don't want it to go on longer, and have their reputations completely trashed. Even if they are innocent, with their celebrity, the media would make a huge deal about it.

but if you settle out of court people are more likely to think you actually did it as opposed to going through the legal process. plus that shows others that if they bring something up on that athlete even if its false, they might get paid to just go away.

Moses
07-20-2007, 10:00 AM
but if you settle out of court people are more likely to think you actually did it as opposed to going through the legal process. plus that shows others that if they bring something up on that athlete even if its false, they might get paid to just go away.

He would have been tied up in court for years and it would have been blown up by the media. It's not nearly the big deal it could have been if he had have fought it in court. Plus, he could be saving money considering the legal costs he would endure.

Moses
07-20-2007, 10:00 AM
and the waterbottle

I hate when people do this. Vick was cleared of ANY wrong-doing in that case. Why are you holding it against him?

Cashmoney
07-20-2007, 10:19 AM
I hate when people do this. Vick was cleared of ANY wrong-doing in that case. Why are you holding it against him?

because it counts as a "run-in" with the law.

Moses
07-20-2007, 10:20 AM
because it counts as a "run-in" with the law.

So if I'm a suspect for murder but it turns out I wasn't involved at all and I did nothing wrong, it should still be held over me? After all, I was a suspect in a murder case.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-20-2007, 10:24 AM
because it counts as a "run-in" with the law.



How is an airlines complete **** up a run in with the law?

Cashmoney
07-20-2007, 10:30 AM
So if I'm a suspect for murder but it turns out I wasn't involved at all and I did nothing wrong, it should still be held over me? After all, I was a suspect in a murder case.

read what i wrote again. it says its a run-in with the law. you cant deny that it wasn't.

Scar
07-20-2007, 10:31 AM
The water bottle is relevant. It wasn't that Vick was cleared due to evidence exhonorating him, it was a matter that it wasn't a case worth pursuing. It was a trace amount of marijuana residue, not nearly enough to pursue any intent to deal charges. Even had they found up to an ounce of actual marijuana in that bottle, Vick would have faced only a fine similar to that of a speeding ticket. It wasn't worth tying up crime labs and district attorneys to pursue, especially in light of the expensive attorneys Vick would have employed to defend himself. It just wasn't a big enough deal to bother prosecuting. It stayed off his police record, but Mike Vick sneaking weed around was another bad story for the league, and it does speak to his character as a guy who isn't exactly a model citizen.

Moses
07-20-2007, 10:34 AM
The water bottle is relevant. It wasn't that Vick was cleared due to evidence exhonorating him, it was a matter that it wasn't a case worth pursuing. It was a trace amount of marijuana residue, not nearly enough to pursue any intent to deal charges. Even had they found up to an ounce of actual marijuana in that bottle, Vick would have faced only a fine similar to that of a speeding ticket. It wasn't worth tying up crime labs and district attorneys to pursue, especially in light of the expensive attorneys Vick would have employed to defend himself. It just wasn't a big enough deal to bother prosecuting. It stayed off his police record, but Mike Vick sneaking weed around was another bad story for the league, and it does speak to his character as a guy who isn't exactly a model citizen.

On Monday, January 22, 2007, the test results indicated there were no illegal substances in the water bottle and Vick was cleared of any wrongdoing. Vick also was drug tested and the results were negative.[17]


He used it to store jewellery in. Know your stuff before you comment.

Moses
07-20-2007, 10:40 AM
read what i wrote again. it says its a run-in with the law. you cant deny that it wasn't.

What are you talking about? A "run-in" with the law is irrelevant if you didn't do anything wrong.

Scar
07-20-2007, 10:41 AM
If that's what you want to believe, I've got some waterfront property to sell you. What happened there was making a minor charge quietly go away. It had already made the news, but they didn't have enough to press any meaningful charges. Saying the bottle was clean saved black eyes all around. Jewelry my ass.
If OJ Simpson came to your house selling knives, would you tell your wife, "Sure, babe, let him in, he was cleared of all charges..." Or could you come off the constitutional rights soapbox long enough to use your head and see the obvious?

Moses
07-20-2007, 10:45 AM
If that's what you want to believe, I've got some waterfront property to sell you. What happened there was making a minor charge quietly go away. It had already made the news, but they didn't have enough to press any meaningful charges. Saying the bottle was clean saved black eyes all around. Jewelry my ass.
If OJ Simpson came to your house selling knives, would you tell your wife, "Sure, babe, let him in, he was cleared of all charges..." Or could you come off the constitutional rights soapbox long enough to use your head and see the obvious?

LOL are you kidding? What's more likely:

1) Vick used the water bottle to store jewellery in to prevent it from being stolen. Airport security mistaked it as a device used to transport drugs.

2) Airport security discovered Vick transporting drugs. They didn't feel like charging him. A crime lab illegally reported that there were no drugs in the water bottle. Vick was released.

Gimme a break. The bottle was TESTED and found clean by a crime lab. What evidence was there supporting your theory?

Scar
07-20-2007, 10:59 AM
This isn't even a discussion worth continuing. The evidence is massive. The evidence is damning. The charges are being brought by the United States of America. I highly suggest you read the charges and evidence brought against him, but I get the feeling you could watch me shoot someone between the eyes and you'd need a judge and jury to tell you that I'd murdered someone.

Cashmoney
07-20-2007, 11:03 AM
What are you talking about? A "run-in" with the law is irrelevant if you didn't do anything wrong.

well tell that pacman.

ricky bobby
07-20-2007, 11:07 AM
This isn't even a discussion worth continuing. The evidence is massive. The evidence is damning. The charges are being brought by the United States of America. I highly suggest you read the charges and evidence brought against him, but I get the feeling you could watch me shoot someone between the eyes and you'd need a judge and jury to tell you that I'd murdered someone.
Don't bother. Moses is too stubborn to ever admit he was wrong. He won't jump off the bandwagon until Vick goes to jail. Someone447 and Moses are the only ones left on the bandwagon. I kind of feel bad for them, it's kind of pathetic.

Scar
07-20-2007, 11:15 AM
Look, all my dogs have come from rescue shelters, I have done training with a number of them that needed to taught to stop aggressive habits caused by previous owners, so this issue hits real close to home for me.
Moses is an intelligent guy. I've seen that all over this forum. I don't mean to come across as belittling him. It's just come on, forget the animal rights tangents and fair trial textbooks and look at the facts. This is one of the most shut and sealed cases in history. There's no leg to stand on to try and defend Vick other than the same inane technicalities and loopholes that his lawyers will employ to try and get him off. Even if they find one that works, it'll never change what Vick has so painfully obviously done.

BuckNaked
07-20-2007, 11:16 AM
Look, all my dogs have come from rescue shelters, I have done training with a number of them that needed to taught to stop aggressive habits caused by previous owners, so this issue hits real close to home for me.
Moses is an intelligent guy. I've seen that all over this forum. I don't mean to come across as belittling him. It's just come on, forget the animal rights tangents and fair trial textbooks and look at the facts. This is one of the most shut and sealed cases in history. There's no leg to stand on to try and defend Vick other than the same inane technicalities and loopholes that his lawyers will employ to try and get him off. Even if they find one that works, it'll never change what Vick has so painfully obviously done.

If only Johnny Cochrane was still alive . . . . .

Philliez01
07-20-2007, 11:32 AM
Hold on there, just because he payed the girl off doesn't mean he's guilty. It means he just wanted to move on. By that logic, Kobe Bryant is a rapist.

That was a civil case too, I don't believe he got into trouble with the law. He simply paid off the girl, it's very similar to the Peyton Manning suit a few years back. A woman sued him claiming that Peyton "sexually harrassed" her but I think it was found out that he just mooned her in college.

Brent
07-20-2007, 11:58 AM
If only Johnny Cochrane was still alive...

Yeah, then Vick could use the Chewbacca Defense.

Jay
07-20-2007, 12:07 PM
Hold on there, just because he payed the girl off doesn't mean he's guilty. It means he just wanted to move on. By that logic, Kobe Bryant is a rapist.

Kobe admitted to having relations with her, he just said it was consensual. He paid her off to make it go away. There is a difference between the cases.

Jay
07-20-2007, 12:14 PM
He used it to store jewellery in. Know your stuff before you comment.

Then why did he have to throw it away before going through a metal detector/security?

Again, if he wasn't putting himself in these positions, there wouldn't be issues. If you want to keep giving him the benefit of the doubt, that's fine. But this is now the fourth incident that has occurred that has brought a black eye/negative press on the league in some way, all because of his personal decisions.

Moses
07-20-2007, 01:00 PM
Then why did he have to throw it away before going through a metal detector/security?

Again, if he wasn't putting himself in these positions, there wouldn't be issues. If you want to keep giving him the benefit of the doubt, that's fine. But this is now the fourth incident that has occurred that has brought a black eye/negative press on the league in some way, all because of his personal decisions.

Let me get this straight: you think Vick should be penalized because of an incident where he was cleared of any wrong-doing? Should T.O. be penalized because he runs his mouth and is a cancer to his team and in the league in general? No, because he's within his rights. If Vick isn't breaking the law, he shouldn't be suspended.

Moses
07-20-2007, 01:04 PM
Look, all my dogs have come from rescue shelters, I have done training with a number of them that needed to taught to stop aggressive habits caused by previous owners, so this issue hits real close to home for me.
Moses is an intelligent guy. I've seen that all over this forum. I don't mean to come across as belittling him. It's just come on, forget the animal rights tangents and fair trial textbooks and look at the facts. This is one of the most shut and sealed cases in history. There's no leg to stand on to try and defend Vick other than the same inane technicalities and loopholes that his lawyers will employ to try and get him off. Even if they find one that works, it'll never change what Vick has so painfully obviously done.

Scar,

First of all, nice change of topic after I proved you wrong on the water bottle incident. ;)

Maybe you're right about Vick having no legal leg to stand on in court. I don't know, the defence hasn't presented its argument yet. Further, it doesn't really matter for the situation right now. The fact is that there is a chance (as slim as it may be) that Vick is found innocent. Since that possibility remains, the league simply cannot suspend him.

