Talk Vikes and Other MN Sports Talk Vikes and Other MN Sports

Forums  Register  Login  My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums 

Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ  Ticket List  Log Out

RE:Mike Vick case

 
Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> General NFL Talk >> RE:Mike Vick case Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/16/2007 4:52:06 PM   
Duane Sampson


Posts: 14200
Status: offline
[quote="Mark Duda"]Newest Vick Action Figure[/quote] :lol:
Post #: 201
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/16/2007 7:31:53 PM   
Steven JL

 

Posts: 640
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline
Latest speculation on Vick case looks like he'll accept a plea and get about 1 year in prison. The sentence would likely start October or November and it's not clear at the moment if he will serve a full year or be eligible for early release. I think all the negotiations with his lawyer right now are to minimize the set of circumstances that he needs to plead guilty to. For example, if he can plead guilty to the charges of funding an operation and conspiring to attend dogfights but NOT be forced to plead guilty or responsible for killing dogs -- then he could feasibly (though with zero credibility to me) claim that he had nothing to do with mistreatment to his dogs. It was the other guys. Interestingly the Feds may not really care about some of those details (as far as a guilty plea) while those admissions to the public or NFL may well effectively end his career ... forever. Even if he pleads guilty I see the NFL's investigation to continue. I wonder what the NFL suspension will be and more importantly when IT WILL BE SERVED? Concurrent with the prison sentence or following his release? Frankly, I think a guilty plea to any intentional animal cruelty (especially over a period of YEARS) puts an end to his career. What team would bring him on after that?
Post #: 202
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/16/2007 8:09:38 PM   
Trekgeekscott


Posts: 38408
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: United Federation of Planets
Status: offline
Tank Johnson's wasn't served concurrently IIRC. He should be suspended after he serves his sentence. Any team that is desperate for a QB might take a flier on him.
Post #: 203
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/16/2007 10:31:21 PM   
DeLain


Posts: 3485
Joined: 7/17/2007
From: BFE, WA
Status: offline
[quote="Todd Mallett"]I read that Vick's lawyers may be pressuring him to plea ASAP as more charges (racketeering [others?]) may soon be added on. So, if he pleads guilty, no more charges can be brought forth? How does it work? I don't see why the state would accept the ring master of all this serving a year or less in jail. If he goes to trial as it stands with the conspiracy charges the max is 5 years right? And if found guilty he would likely be facing the max sentencing. So what I don't get is how all these other potential charges come in to play. I'd like to see some actual animal cruelty charges laid on him. I understand that they have a greater chance of making the conspiracy charges stick but don't they have a lengthy list of additional charges they could lay down? Again, how does pleading guilty to the conspiracy charges make all the rest of it go away? Help me out here.[/quote] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_jeopardy United States The phrase "double jeopardy" stems from the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, specifically the words "twice put in jeopardy." The full clause is "nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb." This clause is intended to limit prosecutorial abuse by the government in repeated prosecution for the same offense, as a means of harassment or oppression. It is also in harmony with the common law concept of res judicata, which prevents courts from relitigating issues and claims that have already been the subject of a final judgment. There are three essential protections included in double jeopardy: protection from being retried for the same crime after an acquittal; protection from retrial after a conviction; and protection from being punished multiple times for the same offense. ETC, ETC, ETC......
Post #: 204
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/16/2007 10:42:18 PM   
Trekgeekscott


Posts: 38408
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: United Federation of Planets
Status: offline
[quote="DeLain"][quote="Todd Mallett"]I read that Vick's lawyers may be pressuring him to plea ASAP as more charges (racketeering [others?]) may soon be added on. So, if he pleads guilty, no more charges can be brought forth? How does it work? I don't see why the state would accept the ring master of all this serving a year or less in jail. If he goes to trial as it stands with the conspiracy charges the max is 5 years right? And if found guilty he would likely be facing the max sentencing. So what I don't get is how all these other potential charges come in to play. I'd like to see some actual animal cruelty charges laid on him. I understand that they have a greater chance of making the conspiracy charges stick but don't they have a lengthy list of additional charges they could lay down? Again, how does pleading guilty to the conspiracy charges make all the rest of it go away? Help me out here.[/quote] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_jeopardy United States The phrase "double jeopardy" stems from the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, specifically the words "twice put in jeopardy." The full clause is "nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb." This clause is intended to limit prosecutorial abuse by the government in repeated prosecution for the same offense, as a means of harassment or oppression. It is also in harmony with the common law concept of res judicata, which prevents courts from relitigating issues and claims that have already been the subject of a final judgment. There are three essential protections included in double jeopardy: protection from being retried for the same crime after an acquittal; protection from retrial after a conviction; and protection from being punished multiple times for the same offense. ETC, ETC, ETC......[/quote] But double jeopardy doesn't protect someone from being charged with another crime. Racketeering and Animal cruelty could be added on or charged at a later date. One act can lead to many charges. For instance, If you kill someone with a gun, you could get charged with Murder. You could also get charged with assault with a deadly weapon. You could also get charged if you couldn't legally own the gun for possesion. Then there are ordinances with firing in city limits depending on the location the shooting took place. Kidnapping could enter in if you used the gun to keep them somewhere before you shot them. Armed robbery if you take anything from them before, or after shooting them... And an acquittal on one charge wouldn't necessarily protect you from the other charges. However, in this case, if they negotiate a plea barbain, where the Federal prosecutors agree to not file any further charges in connection to this case...then he could be protected by the Plea Bargain.
Post #: 205
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/16/2007 10:57:33 PM   
DeLain


