Vick's Co-Defendent has pled GUILTY

[DMD]

And you can be sure that the most standard approach by the defense is to discredit the witnesses. And as is so often the case, the people around the crime are not old ladies who teach Sunday school, they are participants in the crime or somehow involved. That is a reality for a lot of cases and anyone who rolls over on someone else is be definition involved.

 

There will have to be more than just heresay for evidence, but the most damning of all is that Vick cannot deny he bought the property and I would guess paid for the black buildings and later on the white house in front. He probably did pay cash for a lot of things but there is always bank records of when cash was taken out. I think the case is much more than someone just saying Vick was involved, it all began because he owned the property and buildings and was a licensed dog breeder. That alone is pretty damning. Can he produce proof that he raised dogs and sold them for any other purpose? Stands to reason if they were killing non-conpetitive animals that they were not turning around and trying to find them a good home. What was the purpose of the kennel?

 

I am no attorney by any means, but this all smacks of the racketeering charges that stick. Or the mob bosses who are convicted for ordering a hit when they were not actually there and the best witness is a hitman who is hardly the most upstanding person.

[DMD]

And just one more log on the fire of pubic opinion that hasn't been mentioned that I have seen. My mother was the President of the Humane Society in our county when I was growing up and they were involved in dog fighting cases (not her specifically but in conjunction with law enforecement). While some may say "it is only dogs" or even that "they were bred to live and die this way", one rather darker side of this is that dog breeders have to train their dogs to get blood lust and to kill. Do you think they take their prized Pit bulls and throw them in together knowing that at least one will get injured or killed?

 

Nope.

 

They will steal dogs that they find and use them to feed the blood lust of the Pit Bulls and give them something to kill. And yes, they will come into people's yards and steal dogs if they look the right size for their needs. That happens in some parts of the country more than you realize. Fido may be a family pet who likes to bark or wander, but he may also be stolen and, literally, fed to Pit Bulls to train them to kill. The Humane Society in my county was extremely careful to keep anyone from adopting a dog that could end up being killed as a way to train a pit bull and that is a big reason why most shelters will not allow people to adopt more than one dog. Unfortunately, dog fighting is not limited to just the fighting dogs, it extends to family pets who get stolen and killed in ways you do not want to think about. Yeah, they do not care about the life of their fighting dogs and they care even less about your family pet.

[FishFreak]

You have one major flaw with your argument and that is you are assuming animals have the same intelligence as humans. When boxers and ultimate fighters get in the ring it 's because they make a conscious choice to do so. By possessing higher intellect they can do that. Animals don't have the same intelligence as humans and therefore can't make the same choices we can. They are governed by their instincts. I personally don't watch boxing or ultimate fighting but if 2 grown men want to beat themselves up for money - more power to them. Dogs can't make that choice.

 

Just making a valid comparison not analyzing animal rights or their train of thought. I love dogs but at the end of the day they are animals not humans. The uproar over this is blown way out of proportion especially in the violent lusting society we live in.

 

Also, the "let legal system play itself out" argument is the last gasp of someone who can't believe the truth. I'm willing to go with the odds on this one - and the odds say the feds win 99% of the time. Is it because they are lucky or because they are really good at what they do?

 

It's not about the truth or the alleged chrages. It's about being innocent until proven guilty NOT guilty until proven innocent. The Feds win most o the time because they have the power, influence and resources to do so. I would agree that doesn't bode well for Vick and looks bad but like I said, wait and see how everything plays out before you hand this guy a jail sentence. And seriously, why has so much time, resources and money been spent on this case? Did the Feds have to get involved? Isn't there like a top 10,000 Most Wanted List they should be focusing on? There are many, many more serious crimes to solve.

 

You can't compare the Kobe or Duke incidents because the accusers were NOT the Federal Government. Their stories had more holes in it than swiss cheese. I can't see any holes in the Vick indictment, can you?

 

I don't know all the details. It appears as though he is at least involved in dog fighting and knew it was going on. To what extent and how involved he was is pure speculation. I'm sure Vick is taking the fall for all of the dog fighting actions. After all, since dog fighting is illegal, why don't they just round up EVERYONE involved in this and not just four guys?