The league isn't in a position to dictate justice. They know it and we know it. If Vick is cleared of these charges, they're not going to suspend him even if we all still think he did it. They'll punish him based on what the justice system convicts him of. Anything else would be an injustice.

duckseason
07-20-2007, 01:07 PM
Don't bother. Moses is too stubborn to ever admit he was wrong. He won't jump off the bandwagon until Vick goes to jail. Someone447 and Moses are the only ones left on the bandwagon. I kind of feel bad for them, it's kind of pathetic.
If you don't mind me asking, what exactly was Moses wrong about, and what's this bandwagon you speak of? The way I remember it, a few of us pulled back on the reigns of a wild topic and injected a dose of reality for those who took a hypocritical stance on the matter. I don't recall any defending of Vick other than insisting that he be granted due process before we burned him at the stake. Only the most obedient of mass media consuming sheep choose to blindly skip this most elemental consideration. Speaking for myself, if anybody came away from my posts thinking that I in any way implied that I was backing Vick, they ought to brush up on their reading comprehension skills. I haven't read all of their posts on the subject, but I think 447 and Moses would say the same.

Moses
07-20-2007, 01:10 PM
If you don't mind me asking, what exactly was Moses wrong about, and what's this bandwagon you speak of? The way I remember it, a few of us pulled back on the reigns of a wild topic and injected a dose of reality for those who took a hypocritical stance on the matter. I don't recall any defending of Vick other than insisting that he be granted due process before we burned him at the stake. Only the most obedient of mass media consuming sheep choose to blindly skip this most elemental consideration. Speaking for myself, if anybody came away from my posts thinking that I in any way implied that I was backing Vick, they ought to brush up on their reading comprehension skills. I haven't read all of their posts on the subject, but I think 447 and Moses would say the same.

Yup. I'm not "backing" Vick, just saying that he deserves a fair trial just like every other U.S. citizen. On top of that, he deserves to be treated fairly be the league. That means not punishing him until it is clear that he did something to warrant a punishment.

If Vick is found guilty, Goodell can have a field day on him for all I care. He violated the league's rules and he should be punished for it.

Scar
07-20-2007, 01:29 PM
Maybe you're right about Vick having no legal leg to stand on in court. I don't know, the defence hasn't presented its argument yet. Further, it doesn't really matter for the situation right now. The fact is that there is a chance (as slim as it may be) that Vick is found innocent. Since that possibility remains, the league simply cannot suspend him.

But that's just it, the situation right now requires a response. There is a protest outside league headquarters as I type this. Falcons training camp is going to be an absolute circus if Vick is there. Everywhere he goes will be. Everything the league has done to clean up it's image in the last year has been washed away tenfold by the situation Michael Vick has gotten himself into. Even the association with the other persons involved in this if his "I didn't know about this, I was never there" ignorance excuse holds water is bad enough to strongly suggest he not come to work until it's all over. Suspending him wouldn't be going out on a limb, they've certainly suspended guys for less.

Moses
07-20-2007, 01:32 PM
But that's just it, the situation right now requires a response. There is a protest outside league headquarters as I type this. Falcons training camp is going to be an absolute circus if Vick is there. Everywhere he goes will be. Everything the league has done to clean up it's image in the last year has been washed away tenfold by the situation Michael Vick has gotten himself into. Even the association with the other persons involved in this if his "I didn't know about this, I was never there" ignorance excuse holds water is bad enough to strongly suggest he not come to work until it's all over. Suspending him wouldn't be going out on a limb, they've certainly suspended guys for less.

You can't just suspend guys for no reason or because he might have broke a law. What is hard to understand about that? There will be legal ramifications for the league if they do something like that.

Scar
07-20-2007, 01:41 PM
No reason? You've got the US Senate decrying Vick today! How much more detrimental to the league does the guy have to be? Federal Indictments simply aren't handed out without years of investigation and scads of evidence. It's not that he "might" have broken a law. He broke laws. Lots of them. There's no need to sit around to see if he falls into the 1% that manages to escapes sentencing on a technicality.

Moses
07-20-2007, 01:43 PM
No reason? You've got the US Senate decrying Vick today! How much more detrimental to the league does the guy have to be? Federal Indictments simply aren't handed out without years of investigation and scads of evidence. It's not that he "might" have broken a law. He broke laws. Lots of them. There's no need to sit around to see if he falls into the 1% that manages to escapes sentencing on a technicality.

Do you understand what would happen if he were suspended and then "escapes sentencing on a technicalilty"? Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. That's the American way.

duckseason
07-20-2007, 01:48 PM
Federal Indictments simply aren't handed out without years of investigation and scads of evidence.

Not that it matters, but that isn't even close to the truth.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-20-2007, 01:50 PM
Kobe admitted to having relations with her, he just said it was consensual. He paid her off to make it go away. There is a difference between the cases.



How? Vick payed the girl off to make it go away too. He didn't want it to continue.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-20-2007, 01:52 PM
Don't bother. Moses is too stubborn to ever admit he was wrong. He won't jump off the bandwagon until Vick goes to jail. Someone447 and Moses are the only ones left on the bandwagon. I kind of feel bad for them, it's kind of pathetic.


No one is on the Vick "bandwagon" atleast what I have come across. I haven't seen anyone defend dog-fighting. The only thing we are defending, is that it is his right to be innocent until proven guilty.

Scar
07-20-2007, 01:52 PM
Here we go with idealism instead of common sense again...
He did these things. That's not even at issue here.
What the league can act upon is "conduct detrimental to the league." Tell me that Michael Vick has been a good thing for the NFL this week. Tell me that he's been a nonissue for the league this week. Tell me that he has been anything other than the biggest headache the league has endured since, well, ever.

Philliez01
07-20-2007, 01:53 PM
Goodell CAN'T SUSPEND him right now. Pacman had multiple run - ins with the law and none of them were "dropped" or in Vick's bottle incident, deemed a mistake. Same with Henry, Tank and Jared Allen.

But really, if Goodell suspends Vick right now because of PETA; then basically all he is doing is caving into demands. The whole "conduct policy" is then flawed as Goodell was persuaded by a group to suspend a player. It would be ridiculous and if that .5% chance Vick is innoncent becomes 100%; do you realize the implications that sets?

I was trying to make an analogy, but the only thing that comes close to this if Bud Selig suspends Barry Bonds right now. Bonds may still get charged for tax evasion and if say, Selig just suspends him now and Bonds doesn't get indicted; how bad does this look? People will be pissed, Bonds will be pissed but most importantly, Bonds lawyers may be pissed.

I am willing to bet my left and right nut that Vick is going to be in jail. I do find him innoncent and I find dogfighting HORRIBLY sick. But you can't do it now.

D-Unit
07-20-2007, 01:55 PM
No one is on the Vick "bandwagon" atleast what I have come across. I haven't seen anyone defend dog-fighting. The only thing we are defending, is that it is his right to be innocent until proven guilty.
Vick said sorry to Blank. Why apologize if you're innocent?

Moses
07-20-2007, 01:56 PM
Vick said sorry to Blank. Why apologize if you're innocent?

For creating a scene? Are you honestly taking his apology as an admission of guilt?

D-Unit
07-20-2007, 01:58 PM
Goodell CAN'T SUSPEND him right now. Pacman had multiple run - ins with the law and none of them were "dropped" or in Vick's bottle incident, deemed a mistake. Same with Henry, Tank and Jared Allen.

But really, if Goodell suspends Vick right now because of PETA; then basically all he is doing is caving into demands. The whole "conduct policy" is then flawed as Goodell was persuaded by a group to suspend a player. It would be ridiculous and if that .5% chance Vick is innoncent becomes 100%; do you realize the implications that sets?

I was trying to make an analogy, but the only thing that comes close to this if Bud Selig suspends Barry Bonds right now. Bonds may still get charged for tax evasion and if say, Selig just suspends him now and Bonds doesn't get indicted; how bad does this look? People will be pissed, Bonds will be pissed but most importantly, Bonds lawyers may be pissed.

I am willing to bet my left and right nut that Vick is going to be in jail. I do find him innoncent and I find dogfighting HORRIBLY sick. But you can't do it now.
The thing is, Goddell wouldn't be suspending Vick because of what PETA is saying or doing. It would be based off Vick's image being bad for the league. What PETA is saying or doing is a side issue.

duckseason
07-20-2007, 01:58 PM
Vick said sorry to Blank. Why apologize if you're innocent?

Not saying I think he's innocent, but he could just be apologizing for all the negative publicity. I don't see that as an admission of guilt at all.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-20-2007, 01:58 PM
Here we go with idealism instead of common sense again...
He did these things. That's not even at issue here.
What the league can act upon is "conduct detrimental to the league." Tell me that Michael Vick has been a good thing for the NFL this week. Tell me that he's been a nonissue for the league this week. Tell me that he has been anything other than the biggest headache the league has endured since, well, ever.


For all you know Michael Vick's lawyers could have the best defense we have ever heard, and he gets off. Does it seem like he's guilty? Hell yes. Do you think Vick is going to hire some jerk-off lawyer or a top notch one? He could still be proven innocent.

He's not been good for the NFL this last week, but you can't seem to understand how much worse it would be for the NFL if he is found innocent and they had already suspended him.

Scar
07-20-2007, 01:59 PM
Vick said sorry to Blank. Why apologize if you're innocent?

Precisely. Even by if some freak chance, he had no knowledge of what was going on at his property, his associations have brought intense scrunity to himself, his team, and the league. That alone is "conduct detrimental."

Moses
07-20-2007, 01:59 PM
The thing is, Goddell wouldn't be suspending Vick because of what PETA is saying or doing. It would be based off Vick's image being bad for the league. What PETA is saying or doing is a side issue.

They should suspend Terrell Owens for his image too.

Moses
07-20-2007, 02:00 PM
Precisely. Even by if some freak chance, he had no knowledge of what was going on at his property, his associations have brought intense scrunity to himself, his team, and the league. That alone is "conduct detrimental."

LOL. Now we're suspending a guy because of the people he associates with? You should read the constitution...

Cashmoney
07-20-2007, 02:00 PM
Not saying I think he's innocent, but he could just be apologizing for all the negative publicity. I don't see that as an admission of guilt at all.

pacman was suspended for creating negative publicity moreso than anything he was actually convicted of, so why can't vick be suspended for the same thing?