Posts: 3485
Joined: 7/17/2007
From: BFE, WA
Status: offline
It all comes from the same event though. This law is occasionally referred to as a legal technicality, because it allows defendants a defense that does not address whether the crime was actually committed. For example, were police to uncover new evidence conclusively proving the guilt of someone previously acquitted, there is little they can do because the defendant may not be tried again (at least, not on the same or substantially similar charge)
Post #: 206
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/16/2007 11:27:59 PM   
Todd M

 

Posts: 39714
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline
After thinking about this, I''m not sure I'm a fan of this plea. ~1 year sentence? How does 1/20th of the potential sentence (w/additional charges) seem like a good deal? Obviously the evidence is good. The squeezed the other 3 to ensure their case and now they just want to let it go with this light prison term. I realize they could go to trial and get nothing but it reeks of favoritism. Trying to talk to the NFL on what parts he could plead guilty to and still salvage a career seems babying as well. The guy did it, is about to confess to it, at the very least take his NFL career away and the gravy train that was afforded to him to live the lavish lifestyle he was. They went really hard at this and it surprises me that they will plea. To me it's like; What's the least we can make him suffer because we couldn't just make this a wash? 2-3 years served with a life time ban would sit well with me.
Post #: 207
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/16/2007 11:49:27 PM   
Andy Lowe


Posts: 6655
Joined: 7/30/2007
From: Dublin, OH
Status: offline
[quote="Todd Mallett"]After thinking about this, I''m not sure I'm a fan of this plea. ~1 year sentence? How does 1/20th of the potential sentence (w/additional charges) seem like a good deal? Obviously the evidence is good. The squeezed the other 3 to ensure their case and now they just want to let it go with this light prison term. I realize they could go to trial and get nothing but it reeks of favoritism. Trying to talk to the NFL on what parts he could plead guilty to and still salvage a career seems babying as well. The guy did it, is about to confess to it, at the very least take his NFL career away and the gravy train that was afforded to him to live the lavish lifestyle he was. They went really hard at this and it surprises me that they will plea. To me it's like; What's the least we can make him suffer because we couldn't just make this a wash? 2-3 years served with a life time ban would sit well with me.[/quote] It's based on what information Vick is able to share with them. They would give Vick a lighter sentence if he can help bring down bigger than Vick.
Post #: 208
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/16/2007 11:58:31 PM   
Todd M

 

Posts: 39714
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline
I would think that most of the players in the dog fighting circles were on = or less footing than Vick? A numbers game? If that's the case then that's alright. But some are going to have to face stiff sentences to send some real messages out there.
Post #: 209
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/17/2007 2:00:18 PM   
Duane Sampson


