Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Report: Vick won’t admit in plea deal to gambling or killing dogs; Update: Vick “agreed to the killing of … dogs”; Update: NFL suspends Vick indefinitely

posted at 8:55 am on August 24, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

The feds care much less about the particulars of the plea than Vick does, of course, given what they might mean for his career. Still, I’m surprised: they were threatening to add racketeering charges to the indictment last week if he didn’t plead out. Now, allegedly, they’re going to let him walk away without copping to any of the nastiest stuff. I wonder if he threatened to rescind the deal and take his chances with a trial if they didn’t. Although in that case, why wouldn’t the feds call his bluff? They’ve already got three co-defendants rolling over on him.

Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick will not admit to killing dogs or gambling on dog fights, as detailed in his indictment, when he enters a guilty plea in a Richmond, Va., federal court Monday, a source close to the case has told ESPN. Instead, the one count of conspiracy that Vick will plead to will admit guilt to the charge of interstate commerce for the purpose of dogfighting.

The source told ESPN that Vick’s defense team met with federal attorneys Thursday afternoon to determine the “summary of facts” to which Vick will plead, and that his attorneys believed they had a deal. The source said Vick maintains he never killed dogs and never gambled on a dog fight.

He will admit he was present when dogs were killed, but that he did not personally kill any of the dogs.

I guess between the co-defendants’ own shadiness, the celebrity sympathy Vick would get from a jury, and the heat they’re getting from the NAACP, among others, the prosecution figured a trial would be riskier than thought. Probably right, too. The question is, is Roger Goodell going to follow the hard-ass zero-tolerance Kenesaw Mountain Landis example and ban him notwithstanding the legal outcome or will he use the non-admissions as a pretext to save the career of one of the league’s star attractions? According to the ESPN article, assuming a one-year suspension to follow his sentence, he’d be out for two seasons and pushing 30 by the time he came back. Hello, Oakland!

The AJC’s got an interview this morning with his father, a disgruntled former substance abuser currently estranged from Vick, who insists that his son was indeed very much into dogfighting. Believe him or not, your call:

Michael Boddie, in two sometimes tearful interviews with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution this week, said some time around 2001 his son staged dogfights in the garage of the family’s home in Newport News, Va. Boddie also said Vick kept fighting dogs in the family’s backyard, including injured ones — “bit up, chewed up, exhausted” — that the father nursed back to health…

“I wish people would stop sugarcoating it,” Boddie said. “This is Mike’s thing. And he knows it.”

He “likes it, and he has the capital to have a set up like that.”…

Boddie said he cleaned out the home’s garage three times in 2001 to make room for dogfighting sessions held by Vick and his friends.

“I hung around long enough to actually walk in there when an actual dogfight was going on,” Boddie said, but he added that he didn’t stay long.

“It wasn’t my thing,” he said.

He said he had already witnessed test fights of dogs — in which dogs battle to see how well a prospective fighter will perform.

“It’s really something to stand there and watch. You have to have the stomach for it,” he said.

He says eight dogs were kept on the property. A neighbor says she only saw one, and heard nothing.

Update: Semi-related, somehow a parody site slipped through the multiple layers of painstaking fact-checking at MSNBC. And not for the first time, either.

Update: Here’s the plea agreement via the Smoking Gun. No admission to gambling (although he does admit to laying out the money for others to gamble), but click and scroll for dog-killing nuance!

The question now: What to do with his dogs?

Update: Slublog sends the screencap of the key passage for ease of reference. Note the reference to “collective efforts.”

vick1.jpg
vick2.jpg

Update: About that toned-down plea agreement — it didn’t work.

“Your admitted conduct was not only illegal, but also cruel and reprehensible. Your team, the NFL, and NFL fans have all been hurt by your actions.”

“Your plea agreement and the plea agreements of your co-defendants also demonstrate your significant involvement in illegal gambling. Even if you personally did not place bets, as you contend, your actions in funding the betting and your association with illegal gambling both violate the terms of your NFL Player Contract and expose you to corrupting influences in derogation of one of the most fundamental responsibilities of an NFL player.”…

“I have advised the Falcons that, with my decision today, they are no longer prohibited from acting and are now free to assert any claims or remedies available to them under the Collective Bargaining Agreement or your NFL Player Contract.”


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

God forbid that he turn on another player…based on the talking heads reaction to his decision to plead guilty, one wouldn’t think that he commited premeditated murder on the animals…That’s the new face of the NFL

Pam on August 24, 2007 at 8:29 AM

Pam on August 24, 2007 at 9:36 AM

Oh what the heck. Let’s just let him go. I mean, why would someone like this lie?