[Sugar Magnolia]

And just one more log on the fire of pubic opinion that hasn't been mentioned that I have seen. My mother was the President of the Humane Society in our county when I was growing up and they were involved in dog fighting cases (not her specifically but in conjunction with law enforecement). While some may say "it is only dogs" or even that "they were bred to live and die this way", one rather darker side of this is that dog breeders have to train their dogs to get blood lust and to kill. Do you think they take their prized Pit bulls and throw them in together knowing that at least one will get injured or killed?

 

Nope.

 

They will steal dogs that they find and use them to feed the blood lust of the Pit Bulls and give them something to kill. And yes, they will come into people's yards and steal dogs if they look the right size for their needs. That happens in some parts of the country more than you realize. Fido may be a family pet who likes to bark or wander, but he may also be stolen and, literally, fed to Pit Bulls to train them to kill. The Humane Society in my county was extremely careful to keep anyone from adopting a dog that could end up being killed as a way to train a pit bull and that is a big reason why most shelters will not allow people to adopt more than one dog. Unfortunately, dog fighting is not limited to just the fighting dogs, it extends to family pets who get stolen and killed in ways you do not want to think about. Yeah, they do not care about the life of their fighting dogs and they care even less about your family pet.

 

Great post DMD. I just had a behavior consult with an owner of a Pit Bull this week. I spent three hours with him and didn't charge him for the call because he has a hard decision to make about his dog and I just want to give him some guidance. He grew up with a wonderful Pit Bull, and his mom raised and bred them-now that she is older she raises Std. Poodles Now a young adult, he purchased a Pit and is very frustrated with his dog. His dog is very friendly towards all dogs and people, but is pushy, has high prey drive and always challenging, and plays rough. The owner has been through 5 training classes, four of my own, and he can't get get control of his dog, the way he would like. His goal was to be "the ambassador of the breed" which is a lot of pressure. His dog is independent and always challenging. He is ready to return his dog to his responsible breeder, who will place him in a proper home or keep him herself if need be.

 

This dog is too much dog for this owner but will make a wonderful pet for someone. The thing is... with his independent temperament, challenging and status seeking (dominant if you will) personality, and high prey drive, he is the perfect candidate to be dog fighter in the wrong hands. But, right now with a responsible owner with lots of training and socialization, he does not have a mean bone in his body and is a really nice dog, albeit high energy and not focused at times. It would have to be taught, but he has the right hard wired genetics to become a "mean dog" in the wrong hands. But because he comes from a good home, he is a very sweet and a very smart dog, but he can be total idiot lacking good social skills, which his owner has tried hard to change. I see this all the time with this breed. With many of the other Mastiff breeds, the Bull and English come to mind, the breed clubs and breeders have for the most part bred out the bull and dog fighting genetics the breed was originally bred for, and the responsible Pit breeders are as well, but the subculture Pit breeders are working hard to keep those genetics in the line.

[joethin]

You have one major flaw with your argument and that is you are assuming animals have the same intelligence as humans. When boxers and ultimate fighters get in the ring it 's because they make a conscious choice to do so. By possessing higher intellect they can do that. Animals don't have the same intelligence as humans and therefore can't make the same choices we can. They are governed by their instincts. I personally don't watch boxing or ultimate fighting but if 2 grown men want to beat themselves up for money - more power to them. Dogs can't make that choice.

 

Just making a valid comparison not analyzing animal rights or their train of thought. I love dogs but at the end of the day they are animals not humans. The uproar over this is blown way out of proportion especially in the violent lusting society we live in.

 

Also, the "let legal system play itself out" argument is the last gasp of someone who can't believe the truth. I'm willing to go with the odds on this one - and the odds say the feds win 99% of the time. Is it because they are lucky or because they are really good at what they do?

 

It's not about the truth or the alleged chrages. It's about being innocent until proven guilty NOT guilty until proven innocent. The Feds win most o the time because they have the power, influence and resources to do so. I would agree that doesn't bode well for Vick and looks bad but like I said, wait and see how everything plays out before you hand this guy a jail sentence. And seriously, why has so much time, resources and money been spent on this case? Did the Feds have to get involved? Isn't there like a top 10,000 Most Wanted List they should be focusing on? There are many, many more serious crimes to solve.