Posts: 14200
Status: offline
This isn't about Vick or fighting dogs but... Pit bull kills 7-year-old Minneapolis boy at home Father who went to his child’s aid in the basement of their home was attacked before he shot and killed the dog. Minneapolis and St. Paul have been seeking ways to deal with dog attacks. By Tom Ford and Joy Powell, Star Tribune staff writers Last update: August 17, 2007 – 12:37 AM Perhaps, his loved ones can only speculate, young Zachary King Jr. had gone to get a puppy in his family's basement, where their full-grown male pit bull was chained. When the 7-year-old boy's older sister came inside to look for him Thursday afternoon, she found him badly bitten and lying on the basement floor. She ran to get their father, but it was too late. The dog killed Zachary, who was about to enter second grade at Hope Academy, a private Christian school in Minneapolis. The pit bull, which had previously bitten other people, went for the boy's throat, police said. The boy's father, Zachary King Sr., 30, tried to intervene but was himself attacked by the dog, which mauled his arm. The father got a gun and shot the dog to death in the family's home in the 3500 block of Humboldt Avenue N. Other family members, including at least two of the boy's three sisters, were home during the attack, which occurred about 1 p.m. Emergency workers rushed Zachary and his father to North Memorial Medical Center in Robbinsdale, where the child was pronounced dead, police said. The latest attack comes as the number of dog bites is up and as the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul try to find a way to deal with problems related to deaths and injuries caused by pit bulls and several other canine breeds. Even before Thursday's attack, a state legislator touched off debate with his vow to try to outlaw in Minnesota five breeds of dogs, including pit bulls. Police have yet to determine what caused the dog to turn on one of its owners. "There needs to be a detailed investigation to get the facts of what happened here before we jump to conclusions that it's possibly a breed deal," said Tom Deegan, manager of Animal Care & Control for Minneapolis. "They need to have some behaviorists and experts look at what happened." The boy's grandfather, Robert Lee King Jr. of Minneapolis, said he arrived at the family's two-story house in the Folwell neighborhood after getting a hysterical call on his cell phone from the boy's aunt. The grandfather got there just as Zachary was being loaded into an ambulance. Robert King said the male pit bull, whose name was Face, was most often kept in the basement. "I didn't trust that dog," he said, adding that the dog acted quite aggressively toward others and was a big reason he didn't often visit the home. The boy's family also has a female pit bull that family members and neighbors said seemed more friendly and was allowed to move around the house. The pit bulls recently had a litter of five puppies that Zachary and his sisters liked to play with outside. Robin King, Zachary's aunt, said family members who were home when the attack happened told her that the boy had been playing outside when he came in and went downstairs, perhaps to play with the puppies. After his sister found him, she rushed upstairs to wake her father and he bolted to the basement. Police Lt. Amelia Huffman said investigators were piecing together the chain of events, including whether the dog was still attacking the child when his father tried to help him and whether the attack on the boy continued while the father went to get a gun. Animal Care & Control has two recorded contacts with the family about the male pit bull, officials said. In 2005, the dog bit a trespasser on the family's property. That's considered a provoked bite, Deegan said, which would not lead to any official action. In 2006, the dog left the family's property and bit a man. Although that bite was minor, animal-control officers warned the Kings that any further incidents could lead to the dog being declared dangerous. Still, the dog did not meet the criteria to be deemed potentially dangerous, Deegan said. The ordinances are quite specific, he said. Once a dog is declared dangerous, the city restricts how it can be exposed to the public. That includes requiring muzzles and 3-foot leashes in public, as well as fencing and kennel requirements for yards, Deegan said. In this case, the family was doing what would have been acceptable, even if the dog had been previously deemed dangerous, he said. "We can't control what people do in their homes," Deegan said. "The important piece here is that this was an animal that belonged to these folks and tied off in their home. It's terrible, just a terrible tragedy." It was Deegan who retrieved the dead dog from the basement, some time after the female and five puppies had been taken away. Though the dead dog was bloodied, there was nothing to