JWS on August 24, 2007 at 9:39 AM

Yes, ESPN has been so correct in the past regarding sports and law. Duke anyone?

jeffNWV on August 24, 2007 at 9:46 AM

Pretty sad if they let him skate without admitting to the most serious of charges. Still even if he gets 1 year from the NFL he’ll be hard pressed to find a team wanting the baggage he will bring. It will be interesting to see what sponsors of the NFL will do. Imus got canned for his comments (rightly so). Lots of sponsor pressure. I think most logical people would agree Vick’s crime here is far worse. Playing in the NFL is a privledge, not a right.

As for his football skills he’ll be 30, is an average passer at best, and always seems to get hurt.

On a personal note “good riddance.” You and your punk brother can go “muscle up” in the yard. To throw away all that to torture animals.

Hammerhead on August 24, 2007 at 9:46 AM

Then they should withdraw the plea deal and take that vile,l vicious bum to trial. This reeks of a cop out by the prosecutor.

rplat on August 24, 2007 at 9:52 AM

The gambling aspect of the Vick case is the most damaging to his career and it should be….Someone who has a HUNDRED MILLION DOLLAR pro sports contract and STILL can’t control his illegal gambling, has no place in the business of professional sports.

He simply can’t be trusted.

Besides being a “hip-hop” thug and torturing animals, he’s a liar and a gambling addict to boot.

What a great role model!….lol

Keith_Z on August 24, 2007 at 9:59 AM

You know, if you or me, or some high-school/college kid, got caught doing this the very first thing we would be looked at as future serial killers, child abusers, spouse beaters, and have to undergo ‘treatment’ by the courts. Then we would get thrown in the slammer, and restricted from being around animals or children.

Scum.

Limerick on August 24, 2007 at 10:00 AM

Of all the skummy things pro sports stars get busted for, I still don’t see this as bad as serial battery of the wives and/or girl friends, or possessing huge quantities of drugs or steroids that they could not possibly have only for their own use. I love dogs, cats and other domesticated animals, but I don’t think it’s rational to equate harm to them with harm to people.

Racketering is serious, and I think that is the charge he should do time for.

As for playing again, Oakland and/or Washington will sign just about anybody.

doufree on August 24, 2007 at 10:01 AM

Isn’t the really big money in commercials? Even if the NFL is stupid enough to take him back, who’d want him for an endorsement? I’d instantly boycott any company that hired him, and I doubt I’m the only one.

Hello, Oakland!

Hahaha!!

Tanya on August 24, 2007 at 10:01 AM

“…This reeks of a cop out by the prosecutor.”

rplat on August 24, 2007 at 9:52 AM

Well the good ol’ naacp stepped in and made it a racial thang, didn’t they? And we all know what that means. BTW, where is this “black community” I’m always hearing about, rising up and telling Vick what a horrible example he is? They kinda remind me of those “moderate muslims”…

JWS on August 24, 2007 at 10:02 AM

This sucks. Vick, unlike Bill Kristol, is a real thug and should be treated like one, not given nabby-pamby plea agreements.

If there was any justice he’d end up coaching junior high football in Darrow, Alaska. Part-time.

Thomas the Wraith on August 24, 2007 at 10:05 AM

Scum! Scum! Scum! etc etc etc etc etc

jeanie on August 24, 2007 at 10:05 AM

I guess between the co-defendants’ own shadiness, the celebrity sympathy Vick would get from a jury, and the heat they’re getting from the NAACP, among others, the prosecution figured a trial would be riskier than thought.

I doubt it. Al Sharpton and Russell Simmons are back the prosecution. The Falcons fan board was very angry with him, the judge is a hardass, and his buddies were willing to testify under oath that he did it.

amerpundit on August 24, 2007 at 10:06 AM

Hello, Oakland!

Nah, Oakland goes for underutilized talented players (Jim Plunkett, Kenny Stabler, Rich Gannon). Vick is one of the most overrated QB’s to play the game.

Krydor on August 24, 2007 at 10:07 AM

Of course he didn’t kill the dogs!!

The water killed the dog who drowned.

The electricity killed the dog who was electrocuted.

DUH!

kooly on August 24, 2007 at 10:07 AM

Well, as I said in previous posts though I’ll just change a little of it…He’ll get out of much of this. And not being one to say “I told you so” but…

I told you so…it’s a racial thing

LtE126 on August 24, 2007 at 10:18 AM

I must admit, I don’t really understand the “racketeering” angle on all this…but I have to say that I don’t consider killing animals, even with cruelty like this, as a jailtime-worthy offense. A _huge_ fine (representing society’s disgust at his actions), sure, but to incarcerate him would be drawing moral equivalence between human & dog life…dogs are great, but I don’t consider them equal. (If my dog seriously attacks someone, he’s getting a .45 and a shallow grave)

Removing Vicks from society for being involved in this doesn’t protect society from harm…it just soothes the vanity of the emotionally displaced.

