FanDuel - WFBC

August 20, 2007

Michael Vick Admits to Dogfighting, Will Plead Guilty: The Falcons quarterback has reached a plea agreement with prosecutors in his federal dogfighting case and will enter his guilty plea Monday, his attorney said today. No word yet on what sentence he might receive. Vick and his codefendants, who already reached deals, face up to five years in prison and $250,000 in fines.

posted by Ricardo to football at 02:05 PM - 183 comments

Is this going to turn into another one of these? Because we don't need it.

posted by jerseygirl at 02:40 PM on August 20

Plus, I hope we aren't going to have another one when actually does plead guilty, then another one when he is sentenced.

posted by bperk at 02:41 PM on August 20

I second JG's post. Been there.

posted by tahoemoj at 02:50 PM on August 20

I don't know, this is a pretty important update to a pretty important story. I would also like to see the thread play out because the problem with the first thread was the apologists who said "wait and see", "innocent til proven guilty", etc. Now that their man has plead guilty and ADMITTED he TORTURED and EXECUTED DOGS I would like to see if they'll even show up here. I was also glad to read that one of the states has every intention of continuing prosecution of Vick on their own statutes. Vick's putting one set of problems behind him, still has alot in front of him. And yet he's still better off than the animals who had the misfortune of falling under his, uhh, what's the opposite of "care"?

posted by vito90 at 02:57 PM on August 20

I was also glad to read that one of the states has every intention of continuing prosecution of Vick on their own statutes. well I understand the seriousness of the charge stems more from the cross-state gambling part than the dogfighting part, at least from the courts eyes (while the public has latched onto the animal cruelty part, for obvious reasons). So while I'm sure he can and will be charged by the state, I doubt he will see anything other than a heavy fine related to that...especially as this is his first offense.

posted by bdaddy at 03:09 PM on August 20

I don't see how Vick's pro football career can recover from this, even if he gets a short sentence, if he admits to the allegations made against him. No one's going to want the marquee position on their team in his hands. Not even Oakland.

posted by rcade at 03:25 PM on August 20

You overestimate Oakland, rcade.

posted by insomnyuk at 03:39 PM on August 20

This is a huge story, not just from an athletic persective, but from a sociatel one as well. I don't think the apologists will be out on this one,however I wish the media would do some deeper reporting on why this is exceptable in "some" circles of society, and what Michael Vicks life was like before his time in college. His brother was, mabey still is, a very troubled person. So there could be a link between their early formative years and what is going on now. I know that his mother has a different last name, perhaps that suggests a lack of a father figure and no male role model. I don't know. I do know that part of this country's problem is the lack of a stable homelife and the "you can't tell me what to do" attitude. Add money and more money sprinkled in with a little "anything you want" and "your never wrong" and this is the kind of person that develops. I just want to add that before people complain about me being a "holly roller" or some right winger that I'm not perfect, done drugs, lived in sin etc,etc, but at some point you need to grow up, hold yourself and your friends accountable to higher standards and stop apologizing for and blaming others for unspeakable behavior. This was a country of free will, but more and more excuses seem to be the dish of the day.

posted by patsfan73 at 03:45 PM on August 20

I'm hoping that the intense publicity attracted by this case inspires more local and federal prosecutors to go after dogfighting rings.

posted by rcade at 04:14 PM on August 20

My wife is a PETA nutcase (but I love her anyway), and she's hoping the same thing, rcade. I've read a few stories about authorities cracking down on random livestock shootings, so maybe it will make a difference beyond Vick's career.

posted by dusted at 04:36 PM on August 20

well I understand the seriousness of the charge stems more from the cross-state gambling part than the dogfighting part, at least from the courts eyes (while the public has latched onto the animal cruelty part, for obvious reasons). In the time period covered by the indictment, the federal dogfighting charges that could have been assessed against Vick were misdemeanors (the law subsequently was changed to make the charges felonies, but this doesn't apply to Vick -- ex post facto and all that crap). So any other charges in the federal case (such as the gambling charges and other charges related to the "conspiracy") are potentially bigger ticket items. That said, my personal belief is that this should be a matter for state law enforcement only. I just don't think prosecuting these crimes is or should be a core competency of the federal government, and the federal basis for acting here (the cross-border aspects) is incidental, rather than central, to the case. For what it's worth, Virginia law imposes more stringent penalties in dog fighting than the federal statute (at least the federal statute that was in place at the time). Also, I predict Vick gets 12 months and serves no more than 6 in the federal case. (Caveat -- I know nothing about the federal sentencing guidelines in these types of cases and whether he would even be eligible for parole, so this is just mindless (and potentially inappropriate) predictacasting on my part.)

posted by holden at 04:46 PM on August 20

I wish the media would do some deeper reporting on why this is exceptable in "some" circles of society Can you just say what you mean? If you want to talk about why black people are awful, by all means, go ahead.

posted by yerfatma at 06:19 PM on August 20

The question is, does Goodell have the balls to enforce his own policy? I've long said that athletes get away with crap that would get an average-joe employee sacked (ie: Spreewell attacking his coach). Goodell has painted hisself into a corner with harsh penalties to second tier players. Now he's faced with a more serious incident with a superstar who pulls in tons of money for the NFL. In my opinion, he has no choice but to issue a ban to Vick.

posted by FonGu at 06:23 PM on August 20

I don't think Goodell has a choice given the plea in this case and the punishments already handed down by the league for Jones, Johnson, et al. Bench a marquee QB for a year and you really get taken seriously.

posted by irunfromclones at 06:38 PM on August 20

My personal opinion is that he should never be allowed to ever set foot on any football field, at any level, anywhere, in any capacity (even as a spectator) for life. I know it's not possible, but it would be at least partially just punishment. The real shame is that the fine max's out at $250k, because he needs to be sentenced to give at least $1 million to the ASPCA.

posted by commander cody at 07:30 PM on August 20

I know that his mother has a different last name, perhaps that suggests a lack of a father figure and no male role model. Or she never took his name. Or she remarried. I don't know. No, you don't apparently. Probably best not to speculate or fill in the blanks with theories that fit your agenda. And for god's sake, "mabey"?

posted by jerseygirl at 07:42 PM on August 20

According to Wikipedia Vick's parents were together and wed when he was five years old and his father taught Mike and Marcus the fundamentals of football. It sounds like his father was an involved parent in his upbringing. Vick's mother kept her last name and the kids decided to keep "Vick" as their last name as well. Michael Vick, Wiki

posted by urall cloolis at 08:09 PM on August 20

I wish the media would do some deeper reporting on why this is exceptable in "some" circles of society Can you just say what you mean? If you want to talk about why black people are awful, by all means, go ahead. I don't get it. I don't see race being implied in patsfan73's statement at all. If Bishop just made that same retort, you would be all over him.

posted by MrFrisby at 08:12 PM on August 20

I don't know whether to be outraged at the animal cruelty or sad that anyone so talented could be this stupid. He's got a M$130 contract and numerous high dollar licensing deals, yet he decides to get involved in an illegal dog fighting ring that was going to make him maybe K$100. Now the licensing deals are dead and if he's not banned from football for at least a year, I'll be amazed. If he's ever allowed back in the NFL, he'll be lucky to make 1% of his previous salary. A psychologist could write a Ph. D. dissertation on self distructive behavior using Vick as his poster child.

posted by BikeNut at 08:45 PM on August 20

No one's going to want the marquee position on their team in his hands. Not even Oakland. posted by rcade I wish I had your confidence. Vick just needs to serve his time, apologize, and create a fund for homeless animals and I'm positive he'll get another chance.

posted by justgary at 09:49 PM on August 20

If he can still play well when he gets out, he will get another chance. Some owner and GM will weather the protests... if not in the NFL, some team in the CFL will take him (see Exhibit A: Lawerence Phillips) My question is has there been another elite athelete that has taken a couple of years off during his or her prime and been able to shake the rust off. What is the impact of not throwing everyday going to be on Vick's skills?

posted by jc at 10:19 PM on August 20

My question is has there been another elite athelete that has taken a couple of years off during his or her prime and been able to shake the rust off. Muhammad Ali. Of course, he didn't take time off. He was wrongly imprisoned. He didn't have no quarrel with them Viet Cong.

posted by tommytrump at 10:31 PM on August 20

Also, I predict Vick gets 12 months and serves no more than 6 in the federal case. (Caveat -- I know nothing about the federal sentencing guidelines in these types of cases and whether he would even be eligible for parole, so this is just mindless (and potentially inappropriate) predictacasting on my part.) Feds dont give time off for good behavior. He gets 12 months he does 12 months. Its one of the reasons the Feds are asked to come in on certain cases.

posted by firecop at 10:32 PM on August 20

Also upon going to prison on federal charges, wouldn't that preclude any chance of playing football in Canada?

posted by THX-1138 at 10:57 PM on August 20

For me personally, it is hard to look at this objectivly. I like most animals more than most of the people I run into on a daily basis and think crimes against animals are extremly deplorable. That being said this article rasises a few questions in my mind. I don't fully understand what Vick is being charged on. The animal related charges make sens, purchase, transport ect. but why the racketerring charges (which I assume are more serious) I hear racket and think burly mediterranean guy in a zoot suit offering fire insurance (pay me and maybes your buildin' won't burn down) I'm no law talking guy so maybe I just missed something. Secondly, what is Vick's motivation? NFL athletes are well paid, so money's out. Vick doesn't seem like an iverly cruel person (but I don't know him personally) Is it the thrill of gambling? Not to make him out to be a victim but could he have problem? Before crucifying patsfan, could "some" circles refer to people living below the poverty line or people who were raised in a poverty sricken enviornment (as I am sure Vick isn't hurting for those duckets now) show more of a propensity to mistreat animals?

posted by HATER 187 at 11:01 PM on August 20

Some pretty serious hate. I'm sorry, but I just can't see how this is the most despicable act ever. It's a little overkill.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 11:15 PM on August 20