immediately indicate that it was being bred to be aggressive for dog fights, he said. Deegan said it seemed strange to chain up a dog in a house. "I own dogs. I don't tie them off in my house," he said. "It's odd. It'll be interesting to hear, when they're done with their investigation, just what the circumstances were." Targeting specific breeds In June, DFL state Rep. John Lesch announced that he will introduce legislation next year to ban chow chows, wolf hybrids, pit bulls, Akitas and Rottweilers. Lesch was out of the country and couldn't be reached for comment about the fatal attack on Zachary. Under Lesch's proposal, which is already stirring opposition from some animal advocates, anyone owning one of the banned dogs would be subject to misdemeanor charges and could face up to 90 days in jail and a fine of up to $1,000. Keith Streff, director of investigations for the Animal Humane Society, which serves five metro counties, including Hennepin and Ramsey, said there's no doubt the fatal attack on Zachary will become a touchstone for public debate. "This case will quite likely be an interesting paradigm in how this dog and this problem and this community issue is going to be addressed by local communities and law enforcements agencies," he said. In Zachary's neighborhood, feelings ran high. "I feel so sorry for the boy, but this is so preventable," said Marleen Witte. "It makes me angry. This should not have happened." Witte, 55, who has lived on the block for 20 years, said the King family moved in about five years ago and that the father breeds pit bulls. Another neighbor, Tacuma Elliott, 34, said Zachary King Sr. had cautioned neighbor children to always knock before entering the King house because of the dogs. "This is a really bad, terrible freak accident," she said. Bert Robinson, a cousin of Zachary King Sr., described Zachary Jr. as a spunky, tenacious, but quiet boy who adored his father. "He hardly went anywhere without his dad," he said. Reports of dog bites up Last spring, two serious dog attacks within three weeks spurred Minneapolis officials to begin looking more closely at how the city can deal with dangerous dogs. On March 26, Paula Ybarra, 37, was nearly killed by an American bulldog that weighed more than 150 pounds and a smaller pit bull. The dogs bit her in an unprovoked attack at a friend's house in northeast Minneapolis. Ybarra suffered severe injuries, including a crushed trachea, a hole in her esophagus and a crushed artery. Both dogs had previously been deemed dangerous. Then, on April 13, an Akita escaped from a south Minneapolis yard and clamped down on the arm of 8-year-old DeVonta Prince as he walked to school. The dog shook the 60-pound boy, then mauled his scalp and shoulder. A neighbor beat the dog back with a shovel. A state health report released in June found hospitals and emergency rooms saw a 40 percent reported increase in victims of dog bites in the state from 1998 to 2005. Overwhelmingly, the report said, victims are familiar with the attacking dog. It also found that most victims were 4 years old or younger and more likely to be bitten while in the home or the yard. The study, based on hospital discharge data and medical records from the Minnesota Hospital Association, found that 3,600 people were treated in emergency rooms in 2005, compared to 2,600 in 1998. The number of those hospitalized saw a smaller increase, from 89 in 1998 to 95 in 2005. Dr. Heather Day, a co-author of the study, said at the time that part of the increase may be due to hospitals' improved record-keeping, more hospitals filing their information to the Hospital Association and an increase in pet ownership, which she said is a nationwide trend. Day also said young children might be at higher risk because they are less likely to know how to interact with a dog, have slower reaction when a dog makes a threatening move and the youngest of children are at a height that makes them more susceptible to attack than an older child or adult. No dog breeds were identified in the report, Day said, because most hospitals don't specify breed. Also, Day said then, pointing to specific breeds may detract from the point that "any dog breed is capable of biting." A family's deep sorrow About 8 p.m. Thursday, Zachary King Sr., his right arm in a bloodied sling, returned to the home with family members, grabbed some belongings and left soon after. He declined to speak with reporters, though his nephew, Craig Dyar, while holding a picture of Zachary Jr. and his sisters, offered brief comments on behalf of his family. "My uncle and my aunt lost a son," he said. "[His sisters] lost a brother. ... I just want everyone to keep us in their prayers and let us deal with our loss as a family." tford@startribune.com • 612-673-4921 jpowell@startribune.com • 612-673-7750
Post #: 210
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/17/2007 2:01:36 PM   
Duane Sampson