If there are other good reasons to jail him, fine…

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 10:32 AM

I’m waiting until I read the official report. If he is able to plead out without admitting his guilt, there should be riots in the streets until that States Attorney’s office is cleaned out. And ANYONE who has been involved in this case should have to submitt to having their financial records audited yearly for the rest of their lives. But again, I’m waiting to see the official outcome before I get too worked up….

KMC1 on August 24, 2007 at 10:37 AM

I still say he’s headed for Detroit or Baltimore come 2009, or whenever he’s eligible to come back.

In the meantime, Starbury has backtracked and some intrepid folks have figured out a way to make a few bucks off him.

This just in: The NAALCP says it’s all a plot designed to get a mediocre white journeyman QB a job in Atlanta.

JammieWearingFool on August 24, 2007 at 10:37 AM

Judge Henry E Hudson’s email address is Henry_E_Hudson@vaed.uscourts.gov Please don’t let Vick get away with not admitting to gambling or killing dogs. The Judge does not have to accept a guilty plea. The facts in the other guilty pleas show that Vick both killed dogs and was knee deep in the gambling.
It would show cowardace on the part of the prosecutors in this case to allow Vick to plead guilty but not to the main charges…if they are so scared to go to trial against Michael Vick then maybe they should resign. I mean, I would absolutely love to be an Assistant US attorney. If they don’t have the guts to try this case, then maybe they should hire someone like me who would.

Also you can calll the US attorney’s office at (804) 819-5400 and tell them not to accept any guilty plea that does not include Vick agreeing that he killed dogs and gambled.

mlarner on August 24, 2007 at 10:37 AM

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 10:32 AM

Obviously, you 1) should not have access to animals, and 2)are not the best judge of values or morals to begin with.

KMC1 on August 24, 2007 at 10:39 AM

This does suck. It appears having the money to pay those defense attorneys of his is working out quite well for him. Also, playing the race card all across Atlanta turned out to be pretty good strategy too.

wytammic on August 24, 2007 at 10:39 AM

Someone in the comments section of the ESPN article mentioned that Vick could still be brought up on state charges, so perhaps that’s still on the table after the federal case is concluded.

thirteen28 on August 24, 2007 at 10:40 AM

… the heat they’re getting from the NAACP, among others, the prosecution figured a trial would be riskier than thought. Probably right, too.

Allah

Really, AP? I’m out of the loop on stuff like this, but does anyone really give a crap what a local branch of the NAACP says about anything? If there is a single nationwide organization that is more frequently discredited, I don’t know who it would be.

Jaibones on August 24, 2007 at 10:45 AM

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 10:32 AM

And killing dogs is equivalent to killing deer too. Right?

And you enjoy the primal emotions of a good dog fight. Right?

captivated_dem on August 24, 2007 at 10:47 AM

On FOX they said he killed 53 dogs. I think he should one year for every dog. When he gets out, at age 79, maybe he can play for the Century Village Geezers.

Tony737 on August 24, 2007 at 10:48 AM

“…but does anyone really give a crap what a local branch of the NAACP says about anything?”
Jaibones on August 24, 2007 at 10:45 AM

You betcha. It’s pathetic, but all they have to do is yell the “R” word, and scared whitey goes all to pieces…

JWS on August 24, 2007 at 10:53 AM

I did hear the boss drop this pearl…”he’ll also have PETA folowing him the rest of his career, which is worse than life in prison”

Good stuff, MM

LtE126 on August 24, 2007 at 10:54 AM

I sent Mr. White from the Atlanta branch of the NAACP an email and copied their legal dept. (Mrs. Dagmar Grimes) and the executive director (Mrs. Judith Hanson) in regards to his outspoken support of Michael Vick. It’s obvious he is only supporting Mr. Vick based on the color of his skin, and while he is entitled to his personal beliefs, in this case he has crossed a line in making comments while representing the NAACP. In my opinion, he is not fit to represent the organization any longer. I urge you all to do the same. http://www.atlantanaacp.org/contact.html

KMC1 on August 24, 2007 at 11:05 AM

I hope none of the dogs he “allegedly” slaughtered were white.

Might complicate the “racism” card angle.

He should be in a mental institution cleaning up after incontinent patients for a few years.

After that, fast food server in a paper hat.

(He could probably carry ten trays at once.)

profitsbeard on August 24, 2007 at 11:13 AM

I find it funny that everybody is talking about him salvaging his career when he was going to be out of the league in a few years anyway because he can”t play QB worth a damn.

