Grand Jury Indicts Vick

Within Goodell's policy is a clause stating that if you're a repeat offender of the conduct policy, your due process need not be played out in order to receive a suspension. That's what happened with Pac Man and Henry. They were repeat offenders, with several arrests and run-ins with the law, and hence Goodell did not wait for verdicts to be rendered on their latest cases; he went ahead and suspended them.

This is where it gets interesting for Vick. He is not a repeat offender in the same way that Pac Man and Henry are. Sure Vick had the water bottle with the hidden compartment, and he gave the finger to the fans, but neither of those situations ever brought on an arrest or charges from the cops. So technically, this is Vick's first run-in with the law. And Goodell's policy clearly states; if you're a first time offender, you will be allowed your due process before a suspension is levied.

I think Goodell has to let this one play out. Then when he's eventually convicted (based on the evidence in the indictment, I'd be SHOCKED if he wasn't convicted), he'll get at least a season ban if not more.

This article has some horrible stuff in it...
...Fifty-four pit bulls were recovered from the property during searches in April, along with a "rape stand," used to hold dogs in place for mating; an electric treadmill modified for dogs; and a bloodied piece of carpeting, the documents said.
...Fights would end when one dog died or with the surrender of the losing dog, which was sometimes put to death by drowning, strangulation, hanging, gun shot, electrocution or some other method, according to the documents. The property has an above-ground swimming pool, and investigators were seen looking into the pool Friday.
...investigators uncovered the graves of seven pit bulls that were killed...

Im not sure what actually happens when a person gets indicted. Does that mean there will be a trial? As a dog owner I can't see how people can do this and think its horrific. I hope Vick goes down, not because I don't like him but because hes famous and maybe they can make a big deal of out this so that people will know its not tolerated in the future.

A "rape stand" more commonly reffered to as a breeding stand is a common tool in dog breeding, and not illegal anywhere (as far as i know). The media likes its nickname because it sounds cruel, but if you own a dog theres a good chance your pup was conceived with the help of this breeding tool. But maybe your dog is a "love puppy"

For those of you questioning whether Vick will get convicted, you need to read the evidence. I'd like to know what defense a good attorney could possibly use to poke holes in the case?

It's impossible. There are tons of witnesses with tons of different accounts of wrongdoing.

And no, the prosecutors are not going to cut a deal with Vick to get him to roll on others. He's a public figure, and therefore the big dog (sorry for the pun). He's the guy the prosecutors want to take down; they're not going to cut a deal to go after a bunch of relative small timers.

As for the time in prison, I bet he hardly does any. But I think a conviction is in his future, and hence a major punishment from the NFL.

Within Goodell's policy is a clause stating that if you're a repeat offender of the conduct policy, your due process need not be played out in order to receive a suspension. That's what happened with Pac Man and Henry. They were repeat offenders, with several arrests and run-ins with the law, and hence Goodell did not wait for verdicts to be rendered on their latest cases; he went ahead and suspended them.

This is where it gets interesting for Vick. He is not a repeat offender in the same way that Pac Man and Henry are. Sure Vick had the water bottle with the hidden compartment, and he gave the finger to the fans, but neither of those situations ever brought on an arrest or charges from the cops. So technically, this is Vick's first run-in with the law. And Goodell's policy clearly states; if you're a first time offender, you will be allowed your due process before a suspension is levied.

I think Goodell has to let this one play out. Then when he's eventually convicted (based on the evidence in the indictment, I'd be SHOCKED if he wasn't convicted), he'll get at least a season ban if not more.Does the conduct policy only refer to run-ins with the law. If not he isn't first time offender. Flipping the fans the finger last year should fall into the conduct policy somewhere.

Does the conduct policy only refer to run-ins with the law. If not he isn't first time offender. Flipping the fans the finger last year should fall into the conduct policy somewhere.

Therein lies the gray area. We'll see how Goodell interprets it.

This is from the NY Times:

The men indicted with Vick were Purnell Peace, Quanis Phillips and Tony Taylor. The 18-page indictment alleged that in March 2003, Peace consulted with Vick about a dog that had lost a fight. After Peace and Vick spoke, Peace killed the losing dog by wetting down the animal with water and electrocuting it. In April of this year, the indictment alleged that Peace, Phillips and Vick killed about eight dogs who did not perform well in testing sessions.

This puts Vick right in the heart of it.

I hope PETA has protests at every game/practice/autograph signing/etc he goes too.

Remember, he was charged with 'creating mayhem' at a bowling alley before he was even in college.