Secondly, what is Vick's motivation? NFL athletes are well paid, so money's out. Vick doesn't seem like an iverly cruel person (but I don't know him personally) Is it the thrill of gambling? Not to make him out to be a victim but could he have problem? Doesnt seem overly cruel?? Man you gotta see dog fighting vids before you make that comment. Theres lotsa ways to gamble without having animals mistreated. I dont know about the most despicable act ever but it is eggregious in my opinion. Hope he never gets to play again... Pretty sick

posted by firecop at 11:35 PM on August 20

this is off the subject Michael Vick. but there was a situation that happened about 25 miles from where I live. There was a guy that was murdered at his home. when law enforcements and investigators arrived they found that he had about 250 pit bulls on his property. They were chained up like you see them all time, some of them chained with weights, there were treadmills, but a lot of them also were in poor shape as well. when they search inside his house they found all kinds of evidence showing he was selling the dogs all over the country and breeding the dogs as well. so this goes to show another dangerous side of the business. I can find the link, but i wouldn't be able to post because i havent posted enough on here

posted by mflinn at 11:36 PM on August 20

urall cloolis, You may want to dig deeper and get the whole story next time.Wikepedia only shows part of the story. Michael's family situation was something less than ideal. His mother, Brenda Vick, was 16 when she became pregnant with him. His father, Michael Boddie, was just a year older. Already the parents of a girl, Christina, they did not marry for another five years—at which point two more children, Marcus and Courtney, had arrived. Boddie was away more often than he was home during his children's formative years. After spending 2 1/2 years in the Army, he bounced from one job to another. Eventually he found steady work in the Newport News shipyards as a sandblaster and spray-painter. His days started early and ended after dark. The responsibility of raising Michael and his siblings fell to Brenda. She became their savior. In fact, all the kids chose to use her last name. With help from her parents, Brenda ran a tight ship. The family lived in the Ridley Circle housing project on the city's east side. She kept the cramped three-bedroom apartment immaculate. Brenda worked at a KMart, spending every spare dollar she earned on the kids. It sounds like their a little bit happier with thier mother, his dad was around to make babies, ...and to throw footballs. Sounds great. Again I could be wrong. yerfatma As far as the "circles" that I refer to are people who come from poor urban and rural backgrounds who cannot seem to give up or get rid of people who don't care about thier welfare when they become ultra rich, primarily athletes,not black, brown or white. I could've said that perhaps. I guess you only think blacks have dogfighting rings. Sorry you feel that way. My assumption only. ESPN only did a major story when they had an inside guy to talk to, AFTER the story broke. I have seen smaller stories in the past, but nothing of any real substance at this level. Just like steroids, snitching,etc, no one wants to expose or out our HEROS! or make them mad and not get the HOT SEAT interview. You can't tell me that this wasn't out their earlier. Vick has a long history of questionable activity, and when an organization signs someone like this to such a monster contract, it should be examined a little further than the average person. Besides, he isn't that good as a QB anyway. You may want to check out your own hang ups before you assume what someone else thinks.

posted by patsfan73 at 12:00 AM on August 21

As to the question of what "circles" would get involved with dog fighting, keep in mind that this, and similar "blood" sports were, and still are, popular in many places. Dog fighting, cock fights( don't go there), bull fights, all feature brutal treatment, and killing of animals. All are still legal, or at least tolerated in many parts of the world. Now, us enlightend folks tend to view it harshly, as we prefer to get our thrills watching two humans beat the crap out each other, with the popularity of the Ultimate Fighting League as evidence of this. True, one of the contestants isn't killed, and we can presume that they both had a choice of whether to compete or not. I, for one, have no time for sports where the brutality is the whole point of the sport. I would hope that the league bans him for life. If they do not, he will be back.

posted by dviking at 12:22 AM on August 21

Some pretty serious hate. I'm sorry, but I just can't see how this is the most despicable act ever. It's a little overkill. It's not even close to the most despicable act ever, but it's pretty psychotic and very sadistic. Animal fighting of any stripe (and yes, chickens are less cutesy and lovey than dogs) serves only one purpose: bloodlust and half-assed machismo-laden one-upsmanship. There is no single other purpose to breed, 'train'(abuse), and fight an animal. Of course it's not up there with rape or child abuse or anything of that stripe, but it does present a very twisted perception of what's acceptable and what is entertaining, and any therapist/psychologist worth the paper on their wall will tell you that it sets an extremely disturbing precedent for what an individual taking part in such an activity could eventually do and think that it's not abnormal. There's no excuse for breeding dogs (or any animal for that matter) only to play God and decide which of them are worth keeping to play Russian Roulette with and which just don't make the cut and therefore deserve a swift bullet to the brain or much, much worse. I've known pits that were used as bait dogs in fighting rings. These pits were fortunate enough to get saved and have enough trust in either people and (somehow) other dogs to where they could go on with their lives. The vast majority don't. And that's a fucking shame, because Pit Bulls and other Bully breeds were the most common household dogs in the early 20th century, long before Labs or Goldens were even developed. I don't wish Vick harm for what he's done, mainly because it wouldn't do any good. My only hope is that this will lead to federal and local law enforcement agencies cracking down harder on the practice. I'd hope Vick, if he truly was involved in the direct torture (both mentally and physically) of dogs would get his due process, serve an appropriate sentence in Capital P Prison, and never make a single dollar off of his physical ability. But I fear the fact that those that likely had a larger hand in the program are going to get lighter sentences for selling Vick out, which is a shame. I also fear this will trigger a manhunt for bully-breed-based legislation. I hope that doesn't happen, since it's based on absolute bullshit and local-media hype. Yeah, I'm a cutesy-wootsie doggie lover of many stripes, so I'm a bit sensitive to this. I won't try to make some moral analogy about dogs killed :: children diddled, but it's pretty effing bad. I don't want the kind of person that could murder a dog in cold blood living on my street or on my fantasy squad. May he get the help he needs and try again at life, but his time of using athletic ability to earn a paycheck has, at least in my mind, run it's course. Fair enough?

posted by Ufez Jones at 12:28 AM on August 21

Some pretty serious hate. I'm sorry, but I just can't see how this is the most despicable act ever. It's a little overkill. Not sure if this is directed at me, I said deplorable, not most dispicable act ever. I am an animal lover sure and think that Vick deserves to be punished for his actions but I am in no way calling for an eye for an eye type of justice in this case. Dogfighting and animal cruelty are felonies in Virginia, with animal cruelty charges holding penalties of up to five years in jail for each animal killed. Law makers in VA find these crimes pretty serious to warrent such stiff penalties. firecop I meant he didn't seem overly cruel before the whole dog fighting thing.

posted by HATER 187 at 01:14 AM on August 21

I was just browsing thru these posting and came across yerfatma's post that accused patsman73 of dancing around what he really wanted to say. basically calling him a racist. Why is it that every time a black athlete or better yet a black person in general is caught doing something wrong its never their fault, it's always about some white person trying to hold them down. From what I gather this act of brutallity is not condoned by pepole of all races. Making that statement when it is obviously not true shows that until we stop using the race card we are setting up our next generation to continue using this as an excuse to bad behavior. Listen I am not nieve to the fact that there are racist acts every single day but I also know that every time a black person gets caught do somthing wrong racism is not the reason. How can our country get past racism when every time something happens the race card is played. The reason Vick is in this situation is because he made bad decision, he killed dogs, he bet on dog fights, not because of anything anybody else did. Its time for him to stand up and take responsability and its time for us to stop using the race card,stop making excuses for bad behavior. If we dont then our kids and thier kids will continue down the same path usng this as an excuse for there bad behavior. As a father thats something I dread my kids having to deal with.

posted by bigpoppav at 03:00 AM on August 21

Why is it that every time a black athlete or better yet a black person in general is caught doing something wrong its never their fault posted by bigpoppav Did you actually read what yerfatma wrote? Can you please point me out where he said it wasn't his fault because he's black? You can't, because he didn't. Were you waiting for someone to bring race into it regardless of context so you could give us that speech? Because it had nothing to do with what was said, I'm guessing yes.

posted by justgary at 04:19 AM on August 21

You may want to check out your own hang ups before you assume what someone else thinks. Where was the fallout when Bryant Gumble makes remarks about the winter olympics and the lack of true (black) athletes. Oh Ya, he gets the gig on the NFL network for Thursday night games. Rush makes a "True" statement about McNabb NOT winning anything and getting high profile endorsments. He gets the boot. Michael Irvin smokes crack, he gets vacation. Ozzie Guillen makes homophobic remarks, says "Sorry" nothing happens. Sorry if I completely misunderstood what you meant by "circles". What did you mean?

posted by yerfatma at 05:33 AM on August 21

Aside from that, I haven't heard race bandied around in the media or by Vick or his lawyers. Oddly enough, it's an issue which, aside from here and probably countless other blogs on the subject, has been largely absent.

posted by Ricardo at 05:38 AM on August 21

I can't help but think that before everything is said and done, that the IRS will be on Vick yet too. Let's hope that the lier has started to grow up a bit through all this, and doesn't give the sentencing judge the BIRD when he's sentenced! I had to laugh on last saturday morning I heard something on ESPN. Someone had sent a bunch of Vick's jersy's to a human shelter in Atlanta, with a note "You can use these to clean up the kennels". Poetic justice I thought. What bothers me about his lieing about all this is that how can you put any trust in him as your QB any more. QB is a position that leads the team. Having said that, he shows no real good "lead by example", qualities now. I personal would just rather not see him in the NFL anymore. Maybe now the Falcons can move on now. Sadly all of this will come back to BITE him when it comes ballet time for the hall of fame.

posted by robi8259 at 05:54 AM on August 21

posted by yerfatma at 07:27 AM on August 21

robi8259, I don't think it will BITE him when it comes to ballet time for HOF since he was not even close to getting there in the first place.

posted by Familyman at 07:38 AM on August 21

Black Power, Vick was set up? How so?

posted by apoch at 07:40 AM on August 21

Uh, apoch, it's just bishop spewing crap.

posted by tommytrump at 07:43 AM on August 21

I would also like to see the thread play out because the problem with the first thread was the apologists who said "wait and see", "innocent til proven guilty", etc. Now that their man has plead guilty and ADMITTED he TORTURED and EXECUTED DOGS I would like to see if they'll even show up here. How do you get from "wait and see" if the allegations are true to someone being an apologist for dog torturing? Show up and say what? Now, we know and Vick did a terrible thing. Is that vindication for those who railed against him while they were just allegations? Anyway, I guess I am in the minority (or an apologist) because I hope Vick does his time, gets some therapy, and gets an opportunity to get his life together again. I keep thinking that people are revered for playing brutal games like football, but then we have these expectations that that brutality will never seep out off the field. I'm sure lots of people have no problem with that, but I can see how they can get confused. Additionally, I don't enjoy watching any activity whose purpose is one living being inflicting harm on another one, that includes dogfighting, ultimate fighting, boxing, violent nature shows, etc. It's pretty much all the same in my mind and I expect enjoyment of those things are all based on the same sort of instincts.

posted by bperk at 08:05 AM on August 21

Ufez (re: Weedy's comment about "some pretty serious hate"): Of course it's not up there with rape or child abuse or anything of that stripe Of course, but I think Weedy has a point. It had struck me that the several threads about Vick and dogs had prompted some expressions of outrage that -- my subjective impression -- seemed both more frequent and more extreme than what we see here in the case of "rape or child abuse or anything of that stripe". That's totally unscientific, and I could be wrong about that, but it does seem to me that folks here are a little more blase about violence against humans, and quite a bit more shocked, angered and vengeful at violence against animals. tommytrump: Uh, apoch, it's just bishop spewing crap. Somehow I don't think so, but that's just my opinion. Just doesn't read like Bishop to me.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 08:05 AM on August 21

I wish that Samuel quote read "Reason Mother Fucker! Do you use it?!"

posted by garfield at 08:06 AM on August 21

I'm with lbb, that's so far from Bishop as to be amusing.

posted by yerfatma at 08:17 AM on August 21

Somehow I don't think so, but that's just my opinion. Just doesn't read like Bishop to me. I agree. Bishop has some strong opinions and is very vocal about them but that doesn't seem like him at all.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 08:18 AM on August 21

