Grand Jury Indicts Vick

[gibbsisgod]

Didn't Nike say they were not going to terminate his endorsement deals? Bet they are regretting that now.

I got about half way through the story and stopped reading. I can't imagine anyone being that cruel. MV, if this is true, I hope you get the max. You are an underachieving, overpaid, sub-par qb and I hope you burn in hell you Fucking Fuck!

[Schneed10]

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.

[gibbsisgod]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

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.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by gibbsisgod

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.

[724Skinsfan]

Just finished reading the indictment. Vick looks fubar'd in this one. I note that he's not listed as killing any dogs. Is this because of possible stiffer sentencing that accompanies such? As long as the witness' stories stick.

What's the over/under for how long before we hear the conviction and follo-up sentencing? I say 18 months before conviction/sentencing.

EDIT: just re-read and at the bottom it says: "In or about April of 2007, Peace, Phillips and Vick executed approximately eight dogs that did not perform well in 'testing' sessions at 1915 Moonlight Road by various methods, including hanging, drowning and slamming at least one dog's body to the ground."

Yup, FUBAR'd

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

What's the over/under for how long before we hear the conviction and follo-up sentencing? I say 18 months before conviction/sentencing.

I'll take the Under. I heard on Mike & Mike this morning that the Federal Court in Richmond, VA moves its caseload faster than any other Fed Court in the U.S. Greenberg mentioned he spoke with an attorney familiar with the Federal system and estimated the trial starting in Oct. / Nov. 2007.

This link is from the Virginian Pilot, today. Vick and his cohorts have their bond hearing and arraignment on July 26th.

ARTICLE: First court date set for Michael Vick in dogfighting case (The Virginian-Pilot - HamptonRoads.com/PilotOnline.com)

[Longtimefan]

There is no acceptable defense for the actions of Michael Vick. Someone mentioned Devon Boddie and why his name wasn't mentioned anywhere in the indictment, well I had wondered the exact same thing. He did however, do his best to insult the intelligence of investigators when he said the dogs found on Vick's property were planted by authorities.

[Schneed10]

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.

[gibbsisgod]

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

[gibbsisgod]

Originally Posted by gibbsisgod

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

This is a copy of the indictment.
I should have mentioned this when I first posted it.

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by gibbsisgod

This is a copy of the indictment.
I should have mentioned this when I first posted it.

Wow, that looks pretty bad. However, I'm sure a decent defense team can find a way to distance Vick from these guys or make it seem as if Vick were forced into participating or something like that, I don't know. Where's JoeRedskin when you need him?

If that document is true, it doesn't look good for Vick.

[Dirty_Landry]

WOW!!! if we can indict vick then.....
can we indict bush on murder charges as well??

[skinsWill]

When i was reading the indictment I counted 4 cooperating witnesses. In every case it was first had contact with Vick at or regarding dog fights. He is so screwed, if he wants to see the feild again he will be singing about everything he knows, cooperating with his deal that the feds might offer him.

[Redskins8588]

Originally Posted by skinsWill

He is so screwed, if he wants to see the feild again he will be singing about everything he knows, cooperating with his deal that the feds might offer him.

I don't get it, who will Vick be "singing" on? Does Vick answer to someone else? Let's face it here folks, Vick it the "big cheese" here in this case. He is the one that the Fed's are really looking to take down. He is the one that funded the whole operation. If anything the others are the one that are gonna do the singing on Vick... You know things like it was his idea and what not...

[skinsWill]

Originally Posted by Redskins8588

I don't get it, who will Vick be "singing" on? Does Vick answer to someone else? Let's face it here folks, Vick it the "big cheese" here in this case. He is the one that the Fed's are really looking to take down. He is the one that funded the whole operation. If anything the others are the one that are gonna do the singing on Vick... You know things like it was his idea and what not...

Well in the indictment it lists names of MANY other kennels in MANY other states... dont you think if the feds could get the "Big Cheese" Vick to start naming names and locations as to where the MANY other rings are still operating to save his own ass? im sure they would be more than willing to offer a deal for the information that could potentially stop other dog fighting operations in 5 different states.