Posts: 14200
Status: offline
Minneapolis boy, 7, killed by pit bull in his family's home Tom Ford Last update: August 16, 2007 – 7:10 PM A 7-year-old boy was killed by one of his family's pit bulls in his north Minneapolis home Wednesday afternoon. The boy, identified by his grandfather as Zachary King Jr., was attacked in the basement of his home in the 3500 block of Humboldt Avenue N., where the dog was kept chained, said Lt. Amelia Huffman of the Minneapolis Police Department. The dog, which severely bit Zachary in the throat, was shot to death by the boy's father, Zachary King Sr., 30, after he tried to help his son and was himself bitten. Other family members, including the boy's three sisters, were also in the home at the time of the attack, and one called 911 just after 1 p.m. Zachary and his father, who sustained severe bites to the arm, were taken to North Memorial Medical Center in Robbinsdale, where the boy was pronounced dead, police said. The boy's grandfather, Robert Lee King Jr. of Minneapolis, said he arrived at the scene after receiving a hysterical call on his cell phone from the boy's aunt. As he arrived, he said, Zachary was being loaded into an ambulance. Robert King said the male pit bull, whose name was Face, was kept chained in the basement. A female pit bull and five puppies were allowed to roam in the house, but were not part of the attack, he said. Robin King, Zachary's aunt, said family members who were in the house at the time told her that the boy had gone into the basement to play with the puppies when the chained dog attacked him. When Zachary's older sister went to look for him, she found him bleeding in the basement. She woke their father, who was napping, and who was attacked after he rushed to try to help his son. Animal control officers, who removed the female dog and puppies from the home, and police remained at the scene late in the afternoon. Yellow police tape circled the house. Huffman said police have received complaint calls regarding the address in question, but did not know Wednesday afternoon if those complaints involved the dog involved in the attack. "I feel so sorry for the boy, and this is so preventable," said Marleen Witte. "It makes me angry. This should not have happened." Witte, 55, who has lived on the block for 20 years, said the King family moved in about five years ago and that the father breeds pit bulls and has owned others that have bitten neighborhood children. Another neighbor, Tacuma Elliott, 34, who said her children often play with the King children, said Zachary King Sr. had cautioned neighbor children to always knock before entering the King house because of the dogs. "This is a really bad, terrible freak accident," she said. Bert Robinson, a cousin of Zachary King Sr., said Zachary Jr. was "a spunky, tenacious, quiet boy" who adored his father. "He hardly went anywhere without his dad," he said. Reports of dog bites up The most recent vicious-dog attack in Minnesota occurred on March 26. Paula Ybarra nearly died after an American bulldog and a pit bull that had been classified as dangerous bit her repeatedly at her neighbor's northeast Minneapolis house. Ybarra was familiar with both dogs. A state health report released in June found hospitals and emergency rooms saw a 40 percent reported increase in victims of dog bites in the state from 1998 to 2005. Overwhelmingly, the report said, victims are familiar with the attacking dog. It also found that most victims were 4 years old or younger and more likely to be bitten while in the home or the yard. The study, based on hospital discharge data and medical records from the Minnesota Hospital Association, found that about 3,600 people were treated in emergency rooms in 2005, compared to about 2,600 in 1998. The number of those hospitalized saw a smaller increase, from 89 in 1998 to 95 in 2005. Dr. Heather Day, an epidemiologist and a co-author of the study, said at the time that part of the increase may be due to hospitals' improved record-keeping, more hospitals filing their information to the Minnesota Hospital Association and an increase in pet ownership nationwide. Day also said young children might be at higher risk because they are less likely to know how to interact with a dog, have slower reaction when a dog makes a threatening move and the youngest of children are at a height that makes them more susceptible to attack than an older child or adult. What the study found The study also found: • A majority of dog bites are to the head, followed by upper extremities (hands, wrists, forearms, etc.) and then lower extremities (feet, ankles, calves). • The victims in 75 percent of cases are familiar with the dog that bit them. • Warm-weather months tend to bring more dog-bite incidents, while there seems to be a corresponding decrease in colder times of the year. • The median emergency room bill rose from $246 in 1998 to $416 in 2005. For hospital stays, the charges jumped from $5,294 in 1998 to $7,538 in 2005. In recent months, the Twin Cities in recent months have seen a rash of prominent dog attacks on people, some involving victims who knew the animals, some who did not. Even so, dog attacks have declined in the Twin Cities over the past few years. No dog breeds were identified in the report, Day said, because most hospitals don't specify breed. Also, Day said then, pointing to specific breeds may detract from the point that "any dog breed is capable of biting." Tom Ford • 612-673-4921
Post #: 211
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/17/2007 2:12:45 PM   
Todd M