 

You can't compare the Kobe or Duke incidents because the accusers were NOT the Federal Government. Their stories had more holes in it than swiss cheese. I can't see any holes in the Vick indictment, can you?

 

I don't know all the details. It appears as though he is at least involved in dog fighting and knew it was going on. To what extent and how involved he was is pure speculation. I'm sure Vick is taking the fall for all of the dog fighting actions. After all, since dog fighting is illegal, why don't they just round up EVERYONE involved in this and not just four guys?

So... just because we live in a violent lusting society we should give Vick a Get out of Jail card. Let me guess... it wasn't his fault it was society that made him do it

 

How do you know how much time, resources and money has been spent on this case? I bet that the people investigating this case are earning the same amount of money as with any other case. Resources... all investigations require resources, but this case does not mention anything about going to another country or anything like that... so I'm guessing that the people investigating the case will go back to their homes. Puhlease stop with the 10,000 Most Wanted List... it's the same argument all petty criminals make... but the guy next to me is selling drugs and this and that why focus on me... blah, blah... a crime is a crime period. I was once stopped by a cop for speeding, obviously I was mad about it and told him that the guy ahead of me was going faster than I was and how come he didn't get stopped. The cop looked at me and asked me if I go fishing... I said yeah... he said well... do you catch the fastest fish or the slowest... It pretty much translated in my mind like: Do you catch the smart one or the stupid one...

 

There is no speculation about it being Vick's house hosting the fights... right? And please stop with the why don't they stop with only Vick

 

Bottom line: Vick got caught, let the case move on. Next!

[BeeR]

He's done!! Bye-bye forever animal abuser. You now when he goes to prison, solitary shouldn't be him alone in a small hole, it should be him stuck in that small hole with a pitbull trained to kill.

amen but don't hold your breath about that or any prison term - or if there is one it will be exceedingly short, and don't exactly be shocked if he's given easy if not royal treatment in prison. You think the apologists are bad "on the outside," how do you think a load of mostly sub-human slime will react to having such a celeb among them? You don't seriously think most of them give a flip about dogs much if at all do you??

 

As for "it is only dogs" or even that "they were bred to live and die this way", the colossal stupidity and lack of humanity of those statements reminds me that there are people who, given a choice between their life or a dog's, I'd probably choose the dog. Net gain for the world.

 

PS I sure am upset that vick is losing million in endorsements though. :sanders:

Edited July 30, 2007 by BeeR

[Bronco Billy]

I'm not saying Vick is innocent or guilty but I wish everyone would let the legal system play itself out. This guy has been sent to the electric chair before his trial date.

 

No one has sent Vick to the electic chair, unless you know something that the rest of us don't. And so what you are saying is that until a verdict is rendered, Americans shouldn't put forth opinions regarding the accused in any legal case? And you have the temeity to lecture others about how our system works?

 

 

Personally, I doubt Vick is the ring leader of this dog fiasko and is not as hands on as the charges. I really think he's just the big name going down for everyone's actions. I could be very wrong but let's just wait and see.

 

Let's see. It was Vick's property. It was Vick's name on the license to run the kennels. The kennel was named BadNewz kennels, and BadNewz is the annointed nickname of Vick's hometown as he so boldly points out on his website. An operation of this magnitude requires a substantial amount of money, which Vick just happens to have. Then when the whole thing goes down on Vick, he sells the property in one day to a yet un-named party for half the value of the property's worth. Vick proclaimed that he had never been to the property, yet others said they saw him at dogfights betting and neighbors said they talked to him there. Regardless, the Feds, in your mind, apparently have not gathered enough evidence to put forth a suggestion that they have a very strong case against him despite their record in court once they take someone to trial.

 

Apparently you were not very good at connecting the dots game when you were a kid, because you sure can't do it now.

 

 

 

I know this country treates dogs better than humans in many ways but give me a break. It's not like he's a terrorist or mass murderer.....it's dog fighting. The same society that is outraged by this loves to watch boxers and ultimate fighters beat the pulp out of each other. There are much BIGGER problems in the world today.