Quality guy.
The bowling alley fight was not Vick it was Alvin Iverson. He started a fight which had him throwing chairs around and he was convicted and thrown in jail. Then Virginia's governor Doug Wilder gave him a pardon to get him out of jail so he could either play college basketball or go to the pros.

I was talking about the stupid story about him breaking a dog's back. Your mind is already made up (based on zero factual knowledge by the way) so it isn't even worth discussing with you.

Like I said before. Is anyone considering the source? I am sure the people who are going to testify are upstanding members of society who just felt like doing a good deed by giving up information on him.

"Government of the people for the people by the people" We aren't the government? Sit on granddad's knee so I can help you find a clue.

First of all, who's mind is made up? According to you, there is "zero" chance Vick gets convicted for this. Exactly what "factual knowledge" do you have about this case that we don't that makes you so sure?

Second, people have been convicted of far greater crimes with worse witnesses than what the government has lined up here. In an interview on ESPN last night they interviewed an informant who has already assisted the feds in numerous other cases leading to search warrants and convictions.

Third, I'm not sure I understand the point of your quote, as the quote is meant to refer to our democratic system of representative governement (not the court systems), but in any event, the fact that Vick's jury will be comprised of members of the public actually works against your argument that he won't be convicted of these crimes. The fact that we are all horrified by the accusations made against Vick and that we all have the common sense to put two plus two together to figure out what really happened here doesn't bode well for Vick.

I mean come on, there are absolute facts here that just don't add up to a "not-guilty" verdict. Vick comes into money for the first time in his life, immediately sets about buying a property that is unquestionably used for dog fighting based on the condition of the property and the instruments found there, numerous witnesses come forward placing Vick at dog fights, and we're supposed to believe he didn't know what was going on? Give me a break. Please tell me one single fact you've heard that tends to prove his innocence.

Finally, as for the "urban legend", the indictment notes that at least one dog was killed by Vick and company by slamming the dog's body to the ground. You might want to read through the whole indictment before you come to this scumbag's defense.

First of all, who's mind is made up? According to you, there is "zero" chance Vick gets convicted for this. Exactly what "factual knowledge" do you have about this case that we don't that makes you so sure?

Second, people have been convicted of far greater crimes with worse witnesses than what the government has lined up here. In an interview on ESPN last night they interviewed an informant who has already assisted the feds in numerous other cases leading to search warrants and convictions.

Third, I'm not sure I understand the point of your quote, as the quote is meant to refer to our democratic system of representative governement (not the court systems), but in any event, the fact that Vick's jury will be comprised of members of the public actually works against your argument that he won't be convicted of these crimes. The fact that we are all horrified by the accusations made against Vick and that we all have the common sense to put two plus two together to figure out what really happened here doesn't bode well for Vick.

I mean come on, there are absolute facts here that just don't add up to a "not-guilty" verdict. Vick comes into money for the first time in his life, immediately sets about buying a property that is unquestionably used for dog fighting based on the condition of the property and the instruments found there, numerous witnesses come forward placing Vick at dog fights, and we're supposed to believe he didn't know what was going on? Give me a break. Please tell me one single fact you've heard that tends to prove his innocence.

Finally, as for the "urban legend", the indictment notes that at least one dog was killed by Vick and company by slamming the dog's body to the ground. You might want to read through the whole indictment before you come to this scumbag's defense.So you know the witnesses? LOL

http://alt.cimedia.com/ajc/pdf/vick0717.pdf

I was talking about the stupid story about him breaking a dog's back. Your mind is already made up (based on zero factual knowledge by the way) so it isn't even worth discussing with you.

The Duke lacrosse players were indicted too. How did that work out?

Like I said before. Is anyone considering the source? I am sure the people who are going to testify are upstanding members of society who just felt like doing a good deed by giving up information on him.

What problems with the law. Oh yeah, the water bottle incident where he wasn't charged with a single thing. Another public opinion case that he lost.

"Government of the people for the people by the people" We aren't the government? Sit on granddad's knee so I can help you find a clue.


A VT alumn?

The guy is in this, and in it DEEP! you would be niave to thing he isn't. Who pays for all this stuff at the house when not a single one of those fools are employed? Who paid for the house when his boys scoped it out and said this would be good. the 18 page document seemed to be pretty specific about a lot of the details. It sounded to me like they have the written proof putting Vick some what involved in this mess. They seem to have 4 witnesses putting Vick at the fights, agreeing to monetary bets, and killing the dogs.
The Duke Lacross thing was a little different. there was no evidence those kids did anything from the get go. All of that was based on what she said - he said crap. And you saw what happened to that prosecutor! I believe the Feds took their time gathering the evidence. They obviously have some pretty definative proof of Vicks involvement.