Philliez01
07-20-2007, 02:00 PM
The thing is, Goddell wouldn't be suspending Vick because of what PETA is saying or doing. It would be based off Vick's image being bad for the league. What PETA is saying or doing is a side issue.

Touche'.

But someone argued about why Vick should be suspended and threw out PETA's protests. If Goodell suspended Vick wouldn't some think that PETA's protests were somewhat linked to it?

I do think that Vick's image is ruining the league, but I am really curious to see what would've went down if Ray Lewis' whole murder case occured with Goodell in office. It's a wait - and - see thing, I feel. I do think that Goodell has a case of suspending Vick because of image, but if Vick is found innocent; what happens?

BTW, what happened to Boddie? Wasn't he the "cousin"?

Moses
07-20-2007, 02:01 PM
pacman was suspended for creating negative publicity moreso than anything he was actually convicted of, so why can't vick be suspended for the same thing?

Pacman was in trouble with the law and it was proven...

ATLDirtyBirds
07-20-2007, 02:01 PM
Not saying I think he's innocent, but he could just be apologizing for all the negative publicity. I don't see that as an admission of guilt at all.


I never did understand why that's the first conclusion people jumped to.


Here is the quote from Len Pasquarelli's article on Vick apologizing.


None of the sources knew or would divulge the exact wording of what is said to have been a fairly brief conversation. But Vick, who was said by one associate to have been "devastated" by the indictment, is believed to have been contrite, apologized for the distractions the case has created, and thanked Blank for his support.

Philliez01
07-20-2007, 02:02 PM
pacman was suspended for creating negative publicity moreso than anything he was actually convicted of, so why can't vick be suspended for the same thing?

How many incidents did Pacman have? How many did Chris Henry have? Vick had one as Bottlegate was deemed a mistake or just a "precautionary" thing. The only legal problem I saw with Vick is an illegal sticker on a boat.

duckseason
07-20-2007, 02:02 PM
The thing is, Goddell wouldn't be suspending Vick because of what PETA is saying or doing. It would be based off Vick's image being bad for the league. What PETA is saying or doing is a side issue.

Does PETA not magnify that bad image?

Cashmoney
07-20-2007, 02:03 PM
Pacman was in trouble with the law and it was proven...

then why doesnt the league say thats why he was suspended, as oppossed to "multiple run-ins with the law"

Moses
07-20-2007, 02:04 PM
then why doesnt the league say thats why he was suspended, as oppossed to "multiple run-ins with the law"

I'm guessing they warned him after his first incident that he was proven guilty. They probably said if you continue getting involved in incidents, you'll be suspended. Then he got into all those other incidents...

duckseason
07-20-2007, 02:05 PM
pacman was suspended for creating negative publicity moreso than anything he was actually convicted of, so why can't vick be suspended for the same thing?

I think you quoted the wrong person. I merely stated that Vick's apology to Blank shouldn't be received as an admission of guilt.

Cashmoney
07-20-2007, 02:05 PM
I think you quoted the wrong person. I merely stated that Vick's apology to Blank shouldn't be received as an admission of guilt.

yea my bad

D-Unit
07-20-2007, 02:06 PM
For creating a scene? Are you honestly taking his apology as an admission of guilt?
Yeah, he created a scene. What scene do you think that is? Do you think he's apologizing because his name is involved in false allegations? Get real. He is guilty. That's what he's sorry about.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-20-2007, 02:07 PM
Yeah, he created a scene. What scene do you think that is? Do you think he's apologizing because his name is involved in false allegations? Get real. He is guilty. That's what he's sorry about.


I'll post it again. From the article where we all found out he apologized from.


None of the sources knew or would divulge the exact wording of what is said to have been a fairly brief conversation. But Vick, who was said by one associate to have been "devastated" by the indictment, is believed to have been contrite, apologized for the distractions the case has created, and thanked Blank for his support.

Scar
07-20-2007, 02:07 PM
LOL. Now we're suspending a guy because of the people he associates with? You should read the constitution...

Again with the idealism in lieu of logical thought. He's dead to rights on abetting felons and criminal negligence in his dream scenario. Conduct detrimental. There's no harm whatsoever in the league suspending him.

Moses
07-20-2007, 02:08 PM
Yeah, he created a scene. What scene do you think that is? Do you think he's apologizing because his name is involved in false allegations? Get real. He is guilty. That's what he's sorry about.

He apologized about the distractions the case was creating. Wouldn't you do the same if you wanted to keep your job in a situation like this?

Stop pretending you're some all-knowing power and realize that you don't know that Vick is guilty.

Moses
07-20-2007, 02:09 PM
Again with the idealism in lieu of logical thought. He's dead to rights on abetting felons and criminal negligence in his dream scenario. Conduct detrimental. There's no harm whatsoever in the league suspending him.

If I grow drugs in my rented house is my landlord going to get locked up for "abetting felons"?

Freedom of association is a right.

D-Unit
07-20-2007, 02:09 PM
They should suspend Terrell Owens for his image too.
When did TO break the law? TO brings positive drama to the league. They and the media live for his next move.

Moses
07-20-2007, 02:10 PM
When did TO break the law? TO brings positive drama to the league. They and the media live for his next move.

It has not been proven that Vick has broken the law. That's the whole point.

Scar
07-20-2007, 02:12 PM
If I grow drugs in my rented house is my landlord going to get locked up for "abetting felons"?

The key word there is rented. The tenent/landlord relationship is not even close to letting a bunch of guys sleep on your couch while committing felonies in your backyard.

Moses
07-20-2007, 02:13 PM
The key word there is rented. The tenent/landlord relationship is not even close to letting a bunch of guys sleep on your couch while committing felonies in your backyard.

How? Because no money is exchanged? Vick didn't even live there.

D-Unit
07-20-2007, 02:14 PM
He apologized about the distractions the case was creating. Wouldn't you do the same if you wanted to keep your job in a situation like this?

Stop pretending you're some all-knowing power and realize that you don't know that Vick is guilty.
If I think Vick is guilty, that puts me in the majority, buddy. Are we all pretending to be some all knowing power? NO. It's simple common sense. The Feds have all the evidence they need to convict him otherwise they wouldn't have put together this 19 page indictment. I think it's crazy for anyone to think he had no part in this.

D-Unit
07-20-2007, 02:16 PM
It has not been proven that Vick has broken the law. That's the whole point.
NOT YET. ...and the NFL hasn't done anything to him yet either, so what are you complaining about?

Moses
07-20-2007, 02:16 PM
If I think Vick is guilty, that puts me in the majority, buddy. Are we all pretending to be some all knowing power? NO. It's simple common sense. The Feds have all the evidence they need to convict him otherwise they wouldn't have put together this 19 page indictment. I think it's crazy for anyone to think he had no part in this.

Where did I say I don't think he's guilty? It doesn't matter. He hasn't been PROVEN guilty, so you cannot SUSPEND him.

Moses
07-20-2007, 02:16 PM
NOT YET. ...and the NFL hasn't done anything to him yet either, so what are you complaining about?

I'm complaining about the people that think he should be suspended NOW. I agree with what the league is doing.

D-Unit
07-20-2007, 02:27 PM
I'm complaining about the people that think he should be suspended NOW. I agree with what the league is doing.
Well the league and the Falcons are talking about encouraging Vick to take a paid leave to focus on his legal issues. I don't think that is uncalled for. It is not a suspension. Besides, with his court appearances set at the same time of the Falcons practices, the league won't have to take action. The law is taking care of it for them.

Vick has played his last game in the NFL. They want him away from the league until this thing settles.... and when it does settle, he'll be in jail.

Moses
07-20-2007, 02:28 PM
Well the league and the Falcons are talking about encouraging Vick to take a paid leave to focus on his legal issues. I don't think that is uncalled for. It is not a suspension. Besides, with his court appearances set at the same time of the Falcons practices, the league won't have to take action. The law is taking care of it for them.

Vick has played his last game in the NFL. They want him away from the league until this thing settles.... and when it does settle, he'll be in jail.

I'm not sure how paid leaves work but I doubt Vick would object to that.

D-Unit
07-20-2007, 02:31 PM
I'm not sure how paid leaves work but I doubt Vick would object to that.
It means their way of showing support is to pay him to stay away. It's worth it to us, to pay you to stay the hell away.

duckseason
07-20-2007, 02:33 PM
It means their way of showing support is to pay him to stay away. It's worth it to us, to pay you to stay the hell away.

Kinda like what I do with my numerous ex-wives and children.

SubNoize
07-20-2007, 02:33 PM
i'm not making judgement on vick quite yet, i'll admit it's starting to stack up against him quickly, but i don't think the nfl will suspend him quite yet. personally i think the falcons should ask him to take a paid leave of absence so he wont be a major distraction to the team until things clear up some, if that takes the the whole year then so be it, but the media circus the team will face will be more hurtful than vick leaving for a bit.

missed the posts above.... lets see if he goes for it.

Shiver
07-20-2007, 03:13 PM
Vick has played his last game in the NFL. They want him away from the league until this thing settles.... and when it does settle, he'll be in jail.

Now I just have to hope Harrington is as bad as I think he is, then we will be in perfect position for 'my boy.'

D-Unit
07-20-2007, 03:47 PM
Now I just have to hope Harrington is as bad as I think he is, then we will be in perfect position for 'my boy.'
I could see Colt Brennan wearing a dirty birds jersey. ;)

Shiver
07-20-2007, 04:27 PM
The only possible hiccup in the Federal case is how trustworthy their sources are. Evidently it was Vick's relative, a criminal, that gave Vick up. This is the case because Davon Boddie was not indicted. If that's the case, Vick's lawyers will have a field day with him on the stand.

D-Unit
07-20-2007, 04:30 PM
The only possible hiccup in the Federal case is how trustworthy their sources are. Evidently it was Vick's relative, a criminal, that gave Vick up. This is the case because Davon Boddie was not indicted. If that's the case, Vick's lawyers will have a field day with him on the stand.
What I'm thinkin' is....

Did none of Vick's teammates NOT know what was going on?

What about the Falcons management?

Right now, nobody is coming out... but once we start to get into the thick of things, it could get REAL UGLY. People will be pointing fingers everywhere.

Shiver
07-20-2007, 04:34 PM
The Federal Government better have more then Vick's thug friends to back up their indictment.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-20-2007, 05:12 PM
The Federal Government better have more then Vick's thug friends to back up their indictment.