Sadly all of this will come back to BITE him when it comes ballet time for the hall of fame. Let's just hope we don't have to see Peter King or any of the other hall voters in a tutu when its ballet time for the Hall of Fame. firecop -- thanks for the pointer on federal sentencing.

posted by holden at 08:18 AM on August 21

I don't care if it's Bishop or not. I'm curious as to why, and how, he thinks Vick was set up.

posted by apoch at 08:24 AM on August 21

apoch: the commenter is probably being facetious at best and a troll at worst. Set phasers on ignore.

posted by scully at 08:29 AM on August 21

Somehow I don't think so, but that's just my opinion. Just doesn't read like Bishop to me. Off topic but just to get this out of the way, that is bishop. After he was banned Bishop starting sending disturbing emails littered with racist and homophobic slurs. After the first I just had them bounced to another dummy account for safe keeping. It's very easy even without seeing his IP to know when he creates a new account. I banned Aces Full and obviously he got upset. But those who believe he was a passionate guy fighting the good fight with the tendency to go overboard couldn't be more wrong. You're seriously wasting your time with him.

posted by justgary at 08:44 AM on August 21

Wow. Cool. Spoken as a fan of entropy and people going off the deep end.

posted by yerfatma at 08:48 AM on August 21

Can you just say what you mean? If you want to talk about why black people are awful, by all means, go ahead. I do hope that was a joke. People are not perfect. We all make mistakes and what Mike Vick did is no different. I was one that said, "We should wait and see" and we have done just that and now know that he took part in what was being said. Does that make him an evil person? No. Was what he did, wrong and illegal? Yes. Now, if he admits his guilt and does his time (which I don't think will be more than 18 months), should he get on with his life or should he be ostracized? Should he be able to go back to playing football or will the public act like they're living the perfect life and have never done anything wrong in their lives before? I love dogs but living in New Jersey, I've heard of dogfighting years before any of this transpired even though I never even thought of taking any part in it, and as everyone may know, Jersey isn't even close to being considered, 'down south'. This isn't necessarily a 'black' problem, this is more of a 'society' problem and the sooner we realize that, the sooner we can all have more positive dialog instead of acting as if this only happens in urban areas.

posted by BornIcon at 08:48 AM on August 21

Can you just say what you mean? If you want to talk about why black people are awful, by all means, go ahead. I do hope that was a joke. I'll try to be more obvious from here on out.

posted by yerfatma at 09:09 AM on August 21

[T]his place should be called KKKfilter. Crackers. Oh man, I hate when there are some really incendiary remarks put up and they get deleted before I get a chance to see them. Who wants to be Sportsfilter's white Jesse Jackson?

posted by Ricardo at 09:17 AM on August 21

It had struck me that the several threads about Vick and dogs had prompted some expressions of outrage that -- my subjective impression -- seemed both more frequent and more extreme than what we see here in the case of "rape or child abuse or anything of that stripe". That's totally unscientific, and I could be wrong about that, but it does seem to me that folks here are a little more blase about violence against humans, and quite a bit more shocked, angered and vengeful at violence against animals. Sure, there's been an awful lot of knee-jerk "lock him up with a dozen randy Rottweilers" trollish comments, but such is the case on SpoFi (and a lot of other internet places) today. But when was the last time an athlete of Vick's status copped to committing such a heinous crime? When was the last time an athlete plea bargained into association with rape or child abuse? I certainly don't have the widest sports-memory, but nothing springs to mind. Besides, the moral relativism card doesn't fit into play here. The man has admitted that he was involved with some seriously disturbing practices, things that a psychologically sound person wouldn't dream of doing. Is my hope that he no longer make a dollar on the football field or in commercials ever again going too far?

posted by Ufez Jones at 10:06 AM on August 21

THX, sorry this post is late, but as a convicted felon (assuming he pleads guilty and serves time as expected at this point), securing a visa to Canada is gonna be out of the question for a few years, so rule out a future career in the CFL. Also, there was a helluva flak with the other CFL team owners when Toronto signed Ricky Williams, so I don't see anyone there even considering making a suggestion. I think Matt Millen is the only GM with the nerve to even bring up the suggestion of signing Vick and not getting fired on the spot. There's one other alternative, though. Does the Arena Bowl halftime show include "wardrobe malfunctions"?

posted by NerfballPro at 10:13 AM on August 21

Ufez: Sure, there's been an awful lot of knee-jerk "lock him up with a dozen randy Rottweilers" trollish comments, but such is the case on SpoFi (and a lot of other internet places) today. Maybe, but more than a few of those were from folks whom I don't consider trolls. Again, subjective impression only. But when was the last time an athlete of Vick's status copped to committing such a heinous crime? When was the last time an athlete plea bargained into association with rape or child abuse? I certainly don't have the widest sports-memory, but nothing springs to mind. Not sure how a plea bargain enters into it -- is conviction enough? Seems like a lot of people, not just on SpoFi, are having the "feed him to the dogs" reaction to Michael Vick...but I don't recall quite the same public response to Mike Tyson post-conviction. Au contraire, in that case there were more than a few "bitch deserved it" responses. Besides, the moral relativism card doesn't fit into play here. "Moral relativism card"? What, is everything a "card' nowadays? People aren't playing some kind of card when they wonder how the graphic nature of the anger directed at Vick compares to the ho-hum attitude with which some crimes against humans have been greeted. It strikes me as weird and a little disturbing. I'm not playing some card when I say that. The man has admitted that he was involved with some seriously disturbing practices, things that a psychologically sound person wouldn't dream of doing. Is my hope that he no longer make a dollar on the football field or in commercials ever again going too far? No, it isn't. See, it isn't about relativism of any kind, nor about some New Bedford defense. There's a difference between hot-air emotional reactions ("I hope they get a pack of poodles to gnaw his nuts off!") and consequences. What you're talking about are consequences. I'm talking about the differences in emotional reactions. Two different things.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 10:54 AM on August 21

But when was the last time an athlete of Vick's status copped to committing such a heinous crime? Rae Carruth, though I'd say his crime was more heinous. I think part of the strength of the anti-Vick reaction is that he was still held in high esteem by a lot of NFL fans prior to these allegations. Personally, I thought Vick's transgressions were more comedic than awful prior to this -- especially the Ron Mexico stuff. Now, though, I won't be upset if the guy has thrown his last pass.

posted by rcade at 10:56 AM on August 21

On a football note: The Trade: Doesn't it seem that the Chargers' deal for Tomlinson is even more impressive? Poor Bobby Petrino. This could be the worse job in the NFL right now. A star player is lost and the media spotlight on the team is going to be intense. I expect Blank to go after some of Vick's signing bonus. Are these ever successful? I know it was with Ricky Williams (but he had Master P working on his contract so I'm not sure that it counts).

posted by bperk at 11:00 AM on August 21

bperk, I think Master P only did his first contract with the Saints -- wasn't it renegotiated at some point before Williams got to Miami? Meanwhile, as far as football penalties to Vick go, Goodell doesn't have to do a thing until Vick's out of prison -- he will probably wait to suspend him until then...

posted by ajaffe at 11:07 AM on August 21

As far as Petrino's job being tough, I think he's got an automatic scapegoat now if he loses 12 games. "It's Vick's fault." he'll say.

posted by Ricardo at 12:27 PM on August 21

I haven't seen such a windfall of craziness since the Lawrence Phillips or Art Schlichter debacles. Shows how athletes are coddled and allowed to cheat their way through life. But, you eventually reap what you sow.... As I have read some of the bickering that is on this site and I am amazed at how people treat this as such a "small" issue - like the one that said "it was only dog fighting". I don't think it was simply dog fighting, but the inhumane way in which he, along with others, killed the losing dogs that enraged the activists. I think he is knee deep in the whole thing. They have a 19 page indictment on him and another indictment the Feds were going to file if he didn't plead guilty. It involved charges under the RICO laws and he would have faced possibly 20-25 years for that if convicted. And, he would have been convicted as he had at least 7 of his "friends" that were belly-up on him. The RICO charges would have been much worse than what he is facing now. If he were to deserve any sympathy from the public, it would be for the stupidity he was displaying prior to this happening. Flipping off the home crowd, a bottle that had a compartment for his pot, and then lying to the commissioner about this whole thing. If he had admitted first, he would have gotten off lightly, but he could end up serving the full 5 years. The fact that he bankrolled the activities and was the money man, that only puts him in more trouble with the Feds and the NFL. I seriously doubt that he will ever play in the NFL again. He is not a great QB anyway. He is a very gifted athlete and a very elusive runner. But, he isn't ever going to be a prototypical pocket passer. His best bet is in the CFL.

posted by Mickster at 12:36 PM on August 21

His best bet is in the CFL. Explain please? He's a convicted felon. He's going to have a hell of a time crossing the Canadian border. Canadians read the newpapers and watch the news just as much as Americans. CFL teams are not about to risk offending their ticket buyers for a short term fix on the field. I know as a fan that attends 1 or 2 games a year in Toronto that I would never buy another Argonaut ticket if they signed him.

posted by tommytrump at 01:03 PM on August 21

Too bad they just remade The Longest Yard.

posted by yerfatma at 01:15 PM on August 21

Too bad they just remade The Longest Yard Michael Vick/ Adam Sandler Who is worse for America? Or is that more of a locker room debate?

posted by tahoemoj at 01:49 PM on August 21

His best bet is in the CFL. Explain please? He's a convicted felon. He's going to have a hell of a time crossing the Canadian border. Another famous, troubled athlete with lots of talent was given a permit to play in the CFL despite a criminal record, Lawrence Phillips.

posted by bperk at 02:00 PM on August 21

People aren't playing some kind of card when they wonder how the graphic nature of the anger directed at Vick compares to the ho-hum attitude with which some crimes against humans have been greeted. It strikes me as weird and a little disturbing. You're not alone in that thinking. Rae Carruth attempted to murder his pregnant wife. Laurence Phillips dragged a woman down several flights of stairs and banged her head against a mailbox repeatedly. Christian Peter raped 2 women. Leonard Little killed a wife and mother. These guys served little if any time, had numerous opportunites to play again in the NFL, and were mere blips on the screen as far as media coverage regarding their "atrocities" I think you're right on the money wondering why "folks here are a little more blase about violence against humans, and quite a bit more shocked, angered and vengeful at violence against animals"

posted by bdaddy at 02:01 PM on August 21

edit: Sorry...I guess Rae Carruth didn't fit in that very well as he's gone for good

posted by bdaddy at 02:04 PM on August 21

I think the problem with the stories mentioned above is the average person on the street has no idea who Leonard Little is. These things happened and they weren't news to those people. The same people hear "Michael Vick!" and they are suddenly interested because he is way more of a household name. Mothers who don't know anything about football have their kids begging to buy Vick jerseys or Vick shoes or Vick this or Vick that. Because of this, more of America (and the world) was interested in hearing the story. Instead of feeling the Vick story got too much attention (well, maybe a little), I think it's a case of those stories not getting enough. News outlets aren't to blame here. They reported more on these I bet than when some Joe Blow did the same things. As fans, I think it's our fault for allowing these teams to make these kinds of concessions. PETA and other animal rights will most likely do all they can to make any team wanting Vick, when and if he is allowed to play again, feel the pressure. This is what should be done in those cases above (except for the Carruth case obviously as no action will ever be necessary there). St. Louis should have felt more heat for holding onto Little. I didn't know much about the Christian Peter story, just some vague facts, but after reading up on it, this is exactly what happened when New England drafted him (although he was only ever charged and convicted with one rape ... not to say the other didn't happen). They ended up severing all ties to him and he ended up playing for the Giants and other teams. Maybe he turned his life around, who knows, but maybe these teams should've felt more pressure to not allow him the opportunity. And please don't confuse this with the right to earn a living as I feel playing in the NFL is a privilege, not a right. He would have been free to dig ditches to earn a living.

