Michael Vick's "Dog Fight" Investigation

[Perfxion 0]

The only reason the G-men got to the playoffs was because of (the now retired) Tiki. They are not going anywhere but down this season. Vick will be back in the league, the only thing that would stop him is his talent. Some team will give him his summer camp/preseason tryout. If he fails it will be on his own merit. The league itself will watch him like a hawk but not prevent him to ever try again. Hell, Pacman might play again and he personally lead to a HUMAN getting shot.

[The Man in Blak 0]

America's not going to care about this 3 months from now, let alone 3 years from now. It was a cute story for everybody to get on their high horse about during the slow part of the summer, but it will blow over eventually.

 

That's because Vick will be in jail by then and, as the saying goes, "out of sight, out of mind." I don't doubt that the 24x7 media that we suffer with today will find some new atrocity to rail upon at that time, but don't tell me that you wouldn't expect some of that outrage to return if Vick were to make a comeback years from now. There is a very loud section of fans out there who will continue to think that Vick's actions were despicable; they won't pay tickets to see him, and they won't buy merchandise.

 

Mike Tyson didn't get a lifetime ban for raping a human being or for biting half a man's ear off in the ring.

 

Different sport and, frankly, different expectations around their athletes. And, considering the state and perception of boxing right now, I'm not sure if its the strongest example for intelligent management and PR in sports.

 

Leonard Little killed a woman while drunk, then got another DUI on top of that and I think he missed like 4 games. Trying to give Vick a lifetime ban for something about 1/10 as bad would be ridiculous.

 

Different regime. Roger Goodell realizes (and is, perhaps, obsessed with the idea) that the NFL has to protect its image as a league, as a legitimate sporting association. Little makes for a poor and potentially irrelevant precedent, considering the suspensions that have been dealt out to Pac-Man Jones, Chris Henry, Tank Johnson, etc.

 

I don't think he'll play in a major market when he comes back, it's too much bad PR for say NY or Chicago, but he'll get a starting job somewhere. I could see him signing some place like Carolina or Seattle. If he can still get it done on the field, that's all anyone will really care about.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if somebody gives him a chance - the sports world is rife with second, third, and even fourth chances - but his jail sentence and suspension (whatever it ends up being) will do a lot to hinder his ability on the field. He'll likely be able to stay in shape, but he'll have lost a valuable year or more of reading NFL defenses and making throws under NFL coverage. Expecting him to have the same impact as a quarterback on a potential comeback in the future is a real stretch.

[lomasmoney 0]

I still think this whole thing is fucking retarded. I know of a guy who literally killed someone in cold blood, and was eligible for parole in like 20 months, yet America wants to vilify someone for killing dogs (albeit, I will admit very brutally). To me dogfighting isn't really that big of a deal, and is in many ways basically an adult version of using a magnifying glass to kill aunts, expect the only difference is PETA does not give a fuck about non mammalian organisms. Seriously, everyone take a step back, a human being is going to jail for at least a year, and losing his entire career, over the fact that he fought dogs, the same animals that run in front of cars, and even, occasionally bite, maul, kill, each other, as well as human beings almost every day

[Ripper 0]

They TORTURE THE FUCKING ANIMALS. And it is done with dogs because they are a species that show loyalty to their owners. they are utilizing that loyalty to torture them. That is fucking sick.

 

I don't understand why people aren't grasping this.

 

Yes, it is that big of a deal. Just because other people get off when they shouldn't have doesn't mean that you let other stuff go.

 

Yes, there are murderers that are going to get less time than Vick. Then complain about the murderers getting less time, not the time the dog torturers would get.

[bob_barron 0]

You can use a magnifying glass to kill your aunt? Sweet.

 

And lomasmoney sure is dumb

[bob_barron 0]

I still think this whole thing is fucking retarded.

 

Yea, a guy is going to jail for committing a felony. I hate this country.

 

I know of a guy who literally killed someone in cold blood, and was eligible for parole in like 20 months

 

Not relevant

 

yet America wants to vilify someone for killing dogs (albeit, I will admit very brutally).

 

As they should.

 

To me dogfighting isn't really that big of a deal, and is in many ways basically an adult version of using a magnifying glass to kill aunts [sic]

 

No it's not. It's illegal and barbaric. Plus, you don't use a rape stand with the ants. Unless you do, I don't know.

 

a human being is going to jail for at least a year, and losing his entire career, over the fact that he fought dogs

 

And tortured them, and gambled illegally and other stuff that you don't grasp.

 

the same animals that run in front of cars, and even, occasionally bite, maul, kill, each other, as well as human beings almost every day

 

Dogs don't kill humans everyday you idiot.

[Ripper 0]

One thing I am tired of is the whole "rape stand" thing. Like "they had a rape stand...that is SO BARBARIC".

 

A "rape" stand is used in alot of kennels for aggressive females. There is nothing barbaric or wrong about having a rape stand. Killing dogs, thats wrong, the rape stand thing is not a bad thing people.