Metro on August 24, 2007 at 11:15 AM

So, he doesn’t have to admit to any of the crimes he was accused of? Is this victimless crime? Criminalless crime? So, another celebrity walk off I guess? I just love our legal system. Duke Lacrosse players get hung out to dry for over a year on NO evidence. This guy apparently has video of himself demonstrating the islamic terrorist school of pet love and he gets to cop a plea that admits to nothing…I need to go lie down.

austinnelly on August 24, 2007 at 11:16 AM

I can hear it now from the NAACP. He was not convicted and he never admitted or was never charged with killing dogs or dogfighting.
So why keep him out of football?
And they would have a point.

Let him go to trial, let him suffer the consequences of his actions. But then again, look a the quality attorney that wouuld defend him relative to those trying to convict him.

Throw him in whith a pack of pit bulls and let them sort it out.

right2bright on August 24, 2007 at 11:25 AM

Read the indictment and the perverse ways he murdered his dogs. These are the acts of a truly psychotic individual.

Just as the Slickmeister can’t stop abusing wommen,there is little chance that Vick can rehabilitate himself.

This is one sick bastard and the NAACP can “sugarcoat” it all they want, but you can make book on this A’hole becoming a recidivist.

there it is on August 24, 2007 at 11:27 AM

This just in: The NAALCP says it’s all a plot designed to get a mediocre white journeyman QB a job in Atlanta.

Now that’s funny.

Too bad the XFL is gone.

reaganaut on August 24, 2007 at 11:43 AM

Fit him for that Raiders jersey any day now.

Malpaso on August 24, 2007 at 11:47 AM

Fit him for that Raiders jersey any day now.

Malpaso on August 24, 2007 at 11:47 AM

I was a die hard Raiders fan for years — but because you are right on target with your point, I gave them up. I’m going to stick with class act teams like the Colts. :)

wytammic on August 24, 2007 at 11:57 AM

…or we could switch to following tiddleywinks…never so much as a mild cussword there ;-)

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 12:00 PM

Plea bargaining and this nonsense of multiple charges needs to be done away with. No other country with the English system of law uses them. What a complete joke.

PRCalDude on August 24, 2007 at 12:09 PM

My biggest complaint is with the concept of “concurrent” sentences…and voir dire…and pretty much everything that gets in the way of good ol’ public hangin’s

bah humbug

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 12:13 PM

As an NFL icon he should be held to a higher standard not lower one.

Let justice be done though the heavens may fall,Lord Mansfield

Speakup on August 24, 2007 at 12:16 PM

As an NFL icon he should be held to a higher standard not lower one

I heard similar things said about Paris Hilton too…

How about we just stick to applying justice _equally_ ?

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 12:18 PM

First interview on ESPN:

So Michael, if you didn’t do any of these things, why did you plead guilty?

Vick: I didn’t want to put my family through an embarassing trial. Even though I was not personally reponsible for the brutal treatment of these dogs, it WAS my property, so being the upstanding man that I am, I decided to take responsibility for how my property was used. I’m sorry that I did not intervene when my cousin was torturing and killing those dogs. It breaks my heart.

~sob~

CookeyD on August 24, 2007 at 12:26 PM

People should go watch the video of Roger Cossack on ESPN’s site – this is not as cut and dry as it appears.

Of particular note is the fact that the three other co-defendents have already pleaded under oath that Vick did actually participate in both gambling and execution of the dogs. Thus, if Vick pleads under oath that he didn’t participate in those things, it creates a situation where someone has perjured themselves. As such, the judge does not have to accept the plea, and even if he does, he can take into consideration that someone lied when considering his sentence.

Vick isn’t out of the woods yet, and he may actually be taking a big risk here.

thirteen28 on August 24, 2007 at 12:31 PM

John Edwards is correct, there are 2 America’s. Just ask Vick and Simpson among many other professional criminals athletes.

Wade on August 24, 2007 at 12:44 PM

As an NFL icon he should be held to a higher standard not lower one.

He should be held to the same high standard as Bobby Bonds.

Wade on August 24, 2007 at 12:46 PM

I wonder if he threatened to rescind the deal and take his chances with a trial if they didn’t.

It might be fear of just one juror not going all in. That has to be figured in here, because they have sufficient evidence from just what we’ve heard.
Dog fighting is a horrible crime and a crime that very often leads to the participants harming humans. These are bad people and if this plea deal goes out this way, look out America. We just can not allow this to set precedent anywhere at anytime.
Money and fear should NOT be driving the prosecutor or the courts.
Henry_E_Hudson@vaed.uscourts.gov
Email the judge,
call someone, do something, this is just WAY WRONG!

shooter on August 24, 2007 at 12:51 PM

I brutally and sadistically murdered 10s of thousands of ants with boiling water the other day…how much jailtime should I get? An hour per ant sound fair?