posted by Ricardo at 02:30 PM on August 21

Put him into the ring with a couple of the dogs he trained, that would be his trial. Grampsw

posted by grampsw at 03:12 PM on August 21

please don't sign your comments.

posted by jerseygirl at 03:13 PM on August 21

Oh yeah! A Mike Vick thread I somehow missed. Without reading the comments I will predict that all of the following have taken place: a) It has been suggested that Vick's genetalia be chewed off by a dog b) Someone has bizzarely eluded to horse racing as being as cruel as dog fighting c) Racial epitaphs have been traded, knowingly or unknowingly d) "You just don't understand thug life" e) Someone other than Vick is at fault, most notably society, Roger Goodell and the media f) Atlanta fans reminded about how screwed they are with the injury to DJ Shockley Now to start reading in reverse to see if my career change to TV Psychic is not too far fetched.

posted by gradys_kitchen at 03:19 PM on August 21

I always thought Vick was a great athlete and a lousy QB. It doesn't matter how well you throw the ball or run around on the field without the real qualities of a great QB, leadership, good judgement, and a certain level of intelligence you can't be called a great quarterback. Vick will have to face the legal consequences of his actions, but his behavior has exposed him for all that he lacks. If he is ever able to return to the NFL it won't be as Quarterback (which is by nature a leadership role) it will be as player in another position. He certainly has the physical abilities. I only wish someone can explain to me how you can be gifted with all this talent, rewarded with outrageous money and celebrity status, and still be this stupid. Was this guy even thinking for a second? The most shocking thing is what it says about him as a person. Let face it, he didn't do it for the money, and he didn't do it for his wonderfull friends who are so quick to roll on him. The real point is he did not do it out of the goodness of his heart, it was the badness of his heart. He did it because he enjoyed the sadistic pleasure of watching dogs kill each other and for the fun of murdering a helpless dog on occaision. That in a nutshell is why normal people are so upset. Fighting dogs may be an acceptable sport in some societies. Even putting a dog down humanely can be forgiven, but when someone wants to drown, electrocute or just slam a dog to its death, it goes beyond any excuse. These crimes were not crimes of passion or necessity, it's clear he has a sadistic streak and the torture, mutilation, and killing of animals is how most serial mass murderers begin their career. If it weren't for his athletic ability, what kind of contribution to society do you think Michael Vick would be making?

posted by Atheist at 03:34 PM on August 21

Now to start reading in reverse to see if my career change to TV Psychic is not too far fetched. Aaaah, so you hit a couple of softballs. Don't quit yer day job!

posted by lil_brown_bat at 03:42 PM on August 21

I only wish someone can explain to me how you can be gifted with all this talent, rewarded with outrageous money and celebrity status, and still be this stupid. Seriously? I'll give it a try. No one's perfect. Everyone makes mistakes. Athletic talent does not translate into good decisionmaking skills. People who are talented can still be really nasty.

posted by bperk at 03:57 PM on August 21

Seriously? I'll give it a try. No one's perfect. Everyone makes mistakes. Athletic talent does not translate into good decisionmaking skills. People who are talented can still be really nasty. ...and money, privilege and popularity are multipliers: both your good impulses and your bad impulses have more far-reaching effects when you've got the wherewithal to act on them and the visibility to be noticed.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 04:11 PM on August 21

Yeah, I would say, as suggested upthread, if you spent your entire teens and early 20s being told you were awesome and could do no wrong by fawning adults, you might start to believe it.

posted by yerfatma at 04:23 PM on August 21

I have been trying to come up with a way to say exactly what the last two post said, only bperk and lbb said it 50 times better than I could have. Well said.

posted by hawkguy at 04:23 PM on August 21

I don't know how often "upthread" is used so I may sound like a huckleberry here, but good use of words.

posted by Ricardo at 04:28 PM on August 21

Another famous, troubled athlete with lots of talent was given a permit to play in the CFL despite a criminal record, Lawrence Phillips. I know Phillips had a criminal record, but were any of the offences felonies? I can find no information indicating that they were.

posted by tommytrump at 05:04 PM on August 21

Seriously? I'll give it a try. No one's perfect. Everyone makes mistakes. Athletic talent does not translate into good decisionmaking skills. Wow that explains why Atlanta never had a chance with Vick as a quarterback. He could run and he could throw but he just had bad decision making skills. This could be a real red flag for all those teams who are looking for a QB. Make a note, good decision making skills a must! Gee when I said this stuff about Vick way before this dog fighting scandal, I was accused of racism, it turns out his lousy decision making skills were noticable to me on the field way before they were confirmed off the field.

posted by Atheist at 05:09 PM on August 21

To the Canadian that said they wouldn't let him play in the CFL because they watch the news too. Lawrence Phillips played and he was convicted of assault and battery and a few other counts. To suggest that the Canadian owners won't want to offend the ticket buyers by signing someone like that is outrageous. Get real. Talent that isn't good enough to play in the NFL traditionally travel North. As for the stuff on Ray Carruth, he is serving life for the murder of his pregnant wife and won't be playing again. Maybe on a prison team. As for the others, I don't know much about them and could care less. Apparently, they are not being paid 130 million and throwing it away for stupidity.

posted by Mickster at 05:13 PM on August 21

Vick's NFL career over? Keep dreaming. Famous athletes have done worse and still received a second (or more) chance. Vick will apologize, pay a fine, and be picked up by some desperate team willing to take a chance. Unfortunately, many people will cry "forgiveness", but it's really a lack of accountability. As long as you say you're sorry it's okay to screw up.

posted by whitedog65 at 05:24 PM on August 21

I wanna see some of those racial epitaphs that were eluded to.

posted by mr_crash_davis at 05:26 PM on August 21

I believe that as I suspected, Vick can't go to Canada with a federal conviction on his record. Little issue of crossing international borders and all. There is quite a difference in this regard compared to the standard criminal or civil case. Vick's charges are federal and with them, carry the weight of the U.S. government. While Lawrence Phillips' crimes were undoubtedly heinous, legally, if I'm not mistaken, they don't keep him from travelling. Of course, I don't actually know from nothin'.

posted by THX-1138 at 05:36 PM on August 21

To the Canadian that said they wouldn't let him play in the CFL because they watch the news too. Lawrence Phillips played and he was convicted of assault and battery and a few other counts. To suggest that the Canadian owners won't want to offend the ticket buyers by signing someone like that is outrageous. Get real. Talent that isn't good enough to play in the NFL traditionally travel North. As for the stuff on Rae Carruth, he is serving life for the murder of his pregnant wife and won't be playing again. Maybe on a prison team. Get real? Okay rook, I'll get real. Where did anyone in any thread (let alone me) indicate that Michael Vick isn't good enough to play in the NFL. His problem is going to be that after spending the next 12-18 months in a federal prison, in all probability he will be under suspension from the NFL. If that in fact is the case, he will be ineligible to play in the CFL, even if he were to be allowed into the country. Michael Vick has pleaded guilty to a felony, similar to what we in Canada call an indictable offence. This is much more serious than a misdemeanor, or what we call a summary offence. We Canadians tend to frown on allowing felons as Americans call them, into our country. Rae Carruth is not serving life, he is serving 18-24 years. He'll be 44 when eligible for parole. To me that is not life imprisonment, and no, he probably won't be playing professional football again. The woman he murdered (Cherica Adams) was not his wife, but a woman he had been dating. Is that real enough for ya Mickster? You are correct about one thing. Most of Canada is north of most of the U.S.A.

posted by tommytrump at 06:03 PM on August 21

I wanna see some of those racial epitaphs that were eluded to. "Beneath these mountains lies the remains of the White Race, to lame to live."

posted by yerfatma at 06:17 PM on August 21

I wanna see some of those racial epitaphs that were eluded to. Well, I know there was some confusion about a "cracker" reference on Sylvester Graham's tombstone. Said confusion undoubtedly came about due to excessive lack of mastery of the ol' domain, there.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 07:48 PM on August 21

Yeah tommytrump, you sit up there and enjoy your CFL and the quality of your football. Go Winnepeg!!! I know that most of our players that enjoyed a stellar career in college that can't play at the next level here, will opt to go to Canada. I am not going to dispute laws in your fine country as to whether or not they are a "summary offense"? Don't even know what the hell that is. But, you go on and think what you want. As for Ray, I might have mistaken whether she was his wife (Cherica Adams) or girlfriend. Been awhile back. I really believe that is a minor issue in the bigger picture. Another words, who really gives a damn. He killed her. MURDER. Why pick at little details when the bigger issues are she is dead. And, whether it is life or not, you might be right, but I believe it was a life sentence. Usually murder is. What is your point anyway? You just got an itch to scratch? I don't remember pulling your chain. I did state the fact that the CFL did open their arms to Lawrence Phillips and it seems to have hit a nerve with you. Truth hurt? So, what is the matter with you - too real for you too? He did play there did he not?

posted by Mickster at 08:29 PM on August 21

Couldn't help but notice that's a big ol' chin you got there, Mickster. Or, to put it another way: telling someone to "get real" is rude and dismissive. Sometimes it's called for, but even when it is, you shouldn't act all surprised if you say "get real" to someone and they take exception to being treated as if they were a slow-witted child.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 08:51 PM on August 21

Yes, well dogfighting is bad, m'kay. I don't think anyone is trying to suggest otherwise. It's cruel and brutal. Everyone agrees. Did Vick drown the dogs himself? Was he actually doing any of the actual literal horrible shit? Or was he paying for it all and other sociopaths doing it? I think there's a bit of a difference in light of such outrage. He's a dick, for sure, but he's hardly the anti-christ. He's the money, from what I can tell. Plus, I just think it's a combination of inflating factors. Everyone gets to take the popular position and scream about the decline of society (like there is a legion of dogfighters out there waiting to sick their dogs on you - they just need a leader) and yummy celebrity driven/public funded interest groups jumping on the opportunity like a, well, dog on a bone, and it makes a lot more noise than my rational brain suggests it should. He was financing a dogfighting ring. In Spain, something similar gets you a sword and the wickedest outfit going. ... And Laurence Phillips sucked in the CFL.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 09:13 PM on August 21