 

But by all means, go back to calling lomasmoney's post dumb. Just wanted to point that out.

[bob_barron 0]

It's called a rape stand Ripper- that can't be a good thing!

[Ripper 0]

Actually, its called a breeding stand. "rape stand" is another name for it. But Breeding stand wouldn't have sold the papers.

 

 

[Guest Soriano's Torn Quad]

Forget Leonard Little. FORGET it. There's a new sheriff in town. All precedents have rightfully been trashed.

 

I'm glad iggy has peeked his head out to tard up the joint.

 

You can use a magnifying glass to kill your aunt?

Bob cracks me up.

 

I know of a guy who literally killed someone in cold blood

Elaborate on this. Were they in a pool of blood that had cooled to room temperature? Do you know the Brown's Chicken Killer that murdered people in a meat freezer? Was the killer or killee a reptile?

[Ripper 0]

You know, under the new precedents, if he didn't pled guilty to the gambling aspect in the summary of facts, I don't see how Roger could give him more than a 8 game suspension. Utilizing the precendents that he has set with the Henry, Johnsons and Jones.

 

Of course he will give him more, but unless there is a gambling charge in that guilty plea(which could get a lifetime ban) I don't see how he could justify it.

 

Of course, I couldn't see how he justified giving Jones a year and Henry and Johnson 12 games between the both of them.

 

[Guest Soriano's Torn Quad]

dogs, the same animals that run in front of cars, and even, occasionally bite, maul, kill, each other, as well as human beings almost every day

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

Apparently the Atlanta chapter of the NAACP wants the Falcons to let Vick return to the team after he serves his time. So if it's not about race, it's quickly becoming one.

[The Niggardly King 0]

dogs, the same animals that run in front of cars, and even, occasionally bite, maul, kill, each other, as well as human beings almost every day

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Guest Tsukuyomi]

I've been mulling this issue over, and I have to wonder: How much did Marcus Vick and his actions go into hurting Michael's reputation?

 

I mean, Marcus did some stupid, stupid stuff. Mike's stuff, up until this point, had been relatively minor. But I wonder if someone of the early (though obviously correct now) judgment came from looking at little brother and saying "Well, look at this kid. If he can do all this stupid stuff, couldn't his brother?"

[geniusMoment 0]

And so it begins: http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/7146976?MSNHPHMA

 

Jason Whitlock is now in favor of Vick not being suspended at all following his jail time.

[2GOLD 0]

 

I guess it all depends on the amount of jail time he actually gets. If he gets two years, then yeah there is no longer a point since he'll be out of the league for two seasons which alone will hurt his ability. Hell, Mike Williams was out of football for one year and he went completely south.

 

I ignore the NAACP of Atlanta on this issue though, they have seem to been ignoring this as a serious thing since day one so their opinion is worthless right now. I guess getting Michael back on the field in a Falcons uniform and proudly representing their community is more important than a couple of brutally tortured animals.

[Guest Soriano's Torn Quad]

Whitlock, who you crappin'

[Ripper 0]

If reports are true, Vick will plead guitly to giving them the money but not to killing any dogs and not to betting on the dogs.

 

If that is what his statement of facts say monday, then seroiusly, there is no way they could justify suspending him for more than 4-6 games.

[the pinjockey 0]

If he pleads to financing a criminal organization, I don't see where the stretch would be to suspend him for a year. Sure it throws the lifetime ban out the windown, but financing a criminal organization that ran over a few years should be more than enough to get a year (especially considering the NFLPA would probably not pick this battle to fight).

 

That said, this plea seems like a farce. After all that they are going to get him for buying a house and crossing state lines? Either he is getting a sweetheart deal or the gov't has much less then everyone has been led to believe and it makes you wonder why he wouldn't try his hand at trial.

[Guest]

Or they are going to let the state government take care of the other parts.

[Ripper 0]

If he pleads to financing a criminal organization, I don't see where the stretch would be to suspend him for a year. Sure it throws the lifetime ban out the windown, but financing a criminal organization that ran over a few years should be more than enough to get a year (especially considering the NFLPA would probably not pick this battle to fight).

 

That said, this plea seems like a farce. After all that they are going to get him for buying a house and crossing state lines? Either he is getting a sweetheart deal or the gov't has much less then everyone has been led to believe and it makes you wonder why he wouldn't try his hand at trial.

 

I think the problem that people are forgetting is that some of the things that the last two guys that pled directly contradicts things in the feds original indictment and things in Tony Taylor's(the first guy to plead) statement of facts. Tony Taylor's pretty much was the same as the feds investigation. The other two had differing stories. So either they are goingto have to call into question their initial investigation or the pleas of the last two.

 

This plea bargin goes along with the original indictment that says Vick didn't kill any dogs, didn't personally bet on any of the fights (although one witness did say he went and got the money) but did finance the whole thing. maybe thats all they wanted him for, seeing as in the eyes of the law that is the most serious charge.