If they want to win, yes they do. Vick's lawyers will destroy Boddie.

Scott Wright
07-20-2007, 05:16 PM
I don't agree with punishing people before they've gone through the legal process but since Goodell has already set the precedent I don't see how he can not suspend Vick.

On a personal note, if half of the things that are alledged end up being true I hope Mike Vick is never allowed to play another down in the NFL. Some of those things are just absolutely disgusting.

Jay
07-20-2007, 06:09 PM
Let me get this straight: you think Vick should be penalized because of an incident where he was cleared of any wrong-doing? Should T.O. be penalized because he runs his mouth and is a cancer to his team and in the league in general? No, because he's within his rights. If Vick isn't breaking the law, he shouldn't be suspended.

Where did I say he needed to be penalized? I am saying it raises questions about his character. I have never at any point in time in this entire Vick debate stated that Vick needs to be suspended. Matter of fact, I have said and am saying it won't even be necessary. Please do not put words in my mouth. You are better than that.

Moses
07-20-2007, 06:10 PM
Where did I say he needed to be penalized? I am saying it raises questions about his character. I have never at any point in time in this entire Vick debate stated that Vick needs to be suspended. Matter of fact, I have said and am saying it won't even be necessary. Please do not put words in my mouth. You are better than that.

So what are you arguing with me about?

Jay
07-20-2007, 06:12 PM
Do you understand what would happen if he were suspended and then "escapes sentencing on a technicalilty"? Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. That's the American way.

So escaping sentence on a technicality makes him innocent? Tell that to the dogs he killed. Tell that to the two people OJ Simpson killed. Come on dude...

Moses
07-20-2007, 06:13 PM
So escaping sentence on a technicality makes him innocent? Tell that to the dogs he killed. Tell that to the two people OJ Simpson killed. Come on dude...

If he isn't punished by the American justice system, the NFL punishing him would be ridiculous. The NFL are not judges of guilt. They suspend players based on what the American justice system says people do. So if Vick is found innocent, there is no way he gets suspended.

Jay
07-20-2007, 06:16 PM
For creating a scene? Are you honestly taking his apology as an admission of guilt?

You have obviously never worked in sales or retail. Apology is always deemed as an admittance of wrong doing. Most companies train their employees never to apologize, only to sympathize with the customer. Perception can very easily become reality. We also only read reports of what was said between Vick and Blank. Only the two of them know what was really said...

Moses
07-20-2007, 06:17 PM
You have obviously never worked in sales or retail. Apology is always deemed as an admittance of wrong doing. Most companies train their employees never to apologize, only to sympathize with the customer. Perception can very easily become reality. We also only read reports of what was said between Vick and Blank. Only the two of them know what was really said...

Are you comparing retail sales to this? I guess Vick missed his orientation at Walmart when they told him not to apologize or people would think he's guilty.

Jay
07-20-2007, 06:18 PM
For all you know Michael Vick's lawyers could have the best defense we have ever heard, and he gets off. Does it seem like he's guilty? Hell yes. Do you think Vick is going to hire some jerk-off lawyer or a top notch one? He could still be proven innocent.

He's not been good for the NFL this last week, but you can't seem to understand how much worse it would be for the NFL if he is found innocent and they had already suspended him.

So "getting off" is going to make him innocent? Really. Wow.

I guess Chris Benoit is innocent then. I mean, a judge and a jury didn't tell me that he killed his wife and kid, all we really have is circumstantial evidence being fed to us by cops...

Moses
07-20-2007, 06:19 PM
So "getting off" is going to make him innocent? Really. Wow.

I guess Chris Benoit is innocent then. I mean, a judge and a jury didn't tell me that he killed his wife and kid, all we really have is circumstantial evidence being fed to us by cops...

Do you think that the NFL would suspend Vick if all charges were dropped against him and he was not punished by the justice system? That would be completely ridiculous.

bearfan
07-20-2007, 06:26 PM
I believe he should be suspended for a few games right now, w/o being proven guilty. Yes, Moses, I know you think its rediculous, but right now he put himself in a bad spot, based on some bad choices. Now the whole world is looking at him as they never have before, and I believe that that is hurting the NFLs rep. That and the fact that he lied. Goodell should not just let him off even if he is proven innocent

Jay
07-20-2007, 06:47 PM
Do you think that the NFL would suspend Vick if all charges were dropped against him and he was not punished by the justice system? That would be completely ridiculous.

That's not "getting off."

"Getting off" means he goes to trial and does what no one ever does: beats a federal rap. And again, even if he does that, there will be the local authorities to deal with.

I believe everything that 18 page Federal Indictment to be true the same way I believe everything the cops in Georgia have determined in the Chris Benoit case: that he killed his wife and his kid and then killed himself. Neither have had a judge or jury say otherwise, but it's a slam dunk.

Michael Vick is, at the very least, guilty of associating with the wrong people. This is something the NFL drills into their head at their Rookie Symposium, and very clearly many of these guys don't get it.

But at the same time, this isn't simply a case of a guy being guilty by association, though. Vick has claimed he was "never" there, when he has been linked to being there on many, many, many occasions. He can not plead ignorance. It can not and will not happen or work. He was every bit a part in all of this. The evidence is indisputable, the same way it is indisputable in the case of Chris Benoit.

But again, I am going to just let it play out. We're on what, day four after the indictment? A week from today, ****s gonna hit the fan and when this thing actually goes to trial, it's going to be slam dunk.

And again, you are misunderstanding the meaning behind "innocent until proven guilty." That simply means that the government/cops can not dictate a punishment until a decision is made by a judge and jury, and that they are to assume he is innocent until it is proven otherwise.

It if you want to carry that over into your personal opinion, that is certainly your right. But it is evidence is very clearly not in the favor of your opinion...

Jay
07-20-2007, 06:49 PM
So what are you arguing with me about?

I am simply responding to what you are saying. You are telling me that I am saying/implying things that I am not. It's pretty simple actually.

Jay
07-20-2007, 06:51 PM
If he isn't punished by the American justice system, the NFL punishing him would be ridiculous. The NFL are not judges of guilt. They suspend players based on what the American justice system says people do. So if Vick is found innocent, there is no way he gets suspended.

Well being found innocent is certainly different than "escaping on a technicality" isn't it?

Jay
07-20-2007, 06:53 PM
Are you comparing retail sales to this? I guess Vick missed his orientation at Walmart when they told him not to apologize or people would think he's guilty.

The ironic part is that Vick will be lucky if his next job is at Walmart at this point...

As far as the comparison, I think it was pretty straight forward. An apology is often seen as an admission of guilt. I simply sited one example.

Shiver
07-20-2007, 07:29 PM
Well being found innocent is certainly different than "escaping on a technicality" isn't it?

It depends. What if the only witnesses who make these claims about Vick happen to be criminals who their nuts in the proverbial vice by the Feds, (see Davon Boddie) so they told them what they wanted to hear. Is that a "technicality"? Let's not presume guilt or innocence shall we?

As of last night I thought he was guilty as sin. Now that I read that Boddie is one of the witnesses, supposedly, that makes me question the validity of his testimony. It's pretty easy to point fingers and make allegations when you are looking at going away for a long time and the Feds are going to give you a deal in exchange for giving up the big guy they're going after. After all Boddie was thrown under the bus by Vick earlier, he could be just getting back at him to save his own behind.

D-Unit
07-20-2007, 07:38 PM
Regardless, Vick is going down with this attached to his name forever...

Just like OJ and murder and Barry Bonds and steroids.... He will always be guilty in the eyes of the people.

Shiver
07-20-2007, 08:25 PM
No doubt; however, as it stands I think more patience should be displayed on the part of those who would hang Michael Vick in recompense for only what he is charged with. Right now the odds are he is guilty, but some of these responses are ridiculous.

someone447
07-20-2007, 08:45 PM
That's not "getting off."

"Getting off" means he goes to trial and does what no one ever does: beats a federal rap. And again, even if he does that, there will be the local authorities to deal with.

I believe everything that 18 page Federal Indictment to be true the same way I believe everything the cops in Georgia have determined in the Chris Benoit case: that he killed his wife and his kid and then killed himself. Neither have had a judge or jury say otherwise, but it's a slam dunk.

Michael Vick is, at the very least, guilty of associating with the wrong people. This is something the NFL drills into their head at their Rookie Symposium, and very clearly many of these guys don't get it.

But at the same time, this isn't simply a case of a guy being guilty by association, though. Vick has claimed he was "never" there, when he has been linked to being there on many, many, many occasions. He can not plead ignorance. It can not and will not happen or work. He was every bit a part in all of this. The evidence is indisputable, the same way it is indisputable in the case of Chris Benoit.

But again, I am going to just let it play out. We're on what, day four after the indictment? A week from today, ****s gonna hit the fan and when this thing actually goes to trial, it's going to be slam dunk.

And again, you are misunderstanding the meaning behind "innocent until proven guilty." That simply means that the government/cops can not dictate a punishment until a decision is made by a judge and jury, and that they are to assume he is innocent until it is proven otherwise.

It if you want to carry that over into your personal opinion, that is certainly your right. But it is evidence is very clearly not in the favor of your opinion...

You, sir, are the master of the straw man argument(The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3. Person B attacks position Y.
4. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed. )


You do realize that witnesses that are testifying to get a reduced sentence aren't the most trustworthy. That is what I have been saying the entire time. It is impossible to say he is guilty without knowing the situations of the witnesses. Does it look like he is guilty? Of course it does, but we know nothing about the witnesses.

I would like to see a cite that says the federal government wins 95%+ of their cases. He has much more than a one in a million chance, even if that was the average odds of someone beating a federal rap, Vick is not a normal person. He has much, much more money than most people, and money gives him a much better chance.