Yeah tommytrump, you sit up there and enjoy your CFL and the quality of your football. Go Winnepeg!!! I do enjoy the CFL, and the quality of football played in the league is terrific. The CFL and NFL are 2 different games. They require different talents. I enjoy both games. The CFL is a more exciting game, with more action, while the NFL is more structured and precise. It's Winnipeg. However, I am a Toronto Argonaut fan. Ottawa Rough Riders in my youth, but the franchise no longer exists, so I adopted my hometown club as my new team. I am not going to dispute laws in your fine country as to whether or not they are a "summary offense"? Don't even know what the hell that is. But, you go on and think what you want. That's why I explained it to you, that a summary offence is like a misdemeanor. It is an offence that is less severe than a felony, or as we call them, an indictable offence. As for Ray, I might have mistaken whether she was his wife (Cherica Adams) or girlfriend. Been awhile back. I really believe that is a minor issue in the bigger picture. Another words, who really gives a damn. He killed her. MURDER. Why pick at little details when the bigger issues are she is dead. And, whether it is life or not, you might be right, but I believe it was a life sentence. Usually murder is. Whatever you do, don't let the facts get in the way of a good story. Rae Carruth was not convicted of murder. He was convicted on 3 counts though. Those being: 1. Conspiracy to commit murder 2. Shooting into an occupied vehicle 3. Using an instrument to destroy an unborn child. He didn't kill her. His co-conspirators killed her. He was not sentenced to life. He was given a sentence of 18 to 24 years of which he must serve 18 years and 11 months before being eligible for parole. What is your point anyway? You just got an itch to scratch? My point is to be as accurate as possible and deal in realities, not presumptions. No. I don't remember pulling your chain. I don't have a chain for you to pull. I did state the fact that the CFL did open their arms to Lawrence Phillips and it seems to have hit a nerve with you. Truth hurt? I never said that Lawrence Phillips didn't play in the CFL. My position on that was that I believe he was never convicted of a felony, but of less serious crimes, and as a result would not have had the same restrictions on entering Canada placed on him that someone with a felony record would. So, what is the matter with you - too real for you too? He did play there did he not? What do you think is the matter with me? How could what you write be too real? There were too many falsehoods in your statements for that to be true. Yes, Phillips played in Canada. If you want some educational reading on criminals in professional football I recommend you pick up a copy of Don Yaeger's book: "Pros and Cons: The Criminals Who Play in the NFL.

posted by tommytrump at 09:41 PM on August 21

In Spain, something similar gets you a sword and the wickedest outfit going. Tito Santana agrees!

posted by HATER 187 at 10:17 PM on August 21

Here in da Big D,the radio chatter ESPN etc was a brief nod to how aweful Vicks crime is and then the usual patter about what his sentence might be and that he SHOULD be barred from ever taking a snap again.Fuck the football career. In my world he could do whatever after rehabilitation which would include psychological torture (ie letting him believe he would be subjected to the same treatment and mercy he showed to the dogs,getting the third degree by good cop badcop investigators and so forth.This would continue until he underwent a catharsis of self understanding.Then maybe he could be considered fit to live in our society.

posted by sickleguy at 10:26 PM on August 21

The woman he murdered (Cherica Adams) was not his wife, but a woman he had been dating. He didn't kill her. His co-conspirators killed her. I'm confused.

posted by tselson at 10:47 PM on August 21

This isn't a forum to attack one another for a simple opinion, just a forum. If you don't like to play, go home. posted by Mickster He's not attacking you. He was responding to what you wrote. That's what we do here. It's a community blog. You don't have to respond, of course. In fact, it you're just going to respond with a stream of insults, it would be for the better if you didn't. you obviously have too much time on your hands and couldn't care less of what you think of my opinions There is a difference between being thought of as a fool, and opening your mouth and proving it. You prove my point. Get a life and stick to the topics.

posted by justgary at 11:24 PM on August 21

The woman he murdered (Cherica Adams) was not his wife, but a woman he had been dating. He didn't kill her. His co-conspirators killed her. I'm confused. He did not do the actual killing. He stopped his vehicle in front of hers, his partners in crime pulled their car up next to hers and did the shooting. He was the catalyst and his actions led to her death. As a result he was convicted on the charges outlined above. However, he was not the trigger man. He was responsible for her death, but he did not commit the act of killing her. He was charged with, but acquitted of 1st degree murder.

posted by tommytrump at 11:33 PM on August 21

I am checking out and won't come back to see your ten page report Well thank goodness THAT guys gone. Could you believe what he was wearing? I have more important thing to do. One wouldn't want to try to do too much at once anyway.

posted by THX-1138 at 11:41 PM on August 21

It's really sad how Vick let the race card play-out. The n.a.a.c.p showed it's support; so this idiot could turn around and plea out. No class. Shame on you Mr. Vick. All of this racial tension because a grown man made a dumb-ass decision; really sad.

posted by fourthreeforty at 02:41 AM on August 22

Why isn't this being shut down by Spo-Fi like They(the editor/founders of the blog) did about another thread (that was not as controvertial) about 5 weeks ago or so. That topic was arbitrarily ended. No explanation,just see ya.This thread is more emotionally charged but the viturperation is way beyond that of the censored entry.Anyone else remember or am I just trippin'?

posted by sickleguy at 06:11 AM on August 22

This thread doesn't come close to the shitfest that was in the first Vick thread.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 06:29 AM on August 22

In my world he could do whatever after rehabilitation which would include psychological torture Wow, I want no part of your world.

posted by Venicemenace at 06:51 AM on August 22

It's really sad how Vick let the race card play-out. The n.a.a.c.p showed it's support; so this idiot could turn around and plea out. No class. Shame on you Mr. Vick. Oh, please stop. Can we forever get a moratorium on the phrase "race card." The NAACP took the oh-so-radical position that Vick shouldn't be treated as a criminal based solely on the allegations. No one should be. "If Mr. Vick is guilty, he should pay for his crime, but to treat him as he is being treated now is also a crime," White said at a news conference. "Be restrained in your premature judgment until the legal process is completed."

posted by bperk at 06:55 AM on August 22

I know Phillips had a criminal record, but were any of the offences felonies? I can find no information indicating that they were. Yes.

posted by bperk at 07:35 AM on August 22

It's really sad how Vick let the race card play-out....No class. Shame on you Mr. Vick I didn't realize that Mike Vick was the one that used the 'race card' to his advantage, or disadvantage. I could've sworn that the 'race card' was used by the media and by some pro-Vick defenders but not by Vick himself. Can we forever get a moratorium on the phrase "race card." You could wish for it but I don't think that'll ever happen.

posted by BornIcon at 07:41 AM on August 22

I find it sickening that people can't discuss this without playing the moratorium card.

posted by JJ at 07:55 AM on August 22

On the whole could or couldn't a felon play in Canada issue -- while I'm not sure what the specific requirements are in terms of eligibility under CFL rules, Canada can and will keep out those traveling from the U.S. who have been convicted of crimes, including certain minor offences. (And before anyone goes off on how stupid/unfair/etc. of a policy this is from our neighbors (mostly) up north, the U.S. is as bad or worse.)

posted by holden at 07:59 AM on August 22

Weedy, Did Vick drown the dogs himself? Was he actually doing any of the actual literal horrible shit? Or was he paying for it all and other sociopaths doing it? I think there's a bit of a difference in light of such outrage. He's a dick, for sure, but he's hardly the anti-christ. He's the money, from what I can tell. His cohorts turned states evidence and stated that he DID help them execute the dogs. He was NOT just financing the operation. He may not be the antichrist but he is one sick dude. So now that we have established that he "did this literal horrible shit himself" are you outraged? Or will you maintain that since he didnt do it to babies or Nuns he is still only "partially" horrible?

posted by firecop at 08:29 AM on August 22

I find it sickening that people can't discuss this without playing the moratorium card. I'm disappointed too. I don't want SportsFilter to become a community where we can't discuss inflammatory issues like this one. Vick's situation is the biggest NFL story of the season.

posted by rcade at 09:28 AM on August 22

This is from the second link in holden,s post. If less than 5 years have elapsed, or if persons are only seeking entry to Canada for a single or limited period, then they may apply for a TEMPORARY RESIDENT PERMIT. So it is not impossible to get into Canada with a felony, it just takes some paperwork and probably a good canadian lawyer. That being said, I still don't think Vick will be welcomed into the CFL. I do believe that there was some backlash regarding Ricky Williams' voyage to the north. I don't expect to see that happen again any time soon.

posted by Steel_Town at 09:29 AM on August 22

It's a horrible thing to to what Mike Vick has confessed to but why do people think that he's not capable of making a mistake? Is it the $100 million contract? Is it because he's a well-known football player? No matter if you're the President of the United States, people make mistakes, we're human. Are we better than the people that make mistakes? Have we not done things when we were younger that we're ashamed of? What's being said is that Mike Vick got involved before he got into the NFL so he was still in college at that time. Right now, he's just 27 years of age and should've known better than to still be involved in something like this but anyone that's been to college knows that they all experiment and try new & different things, it just so happens that what Vick got involved in was a felony. It's truly a heinous crime and I personally am appalled (as a dog owner) at what's going on but who am I to judge anyone? I'm not better than anyone but I do try to live my life in a positive way. No one but Mike Vick will ever understand why he got involved in the first place. Maybe it was for the money at first, who knows? It wasn't like he got that $100 million contract right out of college but I just think that everyone is entitled to live & learn from their mistakes and people should stop acting like they're living the 'oh-so-perfect' life and stop being so judgemental. We're all have an opinion on this subject, some good & some bad but we should not be so quick to treat it as if Vick is the only individual to ever get involved with this. Dogfights, bullfights & even cockfighting has been around for the longest time. Many of the founding fathers participated in the sport of cockfighting including George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, does that make them criminals as well? In ancient Rome, professional fighters fought against each other, wild animals, and even condemned criminals, sometimes to the death, for the entertainment of spectators. I know we're no longer living in those times but to make it seem as if Vick was the first & only individual to ever get involved in something so barbaric makes me believe that no one has been paying attention to our history. Just my opinion.

posted by BornIcon at 09:30 AM on August 22

I know Phillips had a criminal record, but were any of the offences felonies? I can find no information indicating that they were. Yes. Those charges were post CFL career. He had already been cut by 2 Canadian teams at that point. He last played in the CFL in 2003 and that incident happened in 2005.

posted by tommytrump at 09:35 AM on August 22

Those charges were post CFL career. He had already been cut by 2 Canadian teams at that point. He last played in the CFL in 2003 and that incident happened in 2005. From the linked article: In December 2000, he was sentenced to six months in jail after pleading no contest to felony counts of beating his girlfriend seven months earlier in Beverly Hills, Calif. Phillips then spent two seasons in the CFL, but needed permission from the government to enter Canada because of his criminal record in the United States.

