Beaumont

Vick Indicted

Recommended Posts

If it was signed into law back in May and they are only indicting Vick now, than I believe that would make it active for this case.

 

Didn't that WIkipedia link say that he could be given 3 years for each offense? Ouch...

 

That still sounds like "ex post facto" prosecution to me, though I am not a lawyer.

 

The U.S. Constitution forbids ex post facto prosecution, meaning that you cannot pass a law after someone commits an act and THEN prosecute him under the new law for his pre-existing act. So if you are dog-fighting, and there is no law on the books, and you STOP dog-fighting before a hypothetical new law comes on the books, then legally you can't be charged under the new law. If you start dog-fighting again AFTER the new law is passed, then you are fair game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You think the Falcons are upset they lost Schaub? :D Seriously, what does this do to any Falcon players fantasy wise? Will this have any major affect on they or will this not even be a factor this year?

Schaub was notorious for not being Michael Vick. I'd rather have Harrington than Schaub. Too early to say.

 

Wow, maybe you should defend Vick. You've continually shown your blind passion for him. You bring up good points on 3-4 items, but thats an 18 page document and I don't think you're gonna be able to discredit them all, if thats even all of them. Where there is smoke......... :D

:tup:

Eh there's definetely some holes, IMO. I'm just looking at it and asking some serious questions and bringing up some questionable facts. Vick's defense is that he had no idea what the hell was happening. And all the things that "place" him there are pretty questionable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most important bolded.

Shadowed guy on ESPN says the fight in 2000. Says Vick was betting with everyone. Anyone see that in the indictment?

 

 

Oh...and the 2003 season was the year that VIck had the broken leg and was out for the entirety of it. Doesn't seem to be that hard to believe...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That still sounds like "ex post facto" prosecution to me, though I am not a lawyer.

 

The U.S. Constitution forbids ex post facto prosecution, meaning that you cannot pass a law after someone commits an act and THEN prosecute him under the new law for his pre-existing act. So if you are dog-fighting, and there is no law on the books, and you STOP dog-fighting before a hypothetical new law comes on the books, then legally you can't be charged under the new law. If you start dog-fighting again AFTER the new law is passed, then you are fair game.

 

I don't know, but ESPN has reported that the conspiracy charge carries a max of 5 years plus 1 if he's found guilty in the fighting itself. I don't know if that's old law or new...the wikipedia article seemed to say that the new law was 3 years max for each individual count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh...and the 2003 season was the year that VIck had the broken leg and was out for the entirety of it. Doesn't seem to be that hard to believe...

Did he travel with the team? Go to team stuff? Makes it hard to believe that he wouldn't try to learn all he could in just his 3rd year. You make a great point btw and I'm in no way trying to argue with you. Since I know everything I say in this thread is being watched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yep remember reading that now. So it's a felony if found guilty, 5 year max. Who are these other 3 guys btw? And will Boddie's, the cousin, charges be brought forward next?

 

http://myespn.go.com/conversation/story?id...amp;section=nfl

I don't know, but ESPN has reported that the conspiracy charge carries a max of 5 years plus 1 if he's found guilty in the fighting itself. I don't know if that's old law or new...the wikipedia article seemed to say that the new law was 3 years max for each individual count.

Again... :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that it was during the season does make it more questionable, but I'm just stating that it doesn't seem at all impossible. The exact date isn't given, it just says "in or around the time of fall 2003"...there was probably some point in time in which an injured Michael Vick would have been able to do such a thing.

It does seem like an awful lot of effort for a man who is walking around with a broken leg to go through however.

Edited by Crazysight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The fact that it was during the season does make it more questionable, but I'm just stating that it doesn't seem at all impossible. The exact date isn't given, it just says "in or around the time of fall 2003"...there was probably some point in time in which an injured-reserve placed Michael Vick would have been able to do such a thing.

It does seem like an awful lot of effort for a man who is walking around with a broken leg to go through however.