Or are some lives more equal (and cuter) than others?

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 12:57 PM

Ochlan- If you cant understand humane vs inhumane…well I don’t have much to say other than- well, it’s the LAW.

Go change the laws, then I’ll listen to you.
So til then enjoy your dead ant-farm, call Elvira for consolation and we’ll see ya later.

shooter on August 24, 2007 at 1:03 PM

I wonder if these stunningly perceptive folks would care to indulge their amateur psychological skills on foxhunts and bullfights too?

Well, I hunt, too, but I’ve never been on a fox hunt – I don’t hunt with dogs at all. By that I mean letting the dogs do the “hunting”, retrievers are another matter. I’m not fond of bullfighting either. I don’t understand why people can’t see the difference between hunting and torturing animals just for money and “sport”.

So, I’m going to have to call BS here, I don’t think you hunt at all. No self respecting hunter would even attempt to equate his sport to dog-fighting. I know guys who do let their dogs run down deer, and they’re all lowlifes. Is that how you hunt?

reaganaut on August 24, 2007 at 1:04 PM

The more I think about it, the more I’m amazed that the NAACP didn’t hang this guy out to dry. Aren’t there enough negative stereotypes about blacks already, without people thinking they’re also all cool with torturing and murderering man’s best friend?

Tanya on August 24, 2007 at 1:13 PM

reaganaut…you missed the point entirely.

_I_ am not equating the two. In fact, I object to the very concept of ’sport’ hunting. I don’t consider killing to be a very noble basis for sport at all. Is that how you hunt? If so, I don’t think very highly of you either. tit for tat. Keep your uninformed “BS” where it belongs.

I understand humane vs inhumane. I understand that our appreciation of the two concepts shifts over time & circumstance. I think it’s a bad foundation for law. I’m not even debating the existence of such law…merely that I disagree with the consensus opinion of what should happen to Vicks vis-a-vis jailtime.

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 1:14 PM

Tanya, you make an excellent point…but what do you think would happen to the ‘black rights movement’ if they allowed such a fracture to appear in their ‘blacks can do no wrong’ facade?

Methinks it would all unravel pretty fast…

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 1:26 PM

He should have to clean dog cages at the local SPCA dog shelter for about 30 years.

As a dog owner my whole life, He makes me want to puke! I wouldn’t be surprised at all if he actually takes a human life sometime in the future.

I wonder if OJ enjoyed dogfights too?

FOXHUNTS! I think England banned those years ago.

Masscon on August 24, 2007 at 1:28 PM

And MM about PETA following him. Pete is no better than him, Check out petakillsanimals.com

Masscon on August 24, 2007 at 1:29 PM

Correction, Pete is a great guy. It’s Peta that’s no better than Vick.

Masscon on August 24, 2007 at 1:30 PM

FOXHUNTS! I think England banned those years ago

Yep. England’s great at banning stuff. Not so great at thinking beyond their noses about _consequences_ however ;-)

The British Bulldog gave out its death rattle a long time ago.

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 1:40 PM

I have to say that I don’t consider killing animals, even with cruelty like this, as a jailtime-worthy offense.

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 10:32 AM

I’d bet your mental illness stems from a bad childhood. You’re free to deny it; they always do.

FloatingRock on August 24, 2007 at 1:48 PM

Ochlan;
Have read all your posts on this thread. It would suck to live in your head.

captivated_dem on August 24, 2007 at 1:52 PM

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 1:40 PM

Do you seriously believe you are going to win any converts to your morally bankrupt viewpoint?

And what’s with all of the smiley faces in your many posts in this thread, are you enjoying the topic?

FloatingRock on August 24, 2007 at 1:55 PM

If there is a single nationwide organization that is more frequently discredited, I don’t know who it would be.

Jaibones on August 24, 2007 at 10:45 AM

CAIR?

James on August 24, 2007 at 1:56 PM

How about we just stick to applying justice _equally_ ?

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 12:18 PM

Is the guy in the Deli down the street an example for your kids?

Like it or not, discourage it or not impressionable people are effected by the famous, so yes he should held to a higher standard, that should be part of the trade off for the fame and big bucks.

His being allowed to slide only exaggerates an already outlaw glorifying immorality very prevalent here.

Speakup on August 24, 2007 at 1:56 PM

Is the guy in the Deli down the street an example for your kids?

What? The hardworking guy with a good business that satisfies many customers every day? Sure. Got a problem with deli folk?

impressionable people are effected by the famous

Can’t disagree with that. People are a fickle bunch.

However, is the unknowable subjective a sound basis for justice? Does Tom Cruise get harder time than Gary Coleman? That’s an interesting sliding scale you’re suggesting there…and it all balances on some highly variable formula quantifying _how others perceive you_, rather than a tight focus on the crime itself. Blind justice? Not in your world.