posted by bperk at 09:38 AM on August 22

Nobody is making it seem like Vick is the first and only individual to get involved in something like this. Whether or not he is the first does not change the fact that he is involved. The fact that he is a high profile person means his actions are going to come under scrutiny. Are there others who engage in similar behavior, sometimes even worse? Of course. But these individuals are not famous, millionaire athletes who play in what could be considered to be the most popular sport in the United States. Like I've said before, times change. What was acceptable in the past isn't always acceptable in the present. 2007 is hardly the late 1700's or the time of ancient Rome.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 09:39 AM on August 22

Are there others who engage in similar behavior, sometimes even worse? Of course. But these individuals are not famous, millionaire athletes who play in what could be considered to be the most popular sport in the United States. You certain about that? Or was Mike Vick was the only person that was caught (or ratted out)? 2007 is hardly the late 1700's or the time of ancient Rome. But people still do things that went on even in those times. It may not be as blatantly obvious or as out in the open as it used to be but there are people that still engage in things that happened in those times. Just look at bullfighting for example. Bullfighting is often linked to ancient Rome, where many human-versus-animal events were held as a warm-up for gladiatorial sports.

posted by BornIcon at 09:47 AM on August 22

I don't want SportsFilter to become a community where we can't discuss inflammatory issues like this one. Vick's situation is the biggest NFL story of the season. I wouldn't want that either, but every time we talk about an inflammatory issue involving a black athlete, someone is always accused of "playing the race card." In this case, it was used because someone from the NAACP stated that people should reserve judgment on Vick until the legal matter plays out. It's a rather dismissive way of discrediting the idea that race could possibly be a factor. It is the same as accusing people of political correctness because they think Native American nicknames suck.

posted by bperk at 09:50 AM on August 22

Sorry, bperk, I missed that, I read the article quickly, and must have missed it. Thanks for the clarification. My apologies, and thanks for the information.

posted by tommytrump at 09:51 AM on August 22

*bing bong* This is a customer announcement: Would the owner of BornIcon's logic - that's BornIcon's logic - please contact the infomation desk. Your logic is in the care of our floor staff and desperately wishing to be reunited with his daddy. Thank you.

posted by JJ at 10:07 AM on August 22

JJ, without coming across as an assclown (too late for that), you could just easily have said that you disagreed with my opinion and kept it moving. This is the problem with trying to maintain a civil discussion with people that have absolutely nothing interesting to add.

posted by BornIcon at 10:23 AM on August 22

So what exactly are you saying bornicon? It seems that you're implying that what Vick has done maybe isn't really that bad because all humans make mistakes and there are others who also participate in practices that are just as despicable. And on preview: JJ's comment seems to be on the mark seeing as your logic isn't really making much sense.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 10:25 AM on August 22

BornIcon, by your logic, If I, for example, bounce a check at the local grocery store, that "mistake" puts me in the same boat as Vick. It is the violent and possibly sociopathic nature of the "mistake" that draws out the fervor of the situation. I also love your use of the term "ratted out." You make it sound as if that is a bad thing. Nice.

posted by hawkguy at 10:32 AM on August 22

It seems that you're implying that what Vick has done maybe isn't really that bad because all humans make mistakes and there are others who also participate in practices that are just as despicable. The Washington Post (bugmenot) has a very interesting article about the popularity of dog fighting in the rural south and in urban cities. There is a whole culture, involving breeding and stud fees and training practices.

posted by bperk at 10:35 AM on August 22

I never said that what Vick's involved in instead bad. Maybe if you actually read what I wrote, you probably would've recognized that with no question. What I have said was that we shouldn't be so judgemental towards other people since I'm sure most of us may have done some things in our younger days (and maybe even now) that we're probably ashamed of. I also love your use of the term "ratted out." You make it sound as if that is a bad thing. Nice. So you're saying he wasn't ratted out by his 'friends' so that they would get less jail time? I sure could've sworn that's exactly what happened in this case. I will never condone anything that involves hurting animals, regardless if it's bullfighting, cockfighting or even dogfighting. I think it's absolutely brutal what people do with these animals after the fact and I'm just happy that at least we're more aware that these things do happen.

posted by BornIcon at 10:47 AM on August 22

No matter if you're the President of the United States, people make mistakes, we're human. Are we better than the people that make mistakes? Have we not done things when we were younger that we're ashamed of? All mistakes are not created equal. I'd be surprised if anybody here made a mistake as big as running an interstate dog fighting ring and personally killing animals through electrocution. But if I'm wrong, please don't correct me.

posted by rcade at 10:47 AM on August 22

So you're saying he wasn't ratted out by his 'friends' so that they would get less jail time? I sure could've sworn that's exactly what happened in this case. Had he not been "ratted out" I think the odds are pretty good that his actions would have continued. I think it's a good thing that he's now forced to pay some consequences for his actions.

posted by hawkguy at 10:51 AM on August 22

The fallibility of humankind is quite well documented. We could also throw in a discussion of moral relativism if we wanted to escalate the debate to a different plane. However, in any era there are basic holes in some of the arguments here. No matter if you're the President of the United States, people make mistakes, we're human. Pointing to the actions of others is a poor way to vindicate oneself even if those actions are committed by 'stand up' folks like the President. Mom said it best when she asked, if all of your friends jumped off a bridge, would you follow? Mankind should be held accountable for all mistakes with the opportunity to earn forgiveness, not passively dismissing errors, or crimes in this instance, as just part of human nature. Did Vick drown the dogs himself? Was he actually doing any of the actual literal horrible shit? Or was he paying for it all and other sociopaths doing it? I think there's a bit of a difference in light of such outrage. He's a dick, for sure, but he's hardly the anti-christ. He's the money, from what I can tell. In this case, if broadly applied to history, the Gestapo is at more fault then the Nazi leadership. Did Hitler shove humans into giant furnaces? Was he actually doing any of the actual literal horrible shit? Or was he just directing others to do it? A less sinister comparison would be determining who is ultimately responsible in organized crime (boss or foot soldier) 'cause one hates to play the Hitler card on a sports message board.

posted by gradys_kitchen at 11:10 AM on August 22

people make mistakes, we're human Can you please can the Friend to Humanity claptrap you drag out everytime we have a thread like this? It feels like a completely transparent attempt to win points with girls who aren't even in the back of this classroom. I don't know who it's supposed to impress. You grab a bunch of tenuous points and torture them like a dog on a rape stand until they're willing to sit still on the screen long enough for you to hit Post. We're all entitled to our opinion and if you are so bursting with an opinion about how 1. This is bad 2. Dogs are nice 3. People make mistakes that you feel the need to post it, by all means do so. But manufacturing these "reasoned" viewpoints comes across as so much noise.

posted by yerfatma at 11:20 AM on August 22

What I have said was that we shouldn't be so judgemental towards other people since I'm sure most of us may have done some things in our younger days (and maybe even now) that we're probably ashamed of. Rcade (and hawkguy) said it best. All mistakes are not created equal.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 11:20 AM on August 22

BornIcon - Fair enough. If you want it without the assclownishness, your logic is flawed in this thread and was also flawed (in the same way) in the Offerman thread. Employing your logic - according to which, as far as I can gather, anyone who has ever made a mistake of any magnitude is not entitled to comment on the mistakes of others - none of us should be allowed online without a doctorate in computer science, or even allowed to swtich on a computer without first becoming a CORGI registered electrian. If you want to abstain from offering a personal judgement on Michael Vick's behaviour because you don't feel morally qualified to do so, that's your privilege, and truly I'd be delighted to hear less from you, but that in no way means that anyone else should be precluded from voicing an opinion. If your logic allows you to find anything at all to condone the behaviour of someone who drowns a dog for kicks or who swings a baseball bat at someone else's head, then it's flawed and you need to take another look at it. On preview, a lot of what grady's kitchen said - although you did just play the bossman vs henchman card, grady's. And also, what yerfatma said, especially the classroom bit... Right girls? *wink*

posted by JJ at 11:23 AM on August 22

JJ - you got me. Also, I was hoping to score with the girls by throwing in that moral relativism bit. Had my cardigan on, pipe in hand and everything.

posted by gradys_kitchen at 11:32 AM on August 22

Had he not been "ratted out" I think the odds are pretty good that his actions would have continued. I think it's a good thing that he's now forced to pay some consequences for his actions. And I totally agree that he deserves whatever he gets as far as jail time is concerned. I just laugh when people get on their 'moral pedestal' and act as if they have never done any wrong in their lives. If your logic allows you to find anything at all to condone the behaviour of someone who drowns a dog for kicks or who swings a baseball bat at someone else's head, then it's flawed and you need to take another look at it. Maybe you need to re-read what I wrote because I made it very clear that I do not condone what Mike Vick did or what Offerman has done. Don't make it seem as if I did in order for you to make a point. All mistakes are not created equal And again, I agree with that statement as well. "All mistakes are not created equal" but people are. One thing I've come to terms with is that people, no matter what they might say, are way too quick to judge others. Can you please can the Friend to Humanity claptrap you drag out everytime we have a thread like this? Funny, I actually chuckled to that.

posted by BornIcon at 11:51 AM on August 22

In this case, if broadly applied to history, the Gestapo is at more fault then the Nazi leadership. Did Hitler shove humans into giant furnaces? Was he actually doing any of the actual literal horrible shit? Or was he just directing others to do it? Well, that sure is a broad application. I expected this point to be raised. Hitler was trying to systematically eliminate a race. Michael Vick was getting rid of dogs who couldn't fight. The difference is - one of these victim groups are dogs. But I get your point. In the same way a man who hires someone to murder his wife is guilty of murder - so is Vick. Fine. But dogfighting - I mean - this is the most horrible crime we can remember an athlete undertaking? Raising dogs to fight and gambling on them? Killing (or arranging to kill) dogs who don't fight well? Over the litany of terrible murders and violence against women? Dogfighting? Well - I'm sorry. I don't care enough, I guess. He deserves punishment and jail time - which he'll get. But I wouldn't give out more than a year or two to a dog killer. Dogfighting has a proud British tradition. It seemingly, according to some links here, has a distinct Southern US tradition as well. It's one of the many cruel and unusual things we humans do. Some of the outrage against Vick is poorly considered. I don't think there's moral relavatism being exhibited here - but cultural relevatism. I actually don't find it any more or less cruel than getting all dolled up in camo gear and trapsing through the forest with a giant rifle slaying all manner of gentle creatures. For fun! That's fucking cruel (and unfair). So is killing off the undesirable pigs at a pig farm and then grinding them up and feeding them to the other pigs. That's gross and cruel and inhumane. Plus, my moral/cultural relativist outrage is saved for those assholes who love puppies but hate homeless people. You know the type. But no - I don't hate Vick. I think he's pretty stupid because he had a lot to lose, but I can't bring myself to care that much about the plight of a bunch of dogs raised to fight, anymore than I can for a bunch of cows raised to be eaten. It's all barbaric, but really, who's surprised that people are barbaric? Why get the knickers in a twist over this? Anything to yell and scream about I suppose.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 12:02 PM on August 22

Well said, Weeder.

posted by garfield at 12:11 PM on August 22

Weedy - you understand then why I used 'broadly'. Its tough to drop the Hitler bomb but it is one of the strongest examples to bing forth when trying to implicate the leadership. In this case Vick. I see your points though.