 

Posts: 39714
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline
Very sad. It's all tied together. The pet population, how animals are regarded in society. The ignorance of people.
Post #: 212
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/17/2007 2:19:47 PM   
Duane Sampson


Posts: 14200
Status: offline
My wife works at the Humane society. She's seen this stuff up close and personal. Tragic.
Post #: 213
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/17/2007 3:08:43 PM   
Vernon Smith

 

Posts: 808
Joined: 8/15/2007
Status: offline
[quote="DeLain"]It all comes from the same event though. This law is occasionally referred to as a legal technicality, because it allows defendants a defense that does not address whether the crime was actually committed. For example, were police to uncover new evidence conclusively proving the guilt of someone previously acquitted, there is little they can do because the defendant may not be tried again (at least, not on the same or substantially similar charge)[/quote] law says that a person can be convicted for the same or similar offense under both federal and state laws (though this rarely happens. ) Technically, this means that the state can still bring charges after Vick's guilty plea in Federal court. (or if he is found either guilty or not guilty by a jury)
Post #: 214
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/17/2007 6:44:21 PM   
Steven JL

 

Posts: 640
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline
The death of that boy in Mpls today should be put squarely on the front page of ESPN along with Vick's plea or not plea. It is PRECISELY WHAT happens when you have groups of people BREEDING DOGS with the sole criteria being 'HOW DO THEY FIGHT?'. Yes the parents are responsible there for even keeping a dog in the house with little kids that needed to be tied up in the basement. While Vick didn't kill that boy he is certainly INDIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE for perpetuating (and actually accentuating) the problem of aggressive fight to the death qualities in that breed since evidence is that he specificlly killed dogs of that breed that weren't aggressive fighters. A tragic story of parental and animal neglect led to the death of this child. But make no mistake, it's not that the breed is inherently bad - dogs have been associated with man for millenia. It took concerted efforts to breed killer dogs. And Mike Vick is just the latest to do it. Stories like this make you realize that even a three year sentence for an abombination like Vick's crime would be too light. It's more than just sick twisted entertainment. It leads to dead kids.
Post #: 215
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/17/2007 8:53:12 PM   
Jeff Jesser


Posts: 19063
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: Southern Cal
Status: offline
Good post Steve. But who cares, they're only dogs, right? :roll:
Post #: 216
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/18/2007 12:19:34 AM   
Steven JL

 

Posts: 640
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline
With the sworn testimony today of at least one participant who killed 8 dogs in participation with Vick, Vick is toast. No owner will ever sign Vick again to a contract (even as a backup) when there is proof that he himself hung dogs and drowned them in 5 gallon buckets. Good bye - hope your cell mate is a very large, very gay, very aggressive sexual deviant. In fact, despite being a Vikings fan for all my time on earth, if the Vikings were to ever sign Mike Vick I would cancel my season tickets and never watch them again, perhaps ever, but certainly while he were on the team. I don't think I'm unique in this feeling which is the entire reason his NFL career is t-o-a-s-t.
Post #: 217
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/18/2007 12:20:17 AM   
Steven JL

 

Posts: 640
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline
With the sworn testimony today of at least one participant who killed 8 dogs in participation with Vick, Vick is toast. No owner will ever sign Vick again to a contract (even as a backup) when there is proof that he himself hung dogs and drowned them in 5 gallon buckets. Good bye - hope your cell mate is a very large, very gay, very aggressive sexual deviant. In fact, despite being a Vikings fan for all my time on earth, if the Vikings were to ever sign Mike Vick I would cancel my season tickets and never watch them again, perhaps ever, but certainly while he were on the team. I don't think I'm unique in this feeling which is the entire reason his NFL career is t-o-a-s-t.
Post #: 218
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/18/2007 1:35:10 AM   
Todd M

 

Posts: 39714
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline
As of 7:30 my time I haven't heard anything about Vick pleading. But what I did read over at Fanhouse was that he may feel like he'll get it from the back end on the specific animal cruelty charges from the state if he does. This has played our perfectly then. If was left alone to Poindexter this would have went away (IMO) and I was worried that the Federal case was going to plea him out to lightly. But now Poindexter has to save face to save his job I bet. I really feel that justice will be served now.
Post #: 219
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/18/2007 9:47:20 AM   
Guest
[quote="Littig"]With the sworn testimony today of at least one participant who killed 8 dogs in participation with Vick, Vick is toast. No owner will ever sign Vick again to a contract (even as a backup) when there is proof that he himself hung dogs and drowned them in 5 gallon buckets. Good bye - hope your cell mate is a very large, very gay, very aggressive sexual deviant. In fact, despite being a Vikings fan for all my time on earth, if the Vikings were to ever sign Mike Vick I would cancel my season tickets and never watch them again, perhaps ever, but certainly while he were on the team. I don't think I'm unique in this feeling which is the entire reason his NFL career is t-o-a-s-t.[/quote] *********************************************************** You sound slightly less humane than Vick. Unless I misunderstood your post, you hope that Michael Vick goes to prison and is raped by a very large sexual deviant? Comprehensive mental health screening should be required for both you and him.
  Post #: 220
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/18/2007 1:50:16 PM   
Todd M

 

Posts: 39714
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline
I don't agree with your reasoning Pete. Vick took puppies and treated them like crap for a couple of years. Tested the dogs out to see if they could fight or not. If they couldn’t, he took the dog and tried to hang it. If the hanging failed he took the dog and drowned it. If they could fight he pitted them against other dogs and enjoyed watching them rip each other apart. Wishing for a man of this character to face some jail house justice does not put you on the same level as that man, let alone below it. It's not necessarily the healthiest way to go about things in society, but I will not feel sorry for the man one bit if he faces some stiff penalties in jail as it seems the actual penalties aren't going to be harsh enough. I swear I'll go ballistic if Tim Donaghy gets more jail time than Vick. Now if Steven was wishing for this ref to face the same jail house justice you might be on to something.
Post #: 221
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/18/2007 6:37:49 PM   
Steven JL