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 2:07 PM

I’d bet your mental illness stems from a bad childhood. You’re free to deny it; they always do

Have read all your posts on this thread. It would suck to live in your head.

And what’s with all of the smiley faces in your many posts in this thread, are you enjoying the topic?

Brilliant stuff.

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 2:09 PM

Do you seriously believe you are going to win any converts to your morally bankrupt viewpoint?

Seriously? No. Not a chance.

Perhaps I should just shut up and let you all enjoy the “hang Vicks” circle-jerk?

God damn my impudence at making you read anything that doesn’t totally conform to your worldview.

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 2:11 PM

This old joke is somewhat on topic…

At a San Diego grade school, a teacher asks her class to raise their hands if they’re Chargers fans. Every hand goes up, except for one. The teacher decides to follow up

Teacher: “Mary, why didn’t you raise your hand?”
Mary: “Because I’m a Chiefs fan.”

T: “Why are you a Chiefs fan?”
M: “Because my parents are from Kansas City. That’s where I was born, but we moved here before I started school.”

T: “Well… If your mother were a whore and a drug addict, and your father were her pimp and pusher, what would that make you?”
M: “Uh… A Raiders fan?”

The Monster on August 24, 2007 at 2:12 PM

I’m amazed that the NAACP didn’t hang this guy out to dry

Tanya on August 24, 2007 at 1:13 PM

Just what is the depth past which this organization will not lower itself to make an apology for an African American?

Where is the limit below which they say; this guy went too far we aren’t going to support this despicable behavior, we don’t care for the rest of us to be tainted by this, this is not who we are.

When is skin color overcome by honest recognition (by any group so far as that goes) of right versus wrong?

Speakup on August 24, 2007 at 2:19 PM

Prosecutors are lazy and inept…18 different criminal charges and they let him plead to the minor charges…what a joke. Where’s Fritz, he wouldn’t give up till he got a WH adviser. As I’ve said before, there is justice for all and then there is justice for just-us (celebs.)
I stopped watching big time sports other than golf about 10 yrs ago, I couldn’t take anymore of the “in your face” attitude and thugs that were ruining the games. So, let’s see what the N.F.L. does…I saw next to nothing…he’ll serve is time(maybe a yr) and play if anyone will take a chance on him. Of course someone will, freaky public wanna see the filth.
He should get 5 yrs and never play n the N.F.L. again…but wait i’m old fashoned and have morals, never mind my rantings.

oldernslower on August 24, 2007 at 2:34 PM

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 2:11 PM

Ever think your view may be the one that is a little off base? Comparing putting pit bulls in the ring to fight, slamming pit bulls by the head to kill them, gambling (which is illegal by the way), and watching dogs suffer is the same to you as an ant killing? So you wouldn’t kill locusts either?
We have laws in the country which create order out of chaos. A couple of those is no inhumane treatment of animals and especially pets, no raising animals for fighting, no gambling on those pathetic exhibitions.

If I were you, I would start a petition calling for the abolition of those laws, allow dogs to pit fight, allow cock fighting…or start a petition to outlaw the killing of ants.
Let’s see if your neighborhood, your friends or family will support you in that endeavor. They won’t? I guess we aren’t so different from the rest of society.

We think your ideas are nuts.

right2bright on August 24, 2007 at 2:36 PM

God damn my impudence at making you read anything that doesn’t totally conform to your worldview.

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 2:11 PM

My view of the world has no bearing on your mental condition. Certainly the bounds of societies change over time, however, while once Romans delighted in the pain and suffering of others, by the standards of civilized people today such behavior is reserved for the truly deranged. That’s why civilized societies have laws dictating punishment for such offenses. Laws which you’ve stated your disapproval of.

FloatingRock on August 24, 2007 at 2:38 PM

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 2:09 PM

Regardless of your love of dog fighting, you do have a brilliant intellect. It’s a shame really. And thank you for recognizing the brilliancy of my poetry.

captivated_dem on August 24, 2007 at 2:44 PM

The question now: What to do with his dogs?

Last one standing gets to go home with me.

Oh, wait….

James on August 24, 2007 at 2:51 PM

right2bright on August 24, 2007 at 2:36 PM

I always reserve the possibility that I’m full of crap ;-)

You’re reading my post very superficially. I am not ‘comparing’ these various acts, I am well aware that they are different…my motive in mentioning them was to challenge _why_ we view them differently…and to suggest that this ‘why’ forms a treacherous basis for law.

Petitioning to change such law (not abolish) would be futile. It would be derided as ‘nuts’ by the vast majority…just like the attempts by certain extreme animal-rights groups to ascribe identical inviolable innate rights across all living species. The mob would rule, as it always does. Many take great comfort in that…until it bites them in the ass.