I don't think the NFL should do anything to him. However, I would have absolutely no problem with the Falcons suspending him. Regardless if he is guilty or not, this will negatively affect the teams performance, which is more than enough reason for the TEAM to do something. I don't think it is enough for the NFL to do something, but the team needs to do whatever it can to win, which would involve keeping the Vick circus away.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
07-20-2007, 08:53 PM
Goodell can suspend him if he likes. The NFL is a business, and if someone was indicted by the feds they could certainly lose their job for it. The only thing is, if he is acquitted, all of a sudden, Falcons fans, bitter about losing a season for no reason, will be very angry with Goodell. It would just not be a great situation. If it's settled out of court in time for Goodell to act, I think he'll suspend him. If it goes to court, he might wait it out. This is very different from PacMan. PacMan has repeatedly done stupid things that are against the law. This is Vick's first. The water bottle is a non-issue. flipping off Saints fans(yes they were saints fans) for calling him racial slurs is not against the law.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-20-2007, 09:41 PM
So "getting off" is going to make him innocent? Really. Wow.

I guess Chris Benoit is innocent then. I mean, a judge and a jury didn't tell me that he killed his wife and kid, all we really have is circumstantial evidence being fed to us by cops...


What I meant was Vick's laywers could easily take down these witnesses, espically if they are all Davon Boddies.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-20-2007, 09:43 PM
I believe he should be suspended for a few games right now, w/o being proven guilty. Yes, Moses, I know you think its rediculous, but right now he put himself in a bad spot, based on some bad choices. Now the whole world is looking at him as they never have before, and I believe that that is hurting the NFLs rep. That and the fact that he lied. Goodell should not just let him off even if he is proven innocent



I could see were you would argue that he is hurting the NFL's rep, but as Moses and myself have pointed out several times, what happens if he's innocent? Right now, Vick's rep is hurt alot more than the NFL's. If Vick was suspended then found innocent, the NFL would take an absolute beating.

Jay
07-20-2007, 09:43 PM
You, sir, are the master of the straw man argument(The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3. Person B attacks position Y.
4. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed. )


You do realize that witnesses that are testifying to get a reduced sentence aren't the most trustworthy. That is what I have been saying the entire time. It is impossible to say he is guilty without knowing the situations of the witnesses. Does it look like he is guilty? Of course it does, but we know nothing about the witnesses.

I would like to see a cite that says the federal government wins 95%+ of their cases. He has much more than a one in a million chance, even if that was the average odds of someone beating a federal rap, Vick is not a normal person. He has much, much more money than most people, and money gives him a much better chance.

I don't think the NFL should do anything to him. However, I would have absolutely no problem with the Falcons suspending him. Regardless if he is guilty or not, this will negatively affect the teams performance, which is more than enough reason for the TEAM to do something. I don't think it is enough for the NFL to do something, but the team needs to do whatever it can to win, which would involve keeping the Vick circus away.

Why I am even responding you here after you've proven yourself an idiot through other means, I don't know, but it's a slow night and I'm bored, so I'll bite.

#1, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA at your "Straw man" theory. Kind of ironic since I had issues with Moses putting words into my mouth. But hey, I'm learning real quick that you're not the sharpest tool in the drawer, so this is just par for the course.

I would absolutely love to see you get specific. You won't, because you can't, but please, humor me with an attempt.

#2. If the three other people join the four informants in turning on Vick, and it becomes seven people's word against one, Vicks dream team is going to have their hands full trying to destroy the credibility of a lot of people. Nice try, though.

#3. Give me every single case of the 5% the feds have failed to win, and lets see what went wrong. Having good attorneys doesn't necessarily mean anything, especially when the facts are as concrete as this. Bodies were found, Vick is confirmed to have been a very willing participant, let alone the owner of the land and enterprise, and that's all there is to it.

So basically, before anyone assumes Vick can win this case because it's been done before, let's assess the facts of this case versus the very small handful of others who have actually gone to trial and flat out won.

I guarantee it won't look pretty. Money means nothing. If anything, the details of the case work heavily against him, especially when the feds start bring out pictures of mutilated and dead dogs.

Anyone with half a brain should see the writing on the wall.

#4. Way to straddle the fence there hotshot. Pick a side and stand on it. What difference does it make if a suspension comes from the league or the team? Same ****, different stench.

D-Unit
07-20-2007, 09:54 PM
The fact that there is no precedence for a Federal Case such as this, Goddell can set the precedence now. ...and he should. Yes, players in the past have broken state laws and there is a precedence for that, but this does not compare. People forget that being in the NFL is a priviledge, not a right. The NFL is not the US Justice System. It has it's own set of rules. It does not have the same rules and it doesn't have to have the same rules. If Vick is innocent, then he doesn't have to go to jail. That is completely different from what matters to the NFL or any other business that has their own conduct policies. If the NFL has a rule or sets up a rule related to conduct harmful to the league, then they have the right to do so in order to protect their image. Look at NIKE. They aren't releasing Vick's new shoe line. Is America up in arms because NIKE doesn't wish to relate themselves to Vick at this time? Hell no!

ATLDirtyBirds
07-20-2007, 10:09 PM
The fact that there is no precedence for a Federal Case such as this, Goddell can set the precedence now. ...and he should. Yes, players in the past have broken state laws and there is a precedence for that, but this does not compare. People forget that being in the NFL is a priviledge, not a right. The NFL is not the US Justice System. It has it's own set of rules. It does not have the same rules and it doesn't have to have the same rules. If Vick is innocent, then he doesn't have to go to jail. That is completely different from what matters to the NFL or any other business that has their own conduct policies. If the NFL has a rule or sets up a rule related to conduct harmful to the league, then they have the right to do so in order to protect their image. Look at NIKE. They aren't releasing Vick's new shoe line. Is America up in arms because NIKE doesn't wish to relate themselves to Vick at this time? Hell no!


Most of America isn't crying for Vick. Even non PETA people still have a big problem with animals being hurt. We would be getting less **** if he was selling cocaine. And Nike still has Vick on board with them, so just because they are waiting it out doesn't mean much. Honestly, them not releasing it now has nothing to do with the charges IMO. I think they aren't releasing it because as I pointed out, people have the problem with the animals. The truth is, if this Vick stuff was released right now, it would flop.

D-Unit
07-20-2007, 10:57 PM
Most of America isn't crying for Vick. Even non PETA people still have a big problem with animals being hurt. We would be getting less **** if he was selling cocaine. And Nike still has Vick on board with them, so just because they are waiting it out doesn't mean much. Honestly, them not releasing it now has nothing to do with the charges IMO. I think they aren't releasing it because as I pointed out, people have the problem with the animals. The truth is, if this Vick stuff was released right now, it would flop.
I'm not saying people are crying for Vick. Dunno where you got that. I'm responding to those saying the NFL would get pounded for suspending Vick. It's just not true. Pounded by ATL fans? Maybe. Pounded by players in Adam Jones' shoes? Maybe. But not to the general public.

On Nike....why do you think Vick's stuff would flop? It's because of the charges, bud. You can't say it has nothing to do with the charges... that's wrong.

Jags#7
07-20-2007, 11:03 PM
I don't agree with what the NFL is doing....Tank Johnson had a couple of crimes nowhere near this....one of which he was driving legally...and he gets 8 games....Mike Vick has had several incidents as well, with flipping off the fans and the water bottle and now he kills dogs....and the say"Oh lets wait and see" It really upsets me to see him to this because it hurts the image of not just him, the NFL and the falcons, but his race. Several news reports have said how much of a part dog fighting is of african american culture and it is ashame one man can do so much to ruin image

someone447
07-20-2007, 11:52 PM
Why I am even responding you here after you've proven yourself an idiot through other means, I don't know, but it's a slow night and I'm bored, so I'll bite.

#1, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA at your "Straw man" theory. Kind of ironic since I had issues with Moses putting words into my mouth. But hey, I'm learning real quick that you're not the sharpest tool in the drawer, so this is just par for the course.

I would absolutely love to see you get specific. You won't, because you can't, but please, humor me with an attempt.

#2. If the three other people join the four informants in turning on Vick, and it becomes seven people's word against one, Vicks dream team is going to have their hands full trying to destroy the credibility of a lot of people. Nice try, though.

#3. Give me every single case of the 5% the feds have failed to win, and lets see what went wrong. Having good attorneys doesn't necessarily mean anything, especially when the facts are as concrete as this. Bodies were found, Vick is confirmed to have been a very willing participant, let alone the owner of the land and enterprise, and that's all there is to it.

So basically, before anyone assumes Vick can win this case because it's been done before, let's assess the facts of this case versus the very small handful of others who have actually gone to trial and flat out won.

I guarantee it won't look pretty. Money means nothing. If anything, the details of the case work heavily against him, especially when the feds start bring out pictures of mutilated and dead dogs.

Anyone with half a brain should see the writing on the wall.

#4. Way to straddle the fence there hotshot. Pick a side and stand on it. What difference does it make if a suspension comes from the league or the team? Same ****, different stench.

I see you are still upset about that red dot...

1. Notice how EVERYONE who you disagree with says that you are misconstruing what they say. That, my friend, is a straw man. An example, find any thread about Mike Vick that I have ever said I thought he was innocent. Hell, find any place that Moses said he was completely innocent. All we have ever said is he might not be guilty.

2. IF IF IF IF IF, there is no guarantee they turn on him. You are stating it like it is a fact they will.

3. Vick is not CONFIRMED, he has 4 witnesses, as of right now who are of questionable motives saying he was. Let's wait and see how these witnesses end up before jumping to conclusions. You are the one who is claiming the feds don't lose, therefore, it is your responsibility to show a cite that proves your claim. All I am doing is questioning your information.

4. The difference between the NFL suspending him and the Falcons suspending him is substantial. The Falcons suspending him would help the team win games, which is what each teams primary goal is. The NFL suspending him takes that choice out of the teams hands. If the Falcons think they will win more games with Vick suspended, then they should be able to do it. I think the NFL should have a legitimate reason to suspend someone; I think the teams should be able to do it because it makes it more likely for them to win. I would prefer no one suspends him and they let it all play out, because it is POSSIBLE that he is innocent.

Moses, I have to correct you; Vick cannot be found innocent, US courts do not find anyone innocent, only not guilty. There is a huge difference. The Duke guys were innocent, OJ was not guilty(rightfully, although I am certain he did it, they did not make a case beyond a reasonable doubt, but that is for another thread.)

Borat
07-21-2007, 12:36 AM
Moses vs. Jay is like the epic boxing match of Gotti vs. Ward.

Bravo gentlemen.