posted by gradys_kitchen at 12:13 PM on August 22

I just laugh when people get on their 'moral pedestal' and act as if they have never done any wrong in their lives. For my part, there are certain things about which I feel pretty much obliged to get on a "moral pedestal." These include things like murder, child porn, unnecessary animal abuse. I've made plenty of mistakes, but none of them, in my tiny world view looking out from the shores of the Connecticut River, even approach these on a scale. And, frankly, I really have to view anyone who doesn't take a serious moral highroad on these issues with a great deal of suspicion, in much the same way that P.J. O'Rourke assumes anyone who doesn't drink is an alcoholic. I'll buy a bit of the "cultural differences within the tiny worlds that surround us" argument. The "we all make mistakes" argument creeps me out.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 12:19 PM on August 22

I just laugh when people get on their 'moral pedestal' and act as if they have never done any wrong in their lives. Dude, you just don't get it. Or, maybe you do, but you sure don't sound like you get it. Nobody is saying they haven't made mistakes, but none of us, as far as I know, have ever run a barbaric, sadistic and illegal activity across state lines and used our own hands to cold-bloodedly kill a poor dumb animal who didn't do anything wrong above and beyond not being mean enough. My mistakes (and sure, I've made quite a few) hardly compare, and I'd hazard a guess that most of us are in the same boat. So, yeah, I feel a bit superior to Mike Vick right now. Sure, he can throw a ball 75 yards in the air and run a 4.3 forty, but then again, I'm not a criminal scumbag about to do time in a federal pen for throttling man's best friend with my bare hands (overly simplified on purpose).

posted by The_Black_Hand at 12:55 PM on August 22

And my dead horse is getting tired of this, but the reason Vick wouldn't get into Canada would be because of the federal nature of the charges, not the felon aspect of this whole mess, no?

posted by THX-1138 at 01:42 PM on August 22

And my dead horse is getting tired of this, but the reason Vick wouldn't get into Canada would be because of the federal nature of the charges, not the felon aspect of this whole mess, no? No. See my links upthread -- you can be kept from entering Canada on the basis of DUI, which is never a federal offense.

posted by holden at 01:54 PM on August 22

What if I hit the President? In the Oval Office. Theoretically speaking.

posted by yerfatma at 02:27 PM on August 22

fatty, would it be possible for you to play the race card?

posted by hawkguy at 02:34 PM on August 22

I was on Offermans side in that thread. Don't compare what he did to what Vick did. His was spur of the moment anger. Vick's actions were intentional, calculated and sadistic to a great degree. Also, the NAACP is now saying, in lieu of the impending plea, the Atlanta chapter supports Vick's decision to accept a plea bargain if it's in his best interest, but he questioned the credibility of Vick's co-defendants, saying an admission of guilt might be more about cutting losses than the truth. making it sound as if the only reason Vick could be innocent, but is pleading guilty only to avoid the extra RICO type charges. /// pull pin ... count to three ... toss Why does the NAACP have to stick up for this idiot when that time could be spent help deserving black people who are in need of their services?

posted by Ricardo at 03:10 PM on August 22

Why does the NAACP have to stick up for this idiot when that time could be spent help deserving black people who are in need of their services? Maybe they should keep you on speed dial so you can let them know who is and who is not worthy of their support.

posted by bperk at 03:16 PM on August 22

fatty, would it be possible for you to play the race card? Card? I bought the entire play-at-home version. Playing outside was resulting in too many bricks to my head.

posted by yerfatma at 05:17 PM on August 22

Knicks' star Stephon Marbury has spoken up for Vick, comparing dogfighting to hunting. "I think it's tough," Marbury said, according to Albany TV station Capital News 9. "I think, you know, we don't say anything about people who shoot deer or shoot other animals. You know, from what I hear, dogfighting is a sport. It's just behind closed doors."

posted by rcade at 05:49 PM on August 22

But no - I don't hate Vick. I think he's pretty stupid because he had a lot to lose, but I can't bring myself to care that much about the plight of a bunch of dogs raised to fight, anymore than I can for a bunch of cows raised to be eaten. Weedy, So hes stupid only because he had a lot to lose and not because what he did was wrong? Now I'm not a hunter myself but I do like cheesburgers and I have been to slaughter houses where cows were killed and NEVER have I seen one beaten to death or electrocuted. For the record, if I am to be murdered I choose an air gun to head to being drowned... But thats just me. Now, first you were kinda defending Vick because you thought he was just "the money man" and didnt think he did the deed himself. Now that he's been outted as one of the people who (didnt kill these dogs quickly with a rifle) but "slammed them to the ground, drowned them, electrocuted them and beat them to death. Your downplaying the sick nature of this crime because the absolute brutality wasnt directed at a human being. The brutality to me is the part that makes me think. What is a person who is capable of doing these things to an animal capable of doing to a person given the appropriate circumstances? I mean, I read a story about a 12 year old that cut out the eyes of a golden retreiver then set the dog loose to wander in pain. Some locals said it was unfair to ruin a boys life by making a big deal about an animal. My thought was what will this sociopath do when animal victims arent enough to satify whatever urge made him do this? You cant predict the future, but you can sure follow clues that something is seriously wrong.

posted by firecop at 07:37 PM on August 22

Maybe they should keep you on speed dial so you can let them know who is and who is not worthy of their support. It doesn't take a genius to see Vick has done nothing at this point to earn this kind of support except be black. A single black mother working two or three jobs to feed her kids is only one example of somewhere those efforts could be better placed. I am by no means a holier than thou kind of person, but I gotta say I feel a little holier than Micheal Vick right now ... and I'm an atheist.

posted by Ricardo at 08:01 PM on August 22

So hes stupid only because he had a lot to lose and not because what he did was wrong? Now I'm not a hunter myself but I do like cheesburgers and I have been to slaughter houses where cows were killed and NEVER have I seen one beaten to death or electrocuted. For the record, if I am to be murdered I choose an air gun to head to being drowned... But thats just me. Well, I thought I was clear that I don't think what he did is in any way good. It's just that it's not any more brutal than a lot of other shit. And I like cheeseburgers, too. I have also slaughtered an animal and eaten it. It was brutal, too. But killing anything is brutal. There's a double standard here - and it's not just because he drowned dogs. And a lot of farms use electrocution in killing livestock. I just don't think that it's worse than doing things to people, which other NFL people have done - and that's a precedent. These guys still go to work. Vick deserves trial by the same standards, I guess. I mean, I read a story about a 12 year old that cut out the eyes of a golden retreiver then set the dog loose to wander in pain. Some locals said it was unfair to ruin a boys life by making a big deal about an animal. My thought was what will this sociopath do when animal victims arent enough to satify whatever urge made him do this? You cant predict the future, but you can sure follow clues that something is seriously wrong. Well, I know there's a link between the behaviour as popularized in serial killer lore, but I'm not thinking locking Michael Vick up is helping prevent him from specifically harming people. It's about operating a interstate dogfighting operation - that's the bulk of the charges.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 08:41 PM on August 22

Weedy, I don't think the real issue with people's reaction of distaste and horror has to do with dog fighting per se, but rather with the question of what motivated Vick and the others to dispose of these dogs, and the methods used. I think that these animals, while having to die by any means was wrong, certainly could have been killed in any number of more humane ways. The way they were killed speaks to some much darker motivation that reeks conspicuously of being of some pleasure to these guys. A gunshot to the head would have been sufficient. These animals were intentionally made to suffer. They weren't necessarily getting rid of fatally injured dogs, just ones that didn't suit their needs. And they certainly weren't being used to feed anyone or to serve some greater noble purpose. They simply took up space and didn't make money. Al Capone was charged and convicted with tax evasion, but I think just about everyone may agree that he was a person who could be responsible for some extremely horrific acts against his fellow man that went beyond just capping a guy. Make no mistake, I wouldn't be about to compare Vick to Capone; just trying to show a simile in the nature of the legal cases. Nor do I think that your view is wrong, but perhaps to clarify a different perspective.

posted by THX-1138 at 12:25 AM on August 23

Now that he's been outted as one of the people who (didnt kill these dogs quickly with a rifle) but "slammed them to the ground, drowned them, electrocuted them and beat them to death. Weedy, I don't think the real issue with people's reaction of distaste and horror has to do with dog fighting per se, but rather with the question of what motivated Vick and the others to dispose of these dogs, and the methods used. I think the assumption that Vick was personally torturing dogs is a stretch to make from Pearce's statement of facts. The summary of facts reads in part: "These dogs all died as a result of the collective efforts of Peace, Phillips and Vick." They used various methods of execution, including hanging and drowning, the court papers read. Collective efforts could mean that Vick ordered the dog disposed of but didn't specify how. It certainly doesn't mean that Vick was doing the dirty deeds himself. I think we should work with the facts that we have so far, and it doesn't seem that we have enough to call Vick a sociopath.

posted by bperk at 08:05 AM on August 23

Why does the NAACP have to stick up for this idiot when that time could be spent help deserving black people who are in need of their services? Maybe they should keep you on speed dial so you can let them know who is and who is not worthy of their support. Atlanta chapter supports Vick's decision to accept a plea bargain if it's in his best interest, but he questioned the credibility of Vick's co-defendants Seems to me the Atlanta chapter has already determined that Vick is the one worthy of thier support. They are basically saying the rest of these black men are lying but (coincidentally I'm sure) the $100 million black man is the one getting thier support. Like ricardo, when I read that article on yahoo sports, that is what came to my mind. I am sure that there is a black man somewhere actaully being charged with a crime he didn't committ. Cause, in the Vick case, all signs point to him being guilty and I for one think the NAACP should find someone who appears a little less guilty to stick thier necks out for.

posted by Steel_Town at 09:49 AM on August 23

Cause, in the Vick case, all signs point to him being guilty and I for one think the NAACP should find someone who appears a little less guilty to stick thier necks out for. And, if they "stick up for" or point out injustices in the criminal justice system for Joe Blow who seems less guilty to you, how much media attention or coverage would they get? Do you have any idea who they are sticking up for if it isn't covered in the news? I bet not. An organization picks high profile cases to illustrate the things they wish to draw attention to. Do you think PETA and ASCPA are spending more time on this case than if Joe Blow did it? Or is that okay, then, because they agree with you?

posted by bperk at 10:19 AM on August 23

I agree PETA and other animal activists are probably spending more time, but they are defending a noble cause AND it's a high profile case. The NAACP seems to be there only because of the high profile part of it. IF Vick makes some kind of strides toward showing some kind of redemption, then I would agree: he could possibly deserve a second chance. At this point, he has done nothing except only admit guilt when it looked as if he wasn't going to get away with it. Some kind of remorse with a lot of effort towards righting some of the wrongs is a start. I don't think because someone makes a mistake, they deserve eternal banishment, but they do need to earn their place back in and the NAACP is trying to give it to him for nothing.