I will at least have the backbone to not betray my principles, no matter how much ridicule I receive.

We think your ideas are nuts

You could well be right, but I don’t think so.

by the standards of civilized people today such behavior is reserved for the truly deranged

Yup FR, very true. I wonder how the future will judge abortion?

Regardless of your love of dog fighting

What? Where do you get this idea? I think one of my posts was deleted…where I was pretty vocal about my disgust for Vicks’ actions.

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 3:04 PM

Hmmm…it seems a couple of my posts are gone…what’s the rationale?

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 3:10 PM

The question now: What to do with his dogs?

Last one standing gets to go home with me.

Oh, wait….

James on August 24, 2007 at 2:51 PM

That is a dillema that I wish I had the resources to resolve. A 50 acre fenced compound and alot of time. I’m averse to euthanasia, however, how many of these animals can be retrained to be around humans safely, nobody knows.

captivated_dem on August 24, 2007 at 3:17 PM

That is a dillema that I wish I had the resources to resolve

Agreed. I suspect that if you could afford to take on the responsibility you’d have to get over your aversion towards euthanasia.

Perhaps we could train them to guard our southern border?

Jus’ sayin’…

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 3:21 PM

That is a dillema that I wish I had the resources to resolve

Agreed. I suspect that if you could afford to take on the responsibility you’d have to get over your aversion towards euthanasia.

Perhaps we could train them to guard our southern border?

Jus’ sayin’…

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 3:21 PM

Your answer to this dillema is with a

.45 and a shallow grave.

Right?
As for our southern border and all that goes with it, I’m more of an attrition kinda guy.

captivated_dem on August 24, 2007 at 3:37 PM

If needed, a .45 is humane…although with that many animals, we’re probably talking about a funeral pyre rather than a grave.

I’m more of an attrition kinda guy

aka useless

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 3:45 PM

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 3:21 PM

Now your on my page.

And those dogs are so wounded, like a horse with a broken leg…best to put them down, and remember the responsible party.
Vick and his cronies are the real animals.

right2bright on August 24, 2007 at 3:53 PM

POS

Viper1 on August 24, 2007 at 3:57 PM

captivated_dem on August 24, 2007 at 1:52 PM

get a life

MarkB on August 24, 2007 at 3:59 PM

captivated_dem on August 24, 2007 at 1:52 PM

get a life

MarkB on August 24, 2007 at 3:59 PM

Now that’s funny.

captivated_dem on August 24, 2007 at 4:10 PM

Slublog sends the screencap of the key passage for ease of reference. Note the reference to “collective efforts.”

Does that bit of “nuance” really buy Vick anything? It seems to me like he’s agreed to share responsibility for killing the dogs. To me it looks like the only thing he really weaseled his way out of was the gambling charges, and he probably put more emphasis on getting out of that than the other charges as the gambling charges would have been more likely than anything else to result in a lifetime ban from the NFL.

thirteen28 on August 24, 2007 at 4:15 PM

Ochlan on August 24, 2007 at 3:21 PM

I for one appreciate the arguments that you have made. I too see this case as the lynch mob in a circle jerk.Trial by TV.

I for one would like to see this case go to trial rather than be decided by plea bargain.

Vick’s is despicable but I wonder how many of the outraged have been to their local dog pound and have seen the carnage that is practiced there behind closed doors.

I love dogs and I am opposed to dog fighting.

I wonder if people know that thousands of dogs are killed every week by dog breeders and are never charged. After all, they are members of the Kennel Club set.

Just saying…

ScottyDog on August 24, 2007 at 4:42 PM

The documents allege that before fights; Sometimes dogs were starved to make them hungry for the opposing dog. Fights ended when one dog died, or when a dog gave up. According to documents, losing dogs were sometimes put to death by drowning, strangulation, hanging, gunshot, electrocution, or body slamming them to the ground.

Just saying!

there it is on August 24, 2007 at 5:06 PM

Uh oh. Maybe justice will prevail, at least as far as the NFL is concerned. All’s not lost though Mykoo, I hea da naacp am hyin.

JWS on August 24, 2007 at 6:42 PM

Its interesting to watch peoples reactions on this subject..

A horse breaks his leg in a race and has to be put down… no big deal…

Mean beat each other senseless in Boxing, and Pride Fighting… no big deal…

We slaughter thousands of animals a day in meat packing plants… not a biggy….

Kill a dog, even one you OWN, and boy is it trouble… theres a case here in Denver where a a guy shot his own dog… he’s going to get jail time… yet vets and animal shelters put down animals every day…

I know some of this is unpalatable… but we are rapidly becoming more and more hipocritical as a society…

And the idea that you can’t do with your own property what you wish, is outside of the Constitution’s writers ideas.