 

So the Feds should ignore all other crimes lesser than the most heinous that they are seeking evidence and indictments for? My, how enlightened you are. By that logic, if there is a murder committed, authorities should ignore all other crimes until the murder is solved. The Feds stepped in because there was a local prosecutor charged with the case and he refused to do his job. And please stop comparing dog fighting to boxing or ultimate fighting until people are thrust unwilling into the ring in those sports and then are forced to fight until one of them is dead. To make any comparison between them is a sign of plain ignorance.

 

 

Didn't the Kobe and Duke Lacrosse player incidents teach us anything?

 

What did the Kobe situation teach us? That Kobe did indeed have sex with the young woman at the resort, something he lied about then later changed his story, turning any evidence into a he said/she said case. The Duke LaCrosse case showed us that a local politically appointed prosecutor can use malfeasance of office to maintain his political position and will break rules of conduct to do so. So what do those situations have in common with this one?

 

You just love to make analogies of things that have little in common, don't you?

Edited July 30, 2007 by Bronco Billy

[tosberg34]

No one has sent Vick to the electic chair, unless you know something that the rest of us don't. And so what you are saying is that until a verdict is rendered, Americans shouldn't put forth opinions regarding the accused in any legal case? And you have the temeity to lecture others about how our system works?

Let's see. It was Vick's property. It was Vick's name on the license to run the kennels. The kennel was named BadNewz kennels, and BadNewz is the annointed nickname of Vick's hometown as he so boldly points out on his website. An operation of this magnitude requires a substantial amount of money, which Vick just happens to have. Then when the whole thing goes down on Vick, he sells the property in one day to a yet un-named party for half the value of the property's worth. Vick proclaimed that he had never been to the property, yet others said they saw him at dogfights betting and neighbors said they talked to him there. Regardless, the Feds, in your mind, apparently have not gathered enough evidence to put forth a suggestion that they have a very strong case against him despite their record in court once they take someone to trial.

 

Apparently you were not very good at connecting the dots game when you were a kid, because you sure can't do it now.

So the Feds should ignore all other crimes lesser than the most heinous that they are seeking evidence and indictments for? My, how enlightened you are. By that logic, if there is a murder committed, authorities should ignore all other crimes until the murder is solved. The Feds stepped in because there was a local prosecutor charged with the case and he refused to do his job. And please stop comparing dog fighting to boxing or ultimate fighting until people are thrust unwilling into the ring in those sports and then are forced to fight until one of them is dead. To make any comparison between them is a sign of plain ignorance.

What did the Kobe situation teach us? That Kobe did indeed have sex with the young woman at the resort, something he lied about then later changed his story, turning any evidence into a he said/she said case. The Duke LaCrosse case showed us that a local politically appointed prosecutor can use malfeasance of office to maintain his political position and will break rules of conduct to do so. So what do those situations have in common with this one?

 

You just love to make analogies of things that have little in common, don't you?

 

Amen, Bronco Billy. Amen.

[Mallard]

One thing people fail to realize is that most likely the feds really don't care about the actual dog fighting. Its the actual rackettering charges that are most likely going to be filled in the coming weeks. The dog fighting aspect of the case gets the public on the feds side. The feds are most likely going to treat Vick as though he were a mob boss of some sort and is going to have RICO charges filled against him... which is really bad. Then on top of all that, Vick is most likely going to be investigated and pursued by the IRS and likely will have charges filled against him by the state. While I completely understand someones point of view that someone is innocent until proven guilty and to let the legal system do its work, its up to the prosecution to convict Vick before the jury is even picked and they are doing a good job. Being a lawyer is all about posturing and the feds are holding all the known cards. Some may ask why would the feds not indict Vick first on the RICO or racketering charges first? well thats because a conspiracy charge is much easy to get and indictment on and then the "superceding" charges that are coming will include the harder to prove ones. This is also easier once you get a few of the players to roll on him making it easier to get the harder charges to stick. Unfortunatly, Vick doesn't have the OJ defense of if the glove doesn't fit you can't convict thing going for him. In essence VIck could easliy be looking at possibly 20 years on the RICO charges. So how does this play out for Vick? Not good at all...