posted by Ricardo at 10:26 AM on August 23

I don't think because someone makes a mistake, they deserve eternal banishment, but they do need to earn their place back in and the NAACP is trying to give it to him for nothing. That's bullshit. Vick is going to jail. He shouldn't have to go begging to the media for forgiveness to "earn a place back." He requested a meeting with the Commissioner of the NFL. That's who he should be talking to. You don't know if he has remorse or not. You just know that he hasn't boo hooed at a press conference for you. And, if he did, then people would just say that he is doing it all for show. There is no right way for him to handle this publicly. Obviously, fighting to give people a second chance after they have made mistakes and served their time is not a noble cause to you. That's fine. The NAACP is not the organization for you.

posted by bperk at 10:34 AM on August 23

Obviously, fighting to give people a second chance after they have made mistakes and served their time is not a noble cause to you. That's fine. The NAACP is not the organization for you. The NAACP isn't fighting for a second chance for Vick. They are shamelessly accusing the Poorer defendants in this case of lying and implying Vick is innocent and is just trying to "cut his losses". And, if they "stick up for" or point out injustices in the criminal justice system for Joe Blow who seems less guilty to you, how much media attention or coverage would they get? Do you have any idea who they are sticking up for if it isn't covered in the news? I bet not. An organization picks high profile cases to illustrate the things they wish to draw attention to. Do you think PETA and ASCPA are spending more time on this case than if Joe Blow did it? Or is that okay, then, because they agree with you? This is exactly what is wrong with what the NAACP is doing right now. I couldn't tell you the name of the guy that was dragged behind the pickup truck in texas but they damn sure made it very public didn' they. I also think that if you looked into PETA and ASCPA you would find that they spend alot more time on other things, they just don't find their way to the headlines. And please don't assume how I feel about PETA. I was respoding to comments regarding the NAACP. Personaly I find PETA to be dispicable and could truly care less how they feel about this issue or any other issue. On the other hand, I feel the NAACP is a respectable organization that is failing to truly serve its purpose right now. Like I said earlier in my comment, there are other black men involved in this high profile case, why don't they stick up for them. They would get the same amount of publicity considering they are the witnesses against Vick. In fact it might even be easier to feel sympathy for those guys. But no, they are going to stick up for the $100 million black man because it helps their cause with complete disregard for the cause of african americans

posted by Steel_Town at 11:40 AM on August 23

Not to mention the rest of the defendants don't have whatever millions Vick may have held onto to fall back on once he does get out of jail. And I clearly stated that Vick may deserve a second chance down the road. He just doesn't deserve one now.

posted by Ricardo at 11:59 AM on August 23

Personaly I find PETA to be dispicable and could truly care less how they feel about this issue or any other issue. So, how much less could you care?

posted by lil_brown_bat at 12:45 PM on August 23

Its kinda tough to quantify how much less I could care. Even worse is I would have made the same smart ass remark had I seen someone else type that. Oh well I guess I will have to fire my editor.

posted by Steel_Town at 12:55 PM on August 23

Collective efforts could mean that Vick ordered the dog disposed of but didn't specify how. It certainly doesn't mean that Vick was doing the dirty deeds himself. Of course it could mean that he did indeed do the acts himself. This is a rather circular argument. This is all going to be a matter of opinion and I know what mine is. I think that, at least to me, the weight of evidence, as it appears on the surface and from what all of us know so far, levels the bulk of blame on Vick as a participant. Why would he be less morally culpable than the other defendents, particularly in light of his guilty plea? It seems unlikely that he didn't approve of how the animals were disposed of, otherwise why would he have let it go on? Nah, I think Vick's a bad guy.

posted by THX-1138 at 01:01 PM on August 23

Its kinda tough to quantify how much less I could care. Even worse is I would have made the same smart ass remark had I seen someone else type that. Oh well I guess I will have to fire my editor. I like your sense of humor. Smart-assen unite!

posted by lil_brown_bat at 01:44 PM on August 23

Smart-assen? Is that kind of like the plural of ox is oxen; therefore the plural of box is boxen?

posted by hawkguy at 01:54 PM on August 23

Smart-assen? Is that kind of like the plural of ox is oxen; therefore the plural of box is boxen?

posted by hawkguy at 01:54 PM on August 23

Nice posten.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 02:46 PM on August 23

Thank youen.

posted by hawkguy at 02:50 PM on August 23

It's from a remark from an old friend ("Because you are a pair of smart-assen") in response to a rhetorical question from me about why I and another friend always get into certain kinds of trouble. (btw, no dogs were harmed in the course of the trouble that occasioned the question and comment, btw -- just a young varlet who was operating a dangerous renfaire carousel ride, and he was asking for it)

posted by lil_brown_bat at 03:17 PM on August 23

Ok screw the Vick thread. Tell us of the young varlet, the dangerous renfaire carousel, and the trouble that ensued, lbb.

posted by THX-1138 at 04:52 PM on August 23

Tell us of the young varlet, the dangerous renfaire carousel, and the trouble that ensued, lbb. There wasn't too much trouble, at least not for us; someone else nearly lost a kidney. Story's at here, together with comments from the peanut gallery.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 05:47 PM on August 23

Great, you had to go and play the young varlet card.

posted by irunfromclones at 07:27 PM on August 23

Collective efforts could mean that Vick ordered the dog disposed of but didn't specify how. It certainly doesn't mean that Vick was doing the dirty deeds himself. I think we should work with the facts that we have so far, and it doesn't seem that we have enough to call Vick a sociopath. Ah no man... We cant keep doing this! First it was " wait and youll see Vick didnt do anything wrong, he was the victim", Then it was "We still believe Vick was just a money man" and Now were into "it doesnt Reeeeaaally say that Vick did the killing himself". Prediction, statements from the other defendants will put Vick as "one of the delivery boys for the bad newz dem dogs got". Then what? "Well Vick didnt really slam them the hardest" or "The other dudes wanted to stab them to death with exacto knives over a 2 day period but Vick talked them out of it"? Dam Gene, when does it become a duck? And for arguments sake, does not the ordering of deaths in the manner that these occurred constitute some form of sociopathy?

posted by firecop at 08:54 PM on August 23

heraldtribune.com/article/20070818/SPORTS/708180313I think the assumption that Vick was personally torturing dogs is a stretch to make from Pearce's statement of facts. The summary of facts reads in part: "These dogs all died as a result of the collective efforts of Peace, Phillips and Vick." They used various methods of execution, including hanging and drowning, the court papers read. You left out the best part of that article. "The court filings also say Peace, Phillips and Vick killed about eight dogs that failed to fight well after testing sessions in April 2007". Or this one "A statement signed by Phillips as part of his plea agreement said Vick participated in the execution of about eight dogs, some by drowning and hanging". from this article http://heraldtribune.com/article/20070818/SPORTS/708180313

posted by firecop at 09:17 PM on August 23

According to Roger Cossack on ESPN, if the judge doesn't believe that Vick is being truthful in his plea allocution, he can shoot down the whole deal and make Vick go to trial. Or he could accept Vick's plea deal and then just drop the hammer during sentencing.

posted by The_Black_Hand at 05:03 AM on August 24

Vick will not admit to killing dogs or gambling on dog fights To be honest, I really don't see Vick doing the killing of the animals. He was the Boss or money man. Does your boss scrub the toilets? I still don't think this clears him of any guilt in the killings, I just don't think he was the one doing the killing, and in the court of law there is a difference between the two.

posted by Steel_Town at 07:52 AM on August 24

Does your boss scrub the toilets? If he's got a thing for scat, perhaps he does. You and I see killing a dog as, at best, a detestable necessity. Someone else might see it in a different light. Not saying that's so or that there's anything to indicate that it's so, just that, well...there are some strange tastes out there.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 08:48 AM on August 24

Call me crazy, but I don't see it as too far of a stretch that someone who enjoys watching to dogs rip each other to shreds might also enjoy taking part in ending the life of another living creature.

posted by hawkguy at 09:44 AM on August 24

I know some boxing fans who might object to the "you are what you watch" characterization.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 10:00 AM on August 24

The purpose of boxing is not to end the other person's life, and you don't "put down" an average boxer.

posted by hawkguy at 10:48 AM on August 24

So why wouldn't the connection you made work at a softer level? If you can make the connection that watching dogs tear each other apart makes you more inclined to want to tear dogs apart yourself, then I would think it's easier (since it's less sociopathic on a scale) to assume a connection between being a boxing fan and being the sort who goes about beating people to a pulp.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 10:59 AM on August 24

According to Roger Cossack on ESPN, if the judge doesn't believe that Vick is being truthful in his plea allocution, he can shoot down the whole deal and make Vick go to trial. Or he could accept Vick's plea deal and then just drop the hammer during sentencing. Vick only has to plead guilty to what charges the prosecution and the defense agree upon. In allocution, he will have to fess up to the facts supporting those charges. If the prosecution agrees to drop the charges relating to killing dogs or gambling, there's a possibility that he won't have to make any statement about those charges one way or the other. It sounds like the prosecution has agreed to allow him to plead to the conspiracy charge only, so he possibly would only have to recite his culpability for the facts related to that charge. Now, if Vick and his lawyers have worked to get the affirmative statement that Vick did not kill dogs or gamble in the agreed-upon statement of facts, they are risking a chance that the judge might find that to be untruthful (as TBH suggests). I highly doubt that would happen, though -- the judge generally will give deference to the agreed-upon statement of facts that the prosecution submits and only take action against a defendant if he/she deviates from that statement of facts.

posted by holden at 11:26 AM on August 24

RICHMOND, Va. - Michael Vick filed a plea agreement in federal court Friday admitting to a dogfighting charge and agreed the enterprise included killing fighting dogs and gambling. From the A.P. Not exactly sure what this means but is looks like he plead guilty to the dogfighting charges while somehow skirting the issue of killing them.

posted by Steel_Town at 12:18 PM on August 24

I would think it's easier (since it's less sociopathic on a scale) to assume a connection between being a boxing fan and being the sort who goes about beating people to a pulp. Crafty, I'm sure there are situations that people, not only those who like to watch boxing, would love to beat someone to a pulp (myself included.) I know some boxing fans who might object to the "you are what you watch" characterization. People have the choice to get into the ring and fight. Dogs don't. There is (at least in me,) an overwhelming urge to protect the weaker, less intelligent of all species. (since it's less sociopathic on a scale) I'm not sure it is less sociopathic to walk around beating people to a pulp on a whim, either. So why wouldn't the connection you made work at a softer level? Lastly, as is evident in the Vick case, people don't go around killing (or beating to a pulp) other people because the punishment is far more severe

posted by hawkguy at 01:36 PM on August 24

NFL suspends Michael Vick indefinitely

posted by irunfromclones at 05:11 PM on August 24

According to the statement, Vick also was involved with the others in killing six to eight dogs that did not perform well in testing sessions last April. The dogs were executed by drowning or hanging. "Vick agrees and stipulates that these dogs all died as a result of the collective efforts" of Vick, Phillips and Peace, the statement said. This is just a bit different that what ESPN reported to us earlier. It is definitely admitting to having a part in killing those dogs. I guess we will find out on Monday what he really is pleading to.

posted by jojomfd1 at 05:43 PM on August 24

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.