 

 

 

[Ripper 0]

Or they are going to let the state government take care of the other parts.

 

A question for you law types. Can they use the testimony of a person from another state in a state case. Because that is why they couldn't bring charges in the first place. All of the witnesses were in jail in other states at the time so the state basically had no case whatsoever.

[skullman80 0]

From CNN.com

 

copy of the plea deal.

 

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/images/08/24/v...mmary.facts.pdf

[tominator89 0]

From CNN.com

 

copy of the plea deal.

 

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/images/08/24/v...mmary.facts.pdf

 

Another reason why ESPN sucks?

[Robert 0]

Does ESPN even check their sources anymore? Until the plea agreement being filed, the box was: Mike Vick denies killing dogs, gambling. Christ, they claimed that an anonymous source told and anonymous ESPN reporter the information. What's even more funny, is that ESPN's head legal consultant, Roger Cossack questioned the credibility of the story. Sometimes, I think ESPN really makes some of this shit up, sometimes.

[Ripper 0]

Does ESPN even check their sources anymore? Until the plea agreement being filed, the box was: Mike Vick denies killing dogs, gambling. Christ, they claimed that an anonymous source told and anonymous ESPN reporter the information. What's even more funny, is that ESPN's head legal consultant, Roger Cossack questioned the credibility of the story. Sometimes, I think ESPN really makes some of this shit up, sometimes.

 

 

You do realize that the plea agreement still says he is denying gambling right? And I don't doubt that he was denying that he killed the dogs too, but probably did to get the plea to be accepted.

 

The reason I would think this is because the plea agreement doesn't say that he killed the dogs, only that the dogs died due to "the collective efforts" of all the defendants. If you look at the other guys statement of facts, they all say what exactly they did (Taylor for instance talks about shooting the dogs. The other two talk specifically about how they specifically killed the dogs). Vicks is rather ambigious and makes me believe that he saying he didn't kill the dogs.

 

And to be specific, their headline was "Vick will not admit to killing or gambling."

 

He still didn't. For him to have been gambling he would have had to collected on winnings. Basically, he is admitting to giving the others money.

[Celtic Guardian 0]

NFL suspends Vick indefinitely

 

Following are excerpts from Commissioner Goodell’s letter to Vick:

 

» "Your admitted conduct was not only illegal, but also cruel and reprehensible. Your team, the NFL, and NFL fans have all been hurt by your actions."

 

» "Your plea agreement and the plea agreements of your co-defendants also demonstrate your significant involvement in illegal gambling. Even if you personally did not place bets, as you contend, your actions in funding the betting and your association with illegal gambling both violate the terms of your NFL Player Contract and expose you to corrupting influences in derogation of one of the most fundamental responsibilities of an NFL player."

 

» "You have engaged in conduct detrimental to the welfare of the NFL and have violated the league’s Personal Conduct Policy."

 

» "I will review the status of your suspension following the conclusion of the legal proceedings. As part of that review, I will take into account a number of factors, including the resolution of any other charges that may be brought against you, whether in Surry County, Virginia, or other jurisdictions, your conduct going forward, the specifics of the sentence imposed by Judge Hudson and any related findings he might make, and the extent to which you are truthful and cooperative with law enforcement and league staff who are investigating these matters."

 

» "I have advised the Falcons that, with my decision today, they are no longer prohibited from acting and are now free to assert any claims or remedies available to them under the Collective Bargaining Agreement or your NFL Player Contract."

[skullman80 0]

Does ESPN even check their sources anymore? Until the plea agreement being filed, the box was: Mike Vick denies killing dogs, gambling. Christ, they claimed that an anonymous source told and anonymous ESPN reporter the information. What's even more funny, is that ESPN's head legal consultant, Roger Cossack questioned the credibility of the story. Sometimes, I think ESPN really makes some of this shit up, sometimes.

 

 

You do realize that the plea agreement still says he is denying gambling right? And I don't doubt that he was denying that he killed the dogs too, but probably did to get the plea to be accepted.

 

The reason I would think this is because the plea agreement doesn't say that he killed the dogs, only that the dogs died due to "the collective efforts" of all the defendants. If you look at the other guys statement of facts, they all say what exactly they did (Taylor for instance talks about shooting the dogs. The other two talk specifically about how they specifically killed the dogs). Vicks is rather ambigious and makes me believe that he saying he didn't kill the dogs.

 

And to be specific, their headline was "Vick will not admit to killing or gambling."

 

He still didn't. For him to have been gambling he would have had to collected on winnings. Basically, he is admitting to giving the others money.

 

Roger Goodell tends to think otherwise in regards to the gambling.

[Guest Soriano's Torn Quad]

We all knew Vick was getting the ol' sledgehammer from Rodge, but nonetheless, it's strangely surprising to see it come down. Biggest bust in sports history. Ring it up.