Edited July 30, 2007 by Mallard

[TheShiznit]

You have one major flaw with your argument and that is you are assuming animals have the same intelligence as humans. When boxers and ultimate fighters get in the ring it 's because they make a conscious choice to do so. By possessing higher intellect they can do that. Animals don't have the same intelligence as humans and therefore can't make the same choices we can. They are governed by their instincts. I personally don't watch boxing or ultimate fighting but if 2 grown men want to beat themselves up for money - more power to them. Dogs can't make that choice.

 

Also, the "let legal system play itself out" argument is the last gasp of someone who can't believe the truth. I'm willing to go with the odds on this one - and the odds say the feds win 99% of the time. Is it because they are lucky or because they are really good at what they do?

 

You can't compare the Kobe or Duke incidents because the accusers were NOT the Federal Government. Their stories had more holes in it than swiss cheese. I can't see any holes in the Vick indictment, can you?

 

Let me ask you this then.....would the same outrage be displayed if this was cockfighting(which is what Vick may be doing anywayif he gets prison time)? And, isn't what Martha Stewart did worse than what Vick did? But, if the Feds put Martha away....I don't see any reason why they won't put vick away.

[The Wolf]

Let me ask you this then.....would the same outrage be displayed if this was cockfighting(which is what Vick may be doing anywayif he gets prison time)? And, isn't what Martha Stewart did worse than what Vick did? But, if the Feds put Martha away....I don't see any reason why they won't put vick away.

 

Martha Stewart used insider information to make money. Michael Vick is accused of using money to run an illegal dogfighting operation in which dogs were either killed in the fights themselves or put to death by Vick's thugs.

 

I don't condone what Martha Stewart did by any stretch, and breaking the law is breaking the law, but I'd have to say that this thug did a lot worse.

[cdrudge]

I didn't know he was proven guilty. I missed that part.

Innocent until proven guilty is only applicable in the criminal court of law. No one has sentenced him or taken away his freedoms. Just because he hasn't been proven guilty though doesn't mean the court of public opinion shouldn't have anything to say about him.

 

 

The credibility of these 'witnesses' aren't at all reliable if they can't in some way connect Vick to it all using more than just their word. We're talking about the 'word' of a group of ex-cons who were the most hands-on in all of this, ie. the guys who did the electrocuting, drowning, slamming of dogs to the ground, etc. etc. Like I would ever believe anything that came out of their mouths...

On their own, they probably don't make the greatest witnesses. Put them all together and they become more damning. Information that they provide however can lead to much more credible witnesses or evidence. Think receipts, agreements, travel records, etc. While quality is good, sheer quantity can prove equally difficult to fight if there is a mountain of evidence. You might be able to discredit some of it, but all of it?

[Bill Swerski]

Per ESPN, Tony Taylor pleaded guilty this morning, but was reportedly NOT guaranteed a lesser sentence. So I have no idea what that means.

[Ruffian]

Malfeasance--what a great word.

 

If "T" is turning state's evidence...that means something bad is rolling down the pike for the others and "Taylor wants off that train. I know...not guilty yet. But anyone who has a shred of intelligence is making some assumptions here, and unless they are sitting in the jurors' box, they can, and will do so. It looks bleak for Vick, and it ain't getting better.

[Vet]

The "moral outrage" by the public surrounding this case is laughable.

 

Thousands of human beings will be tortured and/or killed today and most of them won't make the news.

 

People need to get their priorities straight.

[Bronco Billy]

The "moral outrage" by the public surrounding this case is laughable.

 

Thousands of human beings will be tortured and/or killed today and most of them won't make the news.

 

People need to get their priorities straight.

 

Maybe we can get a cable channel posting news 24/7 of people being killed & maimed all over the world. Kind of like ESPN News, but with death & maiming of humans as a focus all day, every day.

 

I sense huge ratings...

[Vet]

Maybe we can get a cable channel posting news 24/7 of people being killed & maimed all over the world. Kind of like ESPN News, but with death & maiming of humans as a focus all day, every day.

 

I sense huge ratings...

