"But not even Vick disputes that he owns the property where, the feds say, 54 dogs were found, where equipment for training dogs was seized, where bloody carpeting and buried carcasses paint a clear picture."
Bloomberg.com: Opinion
Can one of the Vick apologists please explain why, if Vick is innocent, his property looks like a dog fighting business? What are the circumstances in which an innocent person would have such items?
Vick is guilty of at least harboring this kind of activity. It doesn't matter if he knew what was going on, or not -- he owns the property. I'm not saying he should go straight to sentencing, I respect due process. However, the NFL doesn't have to grant due process when deciding whether a player can participate in the league. It is clear that he is involved in some unethical, and possibly illegal, business. I don't think the NFL needs any more reason to take action.