One thing I just want to add in regard to potential witnesses that could incriminate Vick. When ESPN ran that piece a month or two ago where they had that informant talking in a silhouette and with voice masking, they immediately interviewed a federal agent (whom was also in silhouette and voice masked) and that agent said the informant had been used in previous cases as a witness and his validity as a source/witness was legit. The informant clearly outed Vick as being heavily involved. I don't know about the other witnesses, but that guy will be one that Vick's lawyers won't be able to crack.

BigDawg819
07-21-2007, 02:33 AM
All this has done to this point has made Roger Goodell look like a fool. Every opponent of his "iron fist" policy stated that the real test would be when a big name gets into trouble, and then how Goodell reacted would be the true litmus test. Guess what, Goodell failed miserably! By hiding behind the "lets see how things turn out" comment, you are saying that a big name, the face of the NFL arguably, gets more credence then other players. Goodell is basically saying that superstars have different rules and therefore makes his reign as commish null and void. He needed to come out strong, saying that a FEDERAL indictment, no matter what the outcome, is unacceptable and will not be tolerated. An indefinite suspension until the facts come out during a trial or what not would have been the right move but Goodell is saying that marketing is more important then being fair and just. If I'm Tank Johnson or Pacman or Chris Henry I'm thrilled about this because Roger just gave them ammo to fight their suspensions.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-21-2007, 07:04 AM
I'm not saying people are crying for Vick. Dunno where you got that. I'm responding to those saying the NFL would get pounded for suspending Vick. It's just not true. Pounded by ATL fans? Maybe. Pounded by players in Adam Jones' shoes? Maybe. But not to the general public.

On Nike....why do you think Vick's stuff would flop? It's because of the charges, bud. You can't say it has nothing to do with the charges... that's wrong.


The crying part was responding to you saying

"Is America up in arms because NIKE doesn't wish to relate themselves to Vick at this time? Hell no!"


And you honestly don't think they would take a beating? From being sued, to their behavement policy become a complete joke, and all that goodness?


And what I meant by saying it has nothing to do with the crime is, Nike isn't suspending the release because they think he's guilty. They are suspending it because they won't make $$$$.

Moses
07-21-2007, 06:06 PM
I don't agree with what the NFL is doing....Tank Johnson had a couple of crimes nowhere near this....one of which he was driving legally...and he gets 8 games....Mike Vick has had several incidents as well, with flipping off the fans and the water bottle and now he kills dogs....and the say"Oh lets wait and see" It really upsets me to see him to this because it hurts the image of not just him, the NFL and the falcons, but his race. Several news reports have said how much of a part dog fighting is of african american culture and it is ashame one man can do so much to ruin image

Did you even bother reading any of this thread? Half of the stuff you said is inaccurate or just flat-out wrong.

princefielder28
07-21-2007, 06:10 PM
I don't agree with what the NFL is doing....Tank Johnson had a couple of crimes nowhere near this....one of which he was driving legally...and he gets 8 games....Mike Vick has had several incidents as well, with flipping off the fans and the water bottle and now he kills dogs....and the say"Oh lets wait and see" It really upsets me to see him to this because it hurts the image of not just him, the NFL and the falcons, but his race. Several news reports have said how much of a part dog fighting is of african american culture and it is ashame one man can do so much to ruin image

Tank Johnson had unregistered firearms in his house which is illegal and he faced jail time. He deserved what he got and then he drove with alcohol in his system. Vick will be given his fair share at due process and if he is found guilty then he'll face a harsh penalty, but the NFL can not assume that Vick is in fact guilty.

Jags#7
07-22-2007, 12:05 AM
the last straw for tank johnson was the DUI that turned out to be .07 and he was driving legally. So they assumed he was guilty of the DUI, why not vick?

Moses
07-22-2007, 12:07 AM
the last straw for tank johnson was the DUI that turned out to be .07 and he was driving legally. So they assumed he was guilty of the DUI, why not vick?

Johnson was suspended before that DUI. Thus, your point is irrelevant.

Jags#7
07-22-2007, 12:09 AM
Did you even bother reading any of this thread? Half of the stuff you said is inaccurate or just flat-out wrong.


Alright Im prolly gonna get banned for this but u can suck my cok....just cuz u wanna blow mike vick.....bye to everyone even though i didnt add anything very important to this forum...except moses cuz he's a lil tampon wearing flamer who blows thug QB's

Moses
07-22-2007, 12:12 AM
Alright Im prolly gonna get banned for this but u can suck my cok....just cuz u wanna blow mike vick.....bye to everyone even though i didnt add anything very important to this forum...except moses cuz he's a lil tampon wearing flamer who blows thug QB's

Nice post. ;)

Jags#7
07-22-2007, 12:15 AM
kiss me good bye hun....i'll give my self 10 minutes before im done

ccB
07-22-2007, 12:20 AM
So if Mike Vick was being indicted for murder, but was yet to be convicted, you guys think he should still be able to play until he was convicted? I know killing a person and a dog isnt the same thing but the case some of you guys are trying to argue is the same thing. About him not being convicted of nothing so why be punished. Would those of you who feel this way feel the same if it was for murder of a person?

Moses
07-22-2007, 12:21 AM
So if Mike Vick was being indicted for murder, but was yet to be convicted, you guys think he should still be able to play until he was convicted? I know killing a person and a dog isnt the same thing but the case some of you guys are trying to argue is the same thing. About him not being convicted of nothing so why be punished. Would those of you who feel this way feel the same if it was for murder of a person?

Yes. What if Ray Lewis was suspended or punished after he supposedly committed a double-murder?

ccB
07-22-2007, 12:25 AM
Yes. What if Ray Lewis was suspended or punished after he supposedly committed a double-murder?

I am almost positive Lewis' trial was over by the start of the season. If I am right the point you bring up would be irrelevant to what I am asking.

Moses
07-22-2007, 12:30 AM
I am almost positive Lewis' trial was over by the start of the season. If I am right the point you bring up would be irrelevant to what I am asking.

The charges are really irrelevant. The only thing the severity of the charges will change is the length of Vick's punishments.

ccB
07-22-2007, 12:36 AM
The NFL is put in a crappy situation no matter what happens. If he is guilty they will have to put up with crap for allowing a monster like him to play. If they dont allow him to play and hes found not guilty they are going to have to put up with crap for that. I think asking Vick to take a paid leave is the only way to go.

someone447
07-22-2007, 01:09 AM
So if Mike Vick was being indicted for murder, but was yet to be convicted, you guys think he should still be able to play until he was convicted? I know killing a person and a dog isnt the same thing but the case some of you guys are trying to argue is the same thing. About him not being convicted of nothing so why be punished. Would those of you who feel this way feel the same if it was for murder of a person?

I would absolutely be saying the same thing. If someone is indicted for murder, they may still be innocent. I don't think it is the NFL's responsibility to be judge, jury and executioner. Look at what Duke looked like after that whole fiasco. The school came out looking like crap because they suspended the season based on people jumping to conclusions.

ripdw27
07-22-2007, 01:51 AM
quick quesion.. what rules would he be breaking to get him suspended

ccB
07-22-2007, 02:41 AM
I would absolutely be saying the same thing. If someone is indicted for murder, they may still be innocent. I don't think it is the NFL's responsibility to be judge, jury and executioner. Look at what Duke looked like after that whole fiasco. The school came out looking like crap because they suspended the season based on people jumping to conclusions.

Yeah but how would the NFL look if someone was convicted of murder after being allowed to play the season out. It would be a lose lose situation. Again I realize this is to a lesser extent because Vick murdered dogs not people (supposedly even though its pretty clear he was involved) This, along with the the circus act that is going to follow Vick each week is the reason I feel a paid leave is the only way to go with the Vick case. The whole season will be overshadowed by this ridiculousness.

ccB
07-22-2007, 02:55 AM
It depends. What if the only witnesses who make these claims about Vick happen to be criminals who their nuts in the proverbial vice by the Feds, (see Davon Boddie) so they told them what they wanted to hear. Is that a "technicality"? Let's not presume guilt or innocence shall we?

As of last night I thought he was guilty as sin. Now that I read that Boddie is one of the witnesses, supposedly, that makes me question the validity of his testimony. It's pretty easy to point fingers and make allegations when you are looking at going away for a long time and the Feds are going to give you a deal in exchange for giving up the big guy they're going after. After all Boddie was thrown under the bus by Vick earlier, he could be just getting back at him to save his own behind.

This isnt the first time this happens. Situations just like this happened all the time with the mafia. Small time mafia member gets busted cant do the time so they give up the head guy in charge. Same thing happens with drug dealing. Snitches exist everywhere in all shapes and sizes. I do not think someones past criminal history should be held against them as a witness. Feds dont want small frys they want the big dogs, they are willing to let evil people walk in order to get the even more ruthlss people put behind bars. It may be a crappy way to do things but thats just how the system works. Maybe if the prosecutions whole case relyed on this one guy it would be suspect. But this isn the only evidence in the case against Vick. I suppose your optimism can be credited to being a Falcons fan. But testimony from more ruthless criminals than Boddies have been used in the US to convict people time after time.

etk
07-22-2007, 08:05 AM
The charges are really irrelevant. The only thing the severity of the charges will change is the length of Vick's punishments.

I agree completely, innocent until proven guilty. No exceptions.

Moses
07-22-2007, 10:09 AM
Yeah but how would the NFL look if someone was convicted of murder after being allowed to play the season out. It would be a lose lose situation. Again I realize this is to a lesser extent because Vick murdered dogs not people (supposedly even though its pretty clear he was involved) This, along with the the circus act that is going to follow Vick each week is the reason I feel a paid leave is the only way to go with the Vick case. The whole season will be overshadowed by this ridiculousness.

Only an ignorant person would blame the NFL for letting the legal system play out before suspending Vick.

Brilliant!
07-22-2007, 10:33 AM
Wait. There are actually people who want to see Vick play again? Wow.

ccB
07-22-2007, 10:50 AM
Only an ignorant person would blame the NFL for letting the legal system play out before suspending Vick.

