It doesn't matter if Michael Vick was there

[belladonna]

Before I explain this, let me make clear that I do not support Michael Vick in any way, shape or form and that I hope they throw the damn book at him. Yes, I'm in VT country and I WAS a huge fan of Michael Vick's during his VT days, but I'm a bigger fan of dogs and of anyone who would participate in any way in their abuse getting the maximum punishment.

Now, for the reason they're going after him...... MONEY and ASSETS. Notice the language being used when they talk about his indictment? SPONSORING dogfighting? They're going after him with RICO and they're going to take everything he owns and then some. Notice that he's listed at the BOTTOM of the indictment? That's because they can't place him at the scene, unless something new has come out that I'm not aware of. The people who Vick let take over his place and run the dogfights don't have the kind of money Vick has... the most they can do to them is put them in jail. They don't own the property either, so what are they going to seize from those guys? Michael got indicted first and foremost because he is the money man. That's Virginia for you.

Do I feel sorry for Michael? Hell NO. If he had the tiniest inkling of what was going on there, and I'm pretty damn sure that he did, and let it go on, he deserves whatever the State of Virginia can throw at him and to lose whatever they can get their grubby, greedy paws on. Just don't get the idea that these assholes give a shit what anyone did to those dogs... save a few of them. They care about the money and assets and they'll use RICO to get them.

[wakeme2008]

1. I guess his pouring water on a dog and electruing it does not count for

beening there. :shrug:

[Amelie]

6. He was not there for that

Purnell Peace did that, after consulting with Michael Vick.


Paragraph 53: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0717072vick12.html

[wakeme2008]

8. Read 52 he WAS there

:grr:

[alcibiades_mystery]

9. Paragraph 52 says nothing of the kind

It says that he was there when the dog lost, not when the dog was executed.

Besides, your uber-certainty about Vick's presence is based on the testimony of the cooperating witnesses, who are themselves dog fighters (presumably of the winning 35 lb pit bull!). So, Vick is an asshole because he's a dog fighter, but the cooperating witnesses are completely trustworthy despite being dog fighters, right?

I'm starting to think this whole thing has more to do with celebrity than with dog fighting.

[wakeme2008]

10. Do you have trouble reading

52 says he was there for the fight of a female dog. 53 was the talking of what to do with the injured female dog and Vick OK the water and execution.

[alcibiades_mystery]

11. That is not what it says at all

You apparently have trouble reading.

Since there is no date specified for either 52 or 53, these events could have happened on completely separate days. Tell me otherwise. And don't cite "common sense." Show me precisely in the indictment where it says that the fight and killing happened on the same day.

[MousePlayingDaffodil]

2. A pretty good theory, except . . .

. . .

First, it wasn't the Commonwealth of Virginia that indicted Michael Vick but, rather, the federal government.

Second, your assertion that they "can't place him at the scene" is contradicted on the face of the indictment, which references four different "cooperating witnesses" who place Vick "at the scene" of dog fights that were conducted not only at his property in Surry County, but elsewhere in Virginia and in Maryland, North Carolina, and South Carolina. Now, maybe all of these witnesses are lying. But, for the moment, the feds are most certainly alleging that they can "place him at the scene." The feds' theory, as indicated by the indictment, is not simply that Vick was aware of dog fights being held at his property in Surry County but, rather, that he himself purchased the property with the express intention of conducting a dog-fighting operation there, and that, subsequently, Vick himself directly participated in that operation. Again, whether the feds can ultimately prove that is one thing. But what YOU are suggesting is in no way consistent with the feds' own allegations.

Third, I suspect that the reason that Vick's name appears "at the bottom" of the indictment is simply because the four named defendants are listed in alphabetical order.

Sheesh.

[alcibiades_mystery]

4. Points 1, 2, and 3 are well taken

A substantial demolition of the OP. Nicely done.

I suspect that Vick's fate will rest on the relative credibility of the cooperating witnesses, as you suggest. Since NO cooperating witness is part of the Vick crew (the cousin, etc.), and since none of the Vick crew have yet to implicate Vick directly, the credibility of these external sources will play big in any negotiations/trial.

[bicentennial_baby]

3. Ah, but if you read the indictment,

the cooperating witnesses do place him at the scene of several fights, and also talk about him transporting the dogs over state liines, more than once. Otherwise, I agree with you.

Hi you! :hi:

[alcibiades_mystery]

5. The cooperating witnesses being other dog-fighters who flipped

I don't know.

Just sayin'...

[bicentennial_baby]

7. Oh, I know...

Will be interesting to see how this all plays out.