Romeo13 on August 24, 2007 at 6:50 PM

Oh, and add in that if a Man causes a woman to miscarry its murder, while she can kill the fetus and its a right…

Romeo13 on August 24, 2007 at 6:54 PM

I made this comment on the news clips comments but, at the risk of being repetitive, I (ahem) repeat:

Two or three quick hopes here.

1. I hope, on the sentencing or later when Mr. Vick seeks reinstatement to the NFL, we don’t hear he or his lawyer talking about his “mistake”, or how he has learned a lesson from this “mistake”. This was not a “mistake”. A mistake is when you forget to “carry the one” or take the second street on the left rather than the third. These acts were completely premeditated and orchestrated so as to avoid detection.They were wilfully, deliberately and malignantly cruel.

2. I also hope we don’t hear Mr. Vick, as soon as the sentence is served, resile from his admission. I don’t know what the law is in the US but, in Canada, if you subsequently deny the admissions you have made as part of a plea, the plea can be vacated and the case reinstated.

3. I hope we don’t have to hear a lot of crap about how it was “never proved” that Mr. Vick gambled or killed dogs, because he never admitted that specifically and there was never a trial. That is garbage because the “beyond reasonable doubt” standard is a safeguard that applies strictly to protect those accused in a criminal proceeding. Outside of such proceedings, no such standard is, or need be, applied. In most civil proceedings the standard is the balance of probabilities…50% plus one. In day to day life, people act on much less. Thus, even if the admissions made, in the end, do not amount to criminal proof, there is lots of evidence…more than 50% plus one…to justify the conclusion that Mr. Vick DID IN FACT do these acts. That is the basis on which the NFL ought to base its decisions.

Blaise on August 24, 2007 at 6:56 PM

“…And the idea that you can’t do with your own property what you wish, is outside of the Constitution’s writers ideas…”

Romeo13 on August 24, 2007 at 6:50 PM

Yeah! We all know that Washington and Jefferson routinely stepped on every baby chick they came across!

JWS on August 24, 2007 at 6:57 PM

“…And the idea that you can’t do with your own property what you wish, is outside of the Constitution’s writers ideas…”

WTF!

there it is on August 24, 2007 at 7:02 PM

Romeo13 on August 24, 2007 at 6:50 PM

If you can’t see the difference between slaughtering a pig for food and torturing dogs for hours for pleasure and gambling then you need help.

TheBigOldDog on August 24, 2007 at 7:18 PM

there it is on August 24, 2007 at 7:02 PM

The Bill or Rights stems from the idea that the government can’t tell you what to do with your property. Property rights are a huge component of how the other rights in the bill of rights came about.

In fact, most of the “Rights” we have stem from the idea that we are our own property, and can do with it what we please… in fact Roe V Wade was based on the idea that we had a right to privacy, that was based on the premise that we own ourselves…

so killing a Fetus is OK, killing a Dog is not… go figure.

Romeo13 on August 24, 2007 at 7:20 PM

TheBigOldDog on August 24, 2007 at 7:18 PM

Oh, I understand the difference, I just wish to point out the hypocracy our society is currently working under.

Romeo13 on August 24, 2007 at 7:22 PM

And the idea that you can’t do with your own property what you wish, is outside of the Constitution’s writers ideas.

Romeo13 on August 24, 2007 at 6:50 PM

This is by doubt the most idiotic comment I have ever read in Hot Air.

You do realize, Romeo, they abolished slavery? The Dems in the South had the same argument as you stated above and we went to war.

kiakjones on August 24, 2007 at 7:23 PM

Romeo13 on August 24, 2007 at 7:20 PM

You can’t commit crimes on your property just because you own it. Your home is not your own country. You can’t kill your wife in the living room and get away with it because you were on your own property.

TheBigOldDog on August 24, 2007 at 7:23 PM

I think the definition of inhumane really stems from suffering.

An animal put down with a single well placed shot to the brain or heart falls in a much different category than any action that causes unnecessary pain and to derive pleasure from causing pain where unlike humans who have a choice in whether or not to step into a boxing ring , is beneath reprehensible.

A very strong distinction must be made between the two, one may necessary the other sick.

Speakup on August 24, 2007 at 7:25 PM

Speakup on August 24, 2007 at 7:25 PM

Exactly. Well said.

TheBigOldDog on August 24, 2007 at 7:27 PM

There is a strong correlation between animal cruelty and sociopathic tendencies. Shoutout to Bundy and Dahmer. This was evil – pure and simple.

tdau1997 on August 24, 2007 at 7:31 PM

Comment pages: 1 2


You must be logged in to post a comment.