Maybe in your opinion it would take an ignorant person but if Vick has done what he is being indicted for hes a monster and should not be allowed to walk around with the rest of us decent people and if hes convicted of this after being allowed to play the season out its going to reflect poorly on the NFL whether you personally have a problem with it or not. I realize innocent until proven guilty but the NFL isnt the court system and they do not have to play by the same rules. So reguardless of how easy of a decision you think it is whether to let him play or not the NFL has a difficult decision to make.

ks_perfection
07-22-2007, 02:47 PM
The NFL doesn't suspend players for getting convicted, but for embarrasing the league. If the average fan didn't care about players being thugs and having constant run in with police than the NFL wouldn't have suspended any players and Pacman would be getting ready for game 1.

TheChampIsHere
07-22-2007, 03:52 PM
his thread has been skirting the absolute edge of no longer discussing issues related to the topic at hand. stay on topic. the instant this devolves into a discussion over what "innocent until proven guilty" means or devolves further into whether or not that means anything, there will be suspensions and the thread will be locked. the legal ramifications are entirely irrelevant, as the nfl has shown with recent precedent. discuss the nfl implications, or try your luck with a legal discussion in off-topic.

how can you possibly say with no ifs ands or buts that Michael Vick is going to jail, thats just ridiculous. Im sure he was involved in dogfighting but that doesnt mean he will get convicted of anything, theres a good chance they'll cut him a deal.

Moses
07-22-2007, 03:54 PM
This is getting annoying. People are just repeating the same arguments that I've already refuted 10 times. If you're not going to put forth the effort to read this thread, don't post in it.

Moses
07-22-2007, 03:56 PM
Maybe in your opinion it would take an ignorant person but if Vick has done what he is being indicted for hes a monster and should not be allowed to walk around with the rest of us decent people and if hes convicted of this after being allowed to play the season out its going to reflect poorly on the NFL whether you personally have a problem with it or not. I realize innocent until proven guilty but the NFL isnt the court system and they do not have to play by the same rules. So reguardless of how easy of a decision you think it is whether to let him play or not the NFL has a difficult decision to make.

I don't think it will reflect poorly on the NFL. If people expect the NFL to suspend a guy that may or may not be involved in dogfighting, they are insane. What would reflect poorly on the league is suspending a guy who could be innocent.

ccB
07-22-2007, 04:32 PM
I don't think it will reflect poorly on the NFL. If people expect the NFL to suspend a guy that may or may not be involved in dogfighting, they are insane. What would reflect poorly on the league is suspending a guy who could be innocent.


Do you realize the difference between your local court house and a case in the federal court system? When a case is brought to the federal court system the prosecutors come in with an open and shut case. It isnt like "hey this guy might know something lets see how the jury reacts" It is a completely different deal. Its like the big leagues compared to single A. Its closer to a when will Vick be convicted than an IF Vick is convicted.

How is the league going to look if Pacman isnt convicted of what he did? The same way they would look if Vick isnt convicted so why not handle his situation the same way?

ccB
07-22-2007, 04:37 PM
This is getting annoying. People are just repeating the same arguments that I've already refuted 10 times. If you're not going to put forth the effort to read this thread, don't post in it.

Well than quit posting in here. No one is twisting your arm to reply. State your opinion once than move on if your tired of saying what your saying. Last time I checked you werent anyone important enough to tell someone that they are allowed to post or not to post.

Moses
07-22-2007, 04:37 PM
Do you realize the difference between your local court house and a case in the federal court system? When a case is brought to the federal court system the prosecutors come in with an open and shut case. It isnt like "hey this guy might know something lets see how the jury reacts" It is a completely different deal. Its like the big leagues compared to single A. Its closer to a when will Vick be convicted than an IF Vick is convicted.

How is the league going to look if Pacman isnt convicted of what he did? The same way they would look if Vick isnt convicted so why not handle his situation the same way?

Pacman was already found guilty of some of the things he did...

The point remains, Vick is innocent at this point. You don't suspend an innocent man.

ccB
07-22-2007, 04:39 PM
Pacman was already found guilty of some of the things he did...

The point remains, Vick is innocent at this point. You don't suspend an innocent man.

The point remains, innocent in the court of law. This NFL isnt a jury, they go by the beat of their own drum. No matter how many times you beat this innocent until proven guilty thing into someones head its just as easy to counteract with the above statement. Thats a personal opinion of what the NFL should do not what they have to do. If Goodell is going to be strict with suspensions Vick should be no exception guilty or not. If you had an indictment from a federal court system you can most likely kiss your job goodbye so why should there be any difference between that and Michael Vicks. It wouldnt be like hes getting kicked out of the league just suspended until this plays out.

Moses
07-22-2007, 04:41 PM
The point remains, innocent in the court of law. This NFL isnt a jury, they go by the beat of their own drum.

Exactly, they're not a jury. Hence, they wait for the court system to determine guilty or innocence and the severity of the charges.

Has Vick been suspended? No. Therefore, they obviously don't go by the beat of their own drum.

ccB
07-22-2007, 04:47 PM
Exactly, they're not a jury. Hence, they wait for the court system to determine guilty or innocence and the severity of the charges.

Has Vick been suspended? No. Therefore, they obviously don't go by the beat of their own drum.

YET! He hasnt been suspended YET! Dont act like its not even a possibility because it is. I am sure the NFL will weigh out all their options before they make a hasty decision.

Moses
07-22-2007, 04:49 PM
YET! He hasnt been suspended YET! Dont act like its not even a possibility because it is. I am sure the NFL will way out all their options before they make a hasty decision.

Didn't Goodell already say that the NFL was going to let the legal proceedings play out before he made a decision?

Hines
07-22-2007, 06:32 PM
i just say let the poor man go and let him get ready for the season without any distraction

ATLDirtyBirds
07-22-2007, 06:59 PM
Didn't Goodell already say that the NFL was going to let the legal proceedings play out before he made a decision?



Yes. If they were going to suspend him, I'm sure they would have done it by now, because they would be putting the Falcons at a huge disadvantage.

etk
07-22-2007, 07:07 PM
I hope Vick uses all this commotion to his advantage and plays with a chip on his shoulder. He needs to rip us a new A-hole twice so we have a better shot at Brohm, suckaz!

someone447
07-23-2007, 08:06 AM
Do you realize the difference between your local court house and a case in the federal court system? When a case is brought to the federal court system the prosecutors come in with an open and shut case. It isnt like "hey this guy might know something lets see how the jury reacts" It is a completely different deal. Its like the big leagues compared to single A. Its closer to a when will Vick be convicted than an IF Vick is convicted.

How is the league going to look if Pacman isnt convicted of what he did? The same way they would look if Vick isnt convicted so why not handle his situation the same way?

If Pacman is proven to be involved in a single issue he allegedly did, the league comes out smelling like roses.

I don't see how the NFL can come out looking bad if they take a wait and see approach.

I have yet to see anyone give any sort of evidence that the feds don't lose cases. I would guess they have a very good conviction rate, but 95% seems a little too high.

Do you guys understand what an indictment is? It is possible to get an indictment against ANYONE. Like I read in an article(don't have any idea where I found it.) It was compared to the opening drive of a football game. Only one side gets the ball, so they are expected to be in the lead at that time. Vick has had no chance to defend himself yet. Patience, in this case, is always the best strategy. Goodell made a big mistake when he suspended Pacman before his legal proceedings, something I have been saying all along.

Moses
07-23-2007, 08:12 AM
Do you guys understand what an indictment is? It is possible to get an indictment against ANYONE. Like I read in an article(don't have any idea where I found it.) It was compared to the opening drive of a football game. Only one side gets the ball, so they are expected to be in the lead at that time. Vick has had no chance to defend himself yet. Patience, in this case, is always the best strategy. Goodell made a big mistake when he suspended Pacman before his legal proceedings, something I have been saying all along.

Just a note on that because I think it's something that's often misunderstood. Pacman was already punished for various things. That means he was guilty in the eyes of the law. Here are a few:

In October 2005, in a petition filed by the State of West Virginia, it was alleged that Jones had not made regular and sufficient contact with his probation officer and that he did not report his July arrest in Nashville in a timely fashion. The court ordered the probation extended for a period of 90 days, although the state requested it to be extended one year.

On August 25, 2006, Jones was arrested in Murfreesboro, Tennessee for disorderly conduct and public intoxication after claiming that a woman stole his wallet. She claimed that she did not steal anything and Jones spat on her. Police officers said they ordered Jones to leave several times, but he refused, continuing to shout profanities at the woman. A judge granted him six months probation on the conditions that he stays out of further trouble and away from the nightclub.

On October 26, 2006. Jones was cited for misdemeanor assault for allegedly spitting in the face of a female student from Tennessee State University during a private party at Club Mystic, a Nashville nightclub. He was suspended by the Titans for one game and was scheduled to be booked on the charge on November 17, 2006.

This is purely speculative but my guess is that Goodell warned Pacman that if he continued to be involved in situations like this, he would be suspended for a longer period of time. He then proceeded to be involved in his worst incident yet (although it's unclear the extent of his involvement) and Goodell suspended him.

That's my understanding of the situation anyways.

Borat
07-23-2007, 11:49 AM
Do you guys understand what an indictment is? It is possible to get an indictment against ANYONE.

Do YOU understand that this is a FEDERAL indictment. It is not possible to get a FEDERAL indictment on anyone. The government does its homework before bringing a FEDERAL indictment.

Moses
07-23-2007, 11:56 AM
Do YOU understand that this is a FEDERAL indictment. It is not possible to get a FEDERAL indictment on anyone. The government does its homework before bringing a FEDERAL indictment.

All a federal indictment means is that the suspect will be prosecuted under federal law, not state or municipal law. In Vick's case, it's because he allegedly committed a crime that crossed state borders.

Borat
07-23-2007, 12:30 PM
All a federal indictment means is that the suspect will be prosecuted under federal law, not state or municipal law. In Vick's case, it's because he allegedly committed a crime that crossed state borders.

Yeah, I understand that. But he made it sound like Federal indictments can be handed out like free samples at the grocery store. And my point was that this isn't like a municipal court, where any woman screaming rape can produce an indictment. In a Federal case, the government has done its due diligence and the charges are legitimate.

Moses
07-23-2007, 12:43 PM
Yeah, I understand that. But he made it sound like Federal indictments can be handed out like free samples at the grocery store. And my point was that this isn't like a municipal court, where any woman screaming rape can produce an indictment. In a Federal case, the government has done its due diligence and the charges are legitimate.

Well the only reason this is federal to begin with is because it involved crossing state lines...