 

 

Maybe we could have the "Squirrells and Bunnies Getting Run Over by Cars" network. Or the "Ants Getting Stepped On" network. They would both probably get equal ratings since it appears that the killing of animals is now on equal ground with the torture and killing of humans.

[Bronco Billy]

Maybe we could have the "Squirrells and Bunnies Getting Run Over by Cars" network. Or the "Ants Getting Stepped On" network. They would both probably get equal ratings since it appears that the killing of animals is now on equal ground with the torture and killing of humans.

 

I think you may be onto something there, too.

 

All Death, All the Time. They can have a "Many Faces of Death" series running. What sponsor could resist the ratings that a channel like that is sure to draw, as well as promoting empathy for dead & maimed people & animals from all other sentient living beings.

Edited July 30, 2007 by Bronco Billy

[Bill Swerski]

Maybe we could have the "Squirrells and Bunnies Getting Run Over by Cars" network. Or the "Ants Getting Stepped On" network. They would both probably get equal ratings since it appears that the killing of animals is now on equal ground with the torture and killing of humans.

 

What does the rapid and unintentional death of lower forms of wildlife have to do with the prolonged torture of domesticated pets?

Edited July 30, 2007 by Bill Swerski

[Bronco Billy]

What does rapid and unintentional death of lower forms of wildlife have to do with the prolonged torture of domesticated pets?

 

Maybe the Feds con prosecute them next. That is if someone is a serial bunny & squirrel runner overer.

[Vet]

What does rapid and unintentional death of lower forms of wildlife have to do with the prolonged torture of domesticated pets?

 

 

Good question. I guess nothing.

 

Point is the public at large appears more outraged over what Michael Vick has allegedly done to dogs than they are over the atrocities that are perpetrated on humans day in and day out all over the world.

[DemonKnight]

Good question. I guess nothing.

 

Point is the public at large appears more outraged over what Michael Vick has allegedly done to dogs than they are over the atrocities that are perpetrated on humans day in and day out all over the world.

 

 

It seems people are pretty outraged about Iraq. Darfur is grabbing plenty of headlines these days. Just about every murder or kidnapping is all over the news. The difference is the lack of a professional athelete to cheer against.

[Bronco Billy]

Good question. I guess nothing.

 

Point is the public at large appears more outraged over what Michael Vick has allegedly done to dogs than they are over the atrocities that are perpetrated on humans day in and day out all over the world.

 

A good portion of the outrage has to do with Vick's celebrity. Most people with an IQ over 60 can't for the life of them figure out why: 1) A guy whom defenders have propped up as a superb QB and a great human being can do this kind of stuff, and 2) How any pro athlete can be stupid enough to jeopardize to risk making millions of dollars for playing a sport just to get their rocks off watching dogs tear each other apart, and/or 3) how stupid Vick is to think that he's so privledged that he can do something like promoting dogfighting and not have it either be prosecuted and/or have it cost him something significant.

 

Now, if evidence were to be found that say, Tom Cruise, butchered & maimed dozens of people - I'm speculating wildly here mind you - I think the importance of that story in most peoples' minds would supercede that of the Vick story and the outcry would be greater.

Edited July 30, 2007 by Bronco Billy

[Bill Swerski]

Point is the public at large appears more outraged over what Michael Vick has allegedly done to dogs than they are over the atrocities that are perpetrated on humans day in and day out all over the world.

 

That is true. Then again, we tend to hold our fellow Americans to a higher standard than people like Kim Jong Il and Hassan Nasrallah.

 

The reality is that dog-fighting is a widespread problem that needs to be dealt with. If this media-driven over-reaction changes attitudes and helps curb this horrific "sport," I'm all for it.

[Vet]

 

It seems people are pretty outraged about Iraq. Darfur is grabbing plenty of headlines these days. Just about every murder or kidnapping is all over the news. The difference is the lack of a professional athelete to cheer against.

 

 

Not true.

 

I know a guy who was murdered in New Haven CT six months ago. He was black, didn't have a lot of money and not too many people will miss him. Didn't even make the local news. No one protested outside the courthouse. I guess he was worth less than a dog.

 

People protesting this dogfighting thing may claim to be trying to call attention to animal rights, but they're really trying to call attention to themselves.