Exactly I'm just raising questions that HAVE to be brought up. beyond reasonable doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, but this makes it a felony, from what I read. And, I don't have the specific link open, but wasn't this signed by Bush as a federal law and wouldn't that make it active in Virginia?

 

that ESPN link is the one that says the law passed in May 2007 now makes.....

 

Federal Law is the Supreme law of the land....yes....but it has to be brought in Federal District Court and not in State circuit courts. Mostly only state law issues are heard in State circuit courts. There are some states that allow Federal questions to be brought in state circuit courts....Illinois is one of them....but this is a FEDERAL law that was violated.....it trumps the laws of Virgina. So, Vick cannot be prosecuted in Virgina if the feds pursue trial post indictment....unless it is on different charges than the Federal indictment. However, States may enact laws that provide penalties that are tougher than the Federal penalties....pesky 10th ammendment!!! Therefore, if the Feds cannot pursue Vick under the felony indictment....they could choose to drop the Federal charges and turn the case over to the State of Virginia. This is funny as hell BTW. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Federal Law is the Supreme law of the land....yes....but it has to be brought in Federal District Court and not in State circuit courts. Mostly only state law issues are heard in State circuit courts. There are some states that allow Federal questions to be brought in state circuit courts....Illinois is one of them....but this is a FEDERAL law that was violated.....it trumps the laws of Virgina. So, Vick cannot be prosecuted in Virgina if the feds pursue trial post indictment....unless it is on different charges than the Federal indictment. However, States may enact laws that provide penalties that are tougher than the Federal penalties....pesky 10th ammendment!!! Therefore, if the Feds cannot pursue Vick under the felony indictment....they could choose to drop the Federal charges and turn the case over to the State of Virginia. This is funny as hell BTW. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

Thanks for the explanation. Not so much for the assumed sarcasm.

 

27 User(s) are reading this topic (13 Guests and 1 Anonymous Users)

13 Members: broncosn05, magagnon, TheShiznit, fat3anthony, DaFreak, Last Plane Out, matt770, Duchess Jack, boat_hacked, KnightsOfKnee, BigTen, kraftykraft, Apocalypse

Edited by broncosn05

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"However, States may enact laws that provide penalties that are tougher than the Federal penalties"

 

I thought going to a state prison was inherently a tougher penalty than going to a federal prison.

Edited by Crazysight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Schaub was notorious for not being Michael Vick. I'd rather have Harrington than Schaub.

 

You'd rather have a bust who has failed on TWO teams than a guy who has looked pretty good in limited action? :D

 

That's about as logical as your blind defense of Ron Mexico.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You'd rather have a bust who has failed on TWO teams than a guy who has looked pretty good in limited action? :D

 

That's about as logical as your blind defense of Ron Mexico.

I think he's looked terrible and think he's going to be a disaster in Houston, but that's not entirely his fault.

 

My blind defense? Quit stooping to the stupid comment Swerski.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"However, States may enact laws that provide penalties that are tougher than the Federal penalties"

 

I thought going to a state prison was inherently a tougher penalty than going to a federal prison.

 

I think that the serving of the penalty is tougher in state prisons than in Federal ones not doubt. Most crimes for Federal are ones involving things of this nature....something that wouldn't require maximum security....just a loss of liberty.

 

BTW...Bronco...I was not being sarcastic towards you...I just have never liked Michael Vick. However, if he is innocent...he should not be charged...I am not that mean. I believe...from what I have read....that this cannot be something charged under the new law....unless there was a fight post may 2007. So, me thinks this is just an indictment.....noone ever went to jail for being indicted.

 

And I should add that during the grand jury, the rules for putting evidence into the record is almost wide open....that is why it is called the prsceutorial playground. Evidence submitted at grand jury may not be admissable during trial. For instance hearsay can be put into evidence for the grand jury...and not be admissable at trial....this is far from over.