Borat
07-23-2007, 01:08 PM
Well the only reason this is federal to begin with is because it involved crossing state lines...

And that's a bad break for Vick.

Shiver
07-23-2007, 01:09 PM
Here is some interesting insight on the Michael Vick case, from the perspective of a former Federal Prosecutor:

INSIGHTS FROM A FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR

Since the federal prosecutors handling the Vick case won't be conducting many (or any) Poindexter-style press briefings, the closest thing we'll ever get to the thought processes of the federal prosecutors in this case will be via the insights of a former federal prosecutor.

Attorney Marc Garber of The Garber Law Firm, with offices in Atlanta and Marietta, Georgia, worked for eight years as a federal prosecutor in New Jersey and Nevada. He agreed to provide on-the-record observations regarding the Vick case, based on Garber's experiences working up and trying federal criminal cases on behalf of the United States of America.

As an initial matter, Garber believes that the mere existence of an indictment is the product of extensive work by prosecutors to marshal evidence that puts Vick in the places where they allege that he was, doing the things he allegedly did. That evidence, Garber believes, goes beyond the four unnamed cooperating witnesses mentioned in the indictment.

"If I had Vick's case," he said, "the testimony of four cooperators would be enough to prompt a search, but not an indictment. To pull the trigger on an indictment, I'd need documentary evidence that corroborates what the cooperators said.

"I'd start with Vick's credit-card bills to see where he's buying things and when. I'd check airline tickets or other evidence of travel to see when he was in Virginia. I'd check cell phone information. I'd check emails. Whatever kind of documented communication or evidence of travel or location you can imagine, that's what I'd want.

"There's no way, if you're a federal prosecutor, you pull the trigger on this case without [extensive] documents that let you plot out a time-line -- in multiple colors on a huge board that sits in front of the jury as you bury Vick witness by witness and document by document -- putting him at the dog fights on his property."

It all makes a lot of sense. As we've previously explained, the feds aren't in this case to win an indictment and then lose a trial. They took on this fight because prosecutors believe that they have the proof to secure a conviction.

Interestingly, Garber thinks that the prosecution ultimately will focus less on the dog fighting and more on the gambling.

"This case is not so much about animal abuse, though that's the hook that gets the jury impassioned," Garber said. "This case from the Justice Department's perspective is about an illegal-gambling ring which, though the NFL remains silent on this point, is why Vick should be staring at an instant suspension."

Moses
07-23-2007, 01:11 PM
And that's a bad break for Vick.

I've actually read that it's better to be incarcerated in federal prison than state prison. That said, I don't think your sentence can be reduced in federal prison like it can be in state prison.

bsaza2358
07-23-2007, 01:11 PM
This is obviously a serious matter. I trust that all of us can handle it with the maturity that is needed.

P-L
07-23-2007, 09:29 PM
This might have been posted in the NFL section, but I didn't see it here. Roger Goodell orders Michael Vick to stay away from Falcons training camp.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AvcbASQ7Mt0yGkYEZ.X0ZW45nYcB?slug=ap-vick-leave&prov=ap&type=lgns

princefielder28
07-23-2007, 09:30 PM
This might have been posted in the NFL section, but I didn't see it here. Roger Goodell orders Michael Vick to stay away from Falcons training camp.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AvcbASQ7Mt0yGkYEZ.X0ZW45nYcB?slug=ap-vick-leave&prov=ap&type=lgns

It was posted by Shiver, but this is the official thread

BigDawg819
07-23-2007, 09:38 PM
Its about time Goodell did something about this situation.

etk
07-23-2007, 09:44 PM
Its about time Goodell did something about this situation.

Not entirely. I'm in favour of Goodell waiting for the smoke to clear before he makes a harsh decision either way.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-23-2007, 09:46 PM
I'll bring a few of my thoughts in from that thread.


"By suspending Vick from the camp, doesn't that free Vick from team punishment? If he were to miss Falcons camp, wouldn't the team have to punish him in someway for not making a camp, that I'm sure would be mandatory in his contract."

".....wouldn't the Falcons suspend him from the camp, and fine him for not making it when it's in his contract? So basically he would have not been in the camp no matter what, but this saves him from fines and PETA harassment, is what I'm getting at."

BigDawg819
07-23-2007, 09:50 PM
Not entirely. I'm in favour of Goodell waiting for the smoke to clear before he makes a harsh decision either way.

This is a clear example of bad off the field conduct in the mold of Tank Johnson, Pacman, and Chris Henry so why is Mike Vick any different?

etk
07-23-2007, 09:51 PM
This is a clear example of bad off the field conduct in the mold of Tank Johnson, Pacman, and Chris Henry so why is Mike Vick any different?

Because he hasn't been convicted of anything...

Moses
07-23-2007, 09:51 PM
This is a clear example of bad off the field conduct in the mold of Tank Johnson, Pacman, and Chris Henry so why is Mike Vick any different?

Because it is unclear whether Vick is guilty of the things he is being charged with. That was not the case with Pacman, Johnson, or Henry. All had run-ins with the law which they were punished for by the justice system.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-23-2007, 10:09 PM
Not to mention they all had multiple charges/incidents stacked up against them.

BigDawg819
07-23-2007, 10:12 PM
The feds have evidence on this case from the past few years, and Pacman wasn't charged with anything prior to his suspension. Bottomline is Goodell is dragging his feet because Vick is the poster boy for the league.

Moses
07-23-2007, 10:17 PM
The feds have evidence on this case from the past few years, and Pacman wasn't charged with anything prior to his suspension. Bottomline is Goodell is dragging his feet because Vick is the poster boy for the league.

Oh really?

In October 2005, in a petition filed by the State of West Virginia, it was alleged that Jones had not made regular and sufficient contact with his probation officer and that he did not report his July arrest in Nashville in a timely fashion. The court ordered the probation extended for a period of 90 days, although the state requested it to be extended one year.

On August 25, 2006, Jones was arrested in Murfreesboro, Tennessee for disorderly conduct and public intoxication after claiming that a woman stole his wallet. She claimed that she did not steal anything and Jones spat on her. Police officers said they ordered Jones to leave several times, but he refused, continuing to shout profanities at the woman. A judge granted him six months probation on the conditions that he stays out of further trouble and away from the nightclub.

On October 26, 2006. Jones was cited for misdemeanor assault for allegedly spitting in the face of a female student from Tennessee State University during a private party at Club Mystic, a Nashville nightclub. He was suspended by the Titans for one game and was scheduled to be booked on the charge on November 17, 2006.

BigDawg819
07-23-2007, 10:18 PM
Oh really?

Ok I over exaggerated a bit, but Vick getting something took to long.

Moses
07-23-2007, 10:19 PM
Ok I over exaggerated a bit, but Vick getting something took to long.

What do you mean? That's like saying that it takes too long to prove somebody committed a crime so we should just execute them now.

BigDawg819
07-23-2007, 10:22 PM
What do you mean? That's like saying that it takes too long to prove somebody committed a crime so we should just execute them now.

The man has been federally indicted on multiple charges and still faces state charges. He's not exactly batting a 1.000 in the pr department.

princefielder28
07-23-2007, 10:35 PM
The man has been federally indicted on multiple charges and still faces state charges. He's not exactly batting a 1.000 in the pr department.

The state is not filing anything against Vick

Moses
07-24-2007, 07:39 AM
The man has been federally indicted on multiple charges and still faces state charges. He's not exactly batting a 1.000 in the pr department.

Every player that is facing charges should then be suspended? Give me a break. How many times have we heard of somebody, especially celebrities, being falsely accused of something?

bsaza2358
07-24-2007, 08:48 AM
I like what Goodell is doing here. He's taking a very patient approach and is doing his research before jumping with both feet and starting some sort of fire storm.

P-L
07-30-2007, 09:02 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2954244

Tony Taylor pleaded guilty today for having a role in the dogfighting scandal. He also said that Bad Newz Kennels was funded almost exclusively by Vick. He also stated that Vick was frequently at dog fights.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-30-2007, 09:17 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2954244

Tony Taylor pleaded guilty today for having a role in the dogfighting scandal. He also said that Bad Newz Kennels was funded almost exclusively by Vick. He also stated that Vick was frequently at dog fights.


I wonder what kind of evidence the Feds have.

yourfavestoner
07-30-2007, 09:55 PM
I wonder what kind of evidence the Feds have.

Enough for Tony Taylor to change his plea.

ks_perfection
07-30-2007, 10:47 PM
I like what Goodell is doing here. He's taking a very patient approach and is doing his research before jumping with both feet and starting some sort of fire storm.

Fortunatly for him this is going on in the Off-season where he can afford to do nothing and take his time. If it happened during the season he'd have to make a tough decision quickly.

Now with the guy testifying for the Feds it gives him more leverage to suspend Vick for the season.

trkaline
07-30-2007, 11:24 PM
If I was that guy I wouldn't testify against Vick I would make a testimony for Vick tryin to clear his name then when I got out whenever that would be I would try to get hush money outta him, like I wont go to CNN with the story if your offers right...

Shiver
07-30-2007, 11:32 PM
Vick is sunk now that the Feds have leveraged his entourage to turn on him. Don't be surprised when they will hit him with much stiffer charges like racketeering.

someone447
07-31-2007, 10:29 AM
The only thing he got in exchange for testifying was immunity from charges related to his testimony. That means he had very little reason to make it up. Now, Goodell should suspend him. The evidence is piling up and more and more people are testifying against him. Now it really is a formality.

Fitzgerald11
07-31-2007, 01:46 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2954244

Tony Taylor pleaded guilty today for having a role in the dogfighting scandal. He also said that Bad Newz Kennels was funded almost exclusively by Vick. He also stated that Vick was frequently at dog fights.

Since Taylor took a plea bargain, and whatever he says can't get him in more trouble, Michael Vick is ******.

ATLDirtyBirds
07-31-2007, 02:21 PM
Vick is sunk now that the Feds have leveraged his entourage to turn on him. Don't be surprised when they will hit him with much stiffer charges like racketeering.


Yeah, it's getting worse day by day for Vick. If this all goes how it's expected, it will be another major loss in my eyes. As a Mets fan, I got first hand knowledge of this, with Darryl Strawberry, and Doc Gooden. What could have been....