 

Posts: 640
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline
[quote="Pete C"][quote="Littig"]With the sworn testimony today of at least one participant who killed 8 dogs in participation with Vick, Vick is toast. No owner will ever sign Vick again to a contract (even as a backup) when there is proof that he himself hung dogs and drowned them in 5 gallon buckets. Good bye - hope your cell mate is a very large, very gay, very aggressive sexual deviant. In fact, despite being a Vikings fan for all my time on earth, if the Vikings were to ever sign Mike Vick I would cancel my season tickets and never watch them again, perhaps ever, but certainly while he were on the team. I don't think I'm unique in this feeling which is the entire reason his NFL career is t-o-a-s-t.[/quote] *********************************************************** You sound slightly less humane than Vick. Unless I misunderstood your post, you hope that Michael Vick goes to prison and is raped by a very large sexual deviant? Comprehensive mental health screening should be required for both you and him.[/quote] Yes Pete I am less humane than Vick. Less humane because I am angry about the revelations today that confirm his outrageous behavior and in a moment of anger and spite I wrote a single sentence on a blog board with a tongue-in-cheek "hope" that he find some pain and suffering in jail. Would I ever stand by and watch another human being be sodimized against his will? Of course not. But writing a sentence like that is an attempt at humor and a cathartic way to express my outrage. Of course in your world writing that single sentence makes me "less humane" than someone who: [list] 1. Executed at least 8 dogs through hanging (and then when that didn't kill 3 of them after a while), drowning them in a 5 gallon bucket by holding their heads under water. 2. Operating a dog fighting ring for over 5 years which tortured animals and made them fight to the death against one another 3. Tied these dogs up just outside of reach of one another for weeks and months on end so that their every moment was lunging at one another, stress, constant fear, and aggression. 4. Directly contributed to developing a breed of dog that is inherently aggressive and at any moment can snap and kill a human or another animal much like pit bull that killed the 7 year old boy in Minneapolis yesterday. [/list:u] I can see where writing a single sarcastic sentence puts me in the same (no wait, in your words actually "less humane") category than Vick. I'll seek out "comprehensive mental health screening" right away per your brilliant recommendation. And since I accept your renowned medical opinion about my heath, may I make a suggestion for you as well? Get a sense of humor transplant - yours appears to be defective.
Post #: 222
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/19/2007 1:50:32 AM   
Easy E

 

Posts: 10871
Status: offline
[quote="Littig"][quote="Pete C"][quote="Littig"]With the sworn testimony today of at least one participant who killed 8 dogs in participation with Vick, Vick is toast. No owner will ever sign Vick again to a contract (even as a backup) when there is proof that he himself hung dogs and drowned them in 5 gallon buckets. Good bye - hope your cell mate is a very large, very gay, very aggressive sexual deviant. In fact, despite being a Vikings fan for all my time on earth, if the Vikings were to ever sign Mike Vick I would cancel my season tickets and never watch them again, perhaps ever, but certainly while he were on the team. I don't think I'm unique in this feeling which is the entire reason his NFL career is t-o-a-s-t.[/quote] *********************************************************** You sound slightly less humane than Vick. Unless I misunderstood your post, you hope that Michael Vick goes to prison and is raped by a very large sexual deviant? Comprehensive mental health screening should be required for both you and him.[/quote] Yes Pete I am less humane than Vick. Less humane because I am angry about the revelations today that confirm his outrageous behavior and in a moment of anger and spite I wrote a single sentence on a blog board with a tongue-in-cheek "hope" that he find some pain and suffering in jail. Would I ever stand by and watch another human being be sodimized against his will? Of course not. But writing a sentence like that is an attempt at humor and a cathartic way to express my outrage. Of course in your world writing that single sentence makes me "less humane" than someone who: [list] 1. Executed at least 8 dogs through hanging (and then when that didn't kill 3 of them after a while), drowning them in a 5 gallon bucket by holding their heads under water. 2. Operating a dog fighting ring for over 5 years which tortured animals and made them fight to the death against one another 3. Tied these dogs up just outside of reach of one another for weeks and months on end so that their every moment was lunging at one another, stress, constant fear, and aggression. 4. Directly contributed to developing a breed of dog that is inherently aggressive and at any moment can snap and kill a human or another animal much like pit bull that killed the 7 year old boy in Minneapolis yesterday. [/list:u] I can see where writing a single sarcastic sentence puts me in the same (no wait, in your words actually "less humane") category than Vick. I'll seek out "comprehensive mental health screening" right away per your brilliant recommendation. And since I accept your renowned medical opinion about my heath, may I make a suggestion for you as well? Get a sense of humor transplant - yours appears to be defective.[/quote] Steve, the thing is there are lots of people who say what you said, and actually mean it. Seriously. Your post didn't come across like you were joking, and all you had to say was "I was joking" and that'd be it. Cuz I hear people say that stuff all the time, and my reaction is usually the same as Pete's. The world is a sick place sometimes, and the idea that we throw people in prison knowing and hoping they are sodomized, while most of us don't care and even condone it, is pretty sick, when you stop and think about it. I don't know what level it puts people on, it's just pretty warped. Doesn't make what Vick did or didn't do any less disgusting. If he deserves to go to jail, I hope he does, but I don't hope anyone that ends up in jail gets raped, that's just sick and wrong. There are guys that kill dozens of people, or rape and murder kids. Them, maybe I can understand wishing this kind of horryfing experience on, although it's not me. But possibly killing dogs (or funding the guys who did)? That's pretty harsh.
Post #: 223
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/19/2007 2:31:42 AM   
Easy E