Edited by TheShiznit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that the serving of the penalty is tougher in state prisons than in Federal ones not doubt. Most crimes for Federal are ones involving things of this nature....something that wouldn't require maximum security....just a loss of liberty.

 

BTW...Bronco...I was not being sarcastic towards you...I just have never liked Michael Vick. However, if he is innocent...he should not be charged...I am not that mean. I believe...from what I have read....that this cannot be something charged under the new law....unless there was a fight post may 2007. So, me thinks this is just an indictment.....noone ever went to jail for being indicted.

 

And I should add that during the grand jury, the rules for putting evidence into the record is almost wide open....that is why it is called the prsceutorial playground. Evidence submitted at grand jury may not be admissable during trial. For instance hearsay can be put into evidence for the grand jury...and not be admissable at trial....this is far from over.

Again thanks for the explantion.

 

Now it looks like you know law pretty well. With that in mind, how much is the indictment report reflective in the total information that the prosecutor usually has. Is it more of a brief summary or is it all the evidence they had?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been a long time Vick defender regarding his play at QB. Never thought his play was anywhere near as bad as some liked to make out.

 

On his personal less than stellar life, I excused the Ron Mexico thing as that broad being a gold digger.

 

The finger was excused as poor self control. Those fans were three sheets to the wind & were heckling the wrong guy anyway. Personally I would've pulled a Jose Canseco on 'em, but I'm not a star athlete & role model whereas Vick is.

 

The infamous Water Bottle episode? Nothing there after testing.

 

But this? :D

 

Nope. Can't excuse this. :D

 

I hope Goodell is proactive about this & goes ahead & gives him at least 4 games warming the bench right now...with the understanding that the suspension will be extended to a minimum year ban, if not life time, if convicted of any dog fighting related charges.

 

Man, I hope Joey H earns the nickname "Renaissance Man" this year. :tup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Schaub was notorious for not being Michael Vick. I'd rather have Harrington than Schaub.

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But this? :D

 

Nope. Can't excuse this. :D

 

I hope Goodell is proactive about this & goes ahead & gives him at least 4 games warming the bench right now...with the understanding that the suspension will be extended to a minimum year ban, if not life time, if convicted of any dog fighting related charges.

 

Man, I hope Joey H earns the nickname "Renaissance Man" this year. :tup:

On what the indictment? They could've got that for Vick just owning the house. There's no way Goodell suspends him one game let alone 4 for just an indictment. Now I know you have held this opinion on the dog fighting mess for a long time but I do not see Harrington under center on the Atlanta first regular season snap this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've been a long time Vick defender regarding his play at QB. Never thought his play was anywhere near as bad as some liked to make out.

 

On his personal less than stellar life, I excused the Ron Mexico thing as that broad being a gold digger.

 

The finger was excused as poor self control. Those fans were three sheets to the wind & were heckling the wrong guy anyway. Personally I would've pulled a Jose Canseco on 'em, but I'm not a star athlete & role model whereas Vick is.

 

The infamous Water Bottle episode? Nothing there after testing.

 

But this? :D

 

Nope. Can't excuse this. :D

 

 

Mort said the policy was for repeat offenders and they said he wasn't a repeater, but the water bottle, finger, Ron Mexico aren't being counted if that is their stance.

 

The conduct policy as I saw it was brought to protect NFL property more than punish law breakers. They can suspend players they believe harm the league financially whether they are criminals or not.

Edited by Randall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mort said the policy was for repeat offenders and they said he wasn't a repeater, but the water bottle, finger, Ron Mexico aren't being counted if that is their stance.

Water bottle - Are you really using this? Tests ran nothing found. All blown up.

Finger - Last I heard flipping off a bunch of people yelling at you wasn't illegal.

Ron Mexico - Garden tool.

someone should tie Vick to a "rape stand" :D

By the time I post this there's probably four Ron Mexico posts. Thanks for the contribution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From teh first page of the indictment... Michael Vick aka Ookie :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone have any details yet as to the timing of all of this... when is he required to appear before the Grand Jury etc.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.