Yes, he is. In my mind, he's guilty. In the minds of most thinking adults, he's guilty. You know why? Because nobody, I mean NOBODY, owns a house that has been converted into a dog fighting pit and doesn't know about it. And if you somehow DID own a house that your sleazy friends had converted into a dog fighting pit and you didn't know about it, then you're irresposible scum for allowing the b@stards to have free reign. Vick isn't accountable for the actions of his associates...unless he facilitates those actions. Even if he just put up the money and the house, he's guilty as h&ll.
And that argument is completely ridiculous. He starts the whole "Bad Dog Kennels" entity right at the time he buys the house, right? Almost immediately after buying it, they start transforming the property into a dog training facility. His argument that he didn't know is unbelievable, frankly.
i think goodell and blank need to have a pow wow. the falcons should suspend him with pay pending the outcome. if he is found guilty, his contract should be retroactively voided starting from yesterday and banned for life from the NFL. if he is found not guilty then he can be reinstated with the missed season being punishment for his association with this sickening dog fighting biz. this is good for both the NFL and the falcons. the player's union will have a cow but they won't be able to do anything about it. hell, if they raise too much of a stink atlanta can just cut him. no team would touch him with a ten foot pole and the results will work out the same as the aforementioned scenario.
Question: Why should he be banned for life? I understand certain crimes should bann people from certain industries: ie Pedophiles cannot be teachers , Embezzlers cannot be accountants, etc Why should a Dog Abuser not be allow to play football? I am missing the connection. If he did what they said he did . . he deserves jail time no doubt but once he did his time . .. he has paid his debt, right? Rocket River
it would seem like it in the media. Remember, it's not all that bad if you do harm to anyone in nightclub, even if you kill them. Kill an innocent animal...you will be ostracized beyond belief.
That's a bit harsh. Dog-fighting is not even that serious compared to crimes like first degree murder, attempted rape, aggravated sodomy, child molestation, racketeering, distribution of illegal narcotics, and .... here's a big one betting on live NFL games while being an active (star) player.
i would argue that it is a worse crime than racketeering, distribution of illegal narcotics, and .... at least from a moral perspective. hell, i am being harsh and i'm not even a dog lover, i just find this activity heinous. whatever length of time he is suspended is not my call but i can't see anyone giving him another chance if convicted.
There's a few guys calling in to the national and local sports radio shows defending Vick and they are getting SMASHED by the hosts and the other callers. There's a group of Americans out there who aren't really connected to reality, they're only connected to the perception of reality they see in movies, and in movies, real people die, so what's the problem killin a few dogs, bro? I mean, they get crazy when they fight, you gotta see it, it's off the chain! Disgusting.
I think the thought is....if mere allegations of what Pacman did get you suspended for a season...then a federal conviction surrounding being a kingpin of a criminal organization gets you banned from the game. Remember, that's the NFL's decision...it's ultimately a business decision. He's put his team and the league in a real tough position. But, frankly, the suspension/ban from the NFL is the LEAST of his worries at this point.
Ok...betting on games has one player suspended from baseball...to the point of being kept out of the MLB hall of fame, despite being the all-time hits leader. I agree with you that those other crimes are super-serious. I think they would be dealt with even more harshly than they way the NFL is dealing with the Vick allegations at this point. But on the other side of a conviction, I think they all get you booted, given Goodell's approach.
I think people are making a lot of assumptions based on these indictments. remember, law enforcement is going to tack on as much they can in an initial indictment. terms like "kingpin" are jumping the gun a bit.
why in the flying f*ck would a superstar athlete, knowingly, do this? i can understand the firearms, and drugs, and women.. but DOG FIGHTING? i mean, at least guns are 'cool'... drugs are 'fun'.. and women are funnest.. but running a dog fighting ring? what the hell kind of extra curricular is that to risk your entire kick-ass life over?
this why I have very serious doubts to the alleged involement of vick. I don't doubt he knew what was going on. but this whole carrying dogs over state lines, training dogs, I really doubt it. we'll see.
kingpin was the word used by the witness. kingpin was the word used by the guy who gave the interview to ESPN. it's his property...he owns Bad Dog Kennels. i understand why you think people are making assumptions. and if this were a county prosector throwing out allegations, i'd be right there with you. but these are federal prosecutors. it's just a different animal. this isn't marcia clark and chris darden.
actually we won't see. no matter what happens at trial or what plea is entered...none of us will know for sure. that's the fallacy of the judicial system. that a guy really didn't do it unless a jury agrees he did it....or that a guy must have done it because a jury thought so.