 

Posts: 10871
Status: offline
[quote="Todd Mallett"]I don't agree with your reasoning Pete. Vick took puppies and treated them like crap for a couple of years. Tested the dogs out to see if they could fight or not. If they couldn’t, he took the dog and tried to hang it. If the hanging failed he took the dog and drowned it. If they could fight he pitted them against other dogs and enjoyed watching them rip each other apart. Wishing for a man of this character to face some jail house justice does not put you on the same level as that man, let alone below it. It's not necessarily the healthiest way to go about things in society, but I will not feel sorry for the man one bit if he faces some stiff penalties in jail as it seems the actual penalties aren't going to be harsh enough. I swear I'll go ballistic if Tim Donaghy gets more jail time than Vick. Now if Steven was wishing for this ref to face the same jail house justice you might be on to something.[/quote] Then you probably should go ballistic every day because there are people who rape, murder and maim human beings and get away with it. IMO, THAT'S a more appropriate target for this bile and anger. I love animals, and I don't condone dog fighting. I also don't condone people who purposely run over animals, kill rare game, or the slaughtering of thousands of animals for unnecessary testing, but that stuff goes on every day. I mean people still enjoy veal without thinking about what it actually takes to get it. Have you ever been to a slaughterhouse? The tens of thousands of cattle, hogs, sheep, etc that go through there every single day are terrified much more than the dogs Vick killed. People still love to see bullfights, and unless a horse is incredible, if it goes lame it gets shot. None of this is me saying that Vick should get a free pass. But he's getting more bile than arsonists, murderers and rapists. We as a country have condoned the slaughter of hundred of thousands of innocent people, many of them babies, simply because we wanted to get Saddam Hussein and they unfortunately got in the way. I have no doubt there are people that actually DO hope Vick goes to prison and gets gang raped. I just think people get their priorities messed up sometimes, IMO.
Post #: 224
RE:Mike Vick case - 8/19/2007 11:49:22 AM   
Steven JL

 

Posts: 640
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline
For the record, I wouldn't want anything to happen to Mike Vick that would be cruel, illegal, or put his immediate health in jeopordy. If you've never heard the "don't drop the soap" prison joke - you would probably miss the intent of my original statement. And I could see crazy things aside from that happening to him - I hope they don't. I'd rather he suffer his fall from grace in a way he cannot makes others responsible for his misery. And for the record, I would like to see the following justice in the case assuming that he is found or pleads guilty to the facts that have been made public: 1) About 12-18 months in prison in an isolated cell due to his celebrity 2) All this talk of "up to 20 years" is ridiculously disproportionate given the crime(s). 3) A ban on playing in the NFL of 2-4 full seasons (1-2 for the dog crimes AND 1-2 the gambling) to be served AFTER he is released from the Federal Pen. 4) Recovery of all pre-paid bonuses by the Falcons to the extent that they are allowed under contract (think this comes to about $20M). 5) After his ~4-5 year absence from the league (prison and subsequent ban) he would be allowed back in the league only if he has shown appropriate remorse and made restitution in some positive way.
Post #: 225
Page:   <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> General NFL Talk >> RE:Mike Vick case Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode