NAACP Atlanta Head: Vick Would be Treated Better if He Killed a Person

murdering people, come on, we've all heard about that before.

torturing and murdering DOGS...now THAT's sensational coverage.

they cover what people want to hear about. people want to hear the details about a huge nfl star involved in an illegal dog fighting ring. does it make it right, to cover this, when the murder of a human (which happens every day) doesn't get as much coverage? hell no. but that's what is different and sexy to report on.

 

I'm not sure which ones (or one) he is pleading to, but if you're trying to tell me that the interstate nature of it makes it worthy of more punishment in a logical sense, I don't get it.

Interstate crimes are a jurisdictional means to bring things into federal jurisdicition - are you trying to tell me that from a moral/logical standpoint that the fact that an interstate crime was involved, rather than a intrastate crime, should be persuasive? So you are saying that a 100 dog INTRA-state dogfighting ring is inherently less wrong from a moral/ethical/philosophical standpoint, than running a 10 dog INTERstate dogfighting ring?

Sorry but that argument falls flat on its face.

C'mon Max, you know better than this. WHen you plead guilty to (or are convicted of) a crime, "possible other charges" should not -- and, by means of the federal sentencing guidlines -- ARE NOT -- allowed to be considered.

Around here we convict and sentence people for what they are guilty of, not what they could possibly have been guilty of.

These two statements are mutually inconsistent. The public cares (irrationally, which is my point) about dogs being abused. Gambling? Yeah I'm sure the public at large is incensed by gambling - which is only why it's a multihundredbillion(trillion) dollar industry. The fact that the feds are using interstate gambling as a jursidictional hook, again, is really inconsequential to the points that I have raised.

Well, we know forsure his crew murdered somebody on the street in BUcktown (NOT sure whether or not he helped hte acutal murder) and they jumped into his cars (with him) and sped off. then he covered up for them and lied when the cops questioned him

I don't recall the specifics of Georgia's murder statute, but I am pretty certain that in most states, (nad was certain at the time) that active, conscious assistance in a murder - even if that only concerns covering up a murder after it was committed - is enough for accomplice liability - which in legal terms mean you are a murderer.

Again, this does not absolve Vick, but it shows that he is getting a raw deal on the Ray Lewis scale.

Remember, not only did Ray Lewis only serve a short sentence, the guy came back to the NFL and has been celebrated. The guy has endorsements, EASports commercials, lauded with accolades by Madden and the rest of the talking heads, and will one day go to Canton.

Since you are going to play the letter of the law with respect to interstate gambling - I don't see how you can get out of playing it with accomplice liability for murder with respect to Lewis(presuming my assumption as to his participatin is correct, which I think it is). By that measure, Vick gets a raw deal.

That is why I think the whole thing causes severe logical problems.

 

I understand that, I am defending him from asinine statements about what should be done to him or what he should go through, that's all.

 

1. I'm suggesting the interstate nature carried with it higher penalties under the law. I've suggested from the very beginning that this was all framing a RICO action....which apparently the feds were days away from adding at the time of the plea. The feds told us in July that they would be filing a superseding indictment. I'm sorry, but I have a hard time believing that the timing of the plea right before the superseding indictment had nothing to do with the fact they were planning on bringing deeper charges. You'd have to live in a bubble to convince yourself that it wasn't considered by Vick and his attorneys;

2. Honestly, I don't remember the deal with Ray Lewis. But I don't care. Because he got off unjustly, doesn't mean Vick should too. I think Vick will ultimately be getting off light if he only sees 18 months in jail. That Lewis got off lighter is of little issue to me. I don't want to judge every defendant from this point forward on the basis of how Ray Lewis was dealt with. I'm guessing Ray was facing state authorities. It's a whole different deal when you're dealing with the feds. I wrote my seminar paper on the feds and their intrusion into the area of criminal law through mail fraud...I wrote about what a farce that was...but that's an entirely different issue from whether what Vick is getting is just or not. I'm guessing Vick knew what he was doing was illegal. He plead guilty to avoid further charges and a longer sentence under the charges that were currently brought. Sorry...but I don't see that as a raw deal.

 

I haven't had a chance to read through this thread but my 2 cents are this is more about the individual than the crime. Ray Lewis and Jason Williams were charged with a much worse crime but they aren't as big stars as Vick. For that matter Paris Hilton was convicted of a DUI but look at all of the attention that received. Celebrity magnifies what a person does for better and for worse.

 

It does? Conspiracy to run a dogfighting ring under federal statutes is a bigger deal than under state statutes? I am unaware of the discrepancies but the automatic assumption on yoru part that federal crimes carry heavier penalties because they are interstate is not aways true - nor is it all relevant to the point that I made: "interstate" is a jurisdictional means, not a freestanding crime in a moral or ethical sense.

And as I said before - that is completely irrelevant to his ultimate sentence for conspiracy to commit dogfighting. His sentence for conspiracy commit dogfighting cannot incorporate "probable RICO" any more than it can incorporate the fact that he might have jaywalked on the way to the court house or that he forgot his mothers birthday. You know this.

You're right it was. Again this is irrelevant to what I posted and I am uncertain as to why you are bringing it up.

Again, I don't see you addressing my main points from the post you quoted - I'll go through it again.

1. If Ray Lewis is our baseline, then Vick gets a raw deal.
2. The same people who celebrate, and CONTINUE to celebrate Ray Lewis (the NFL, the NFL media, fans, marketing people)..... are now saying that Vick should be ostracized, tortured, beaten, shot, blah blah blah. Read the thread or threads.

I find the inconsistencies pretty obvious to even a casual observer, and at least worthy of comment.

 

1. maybe you misunderstood me earlier. i was initially distinguishing between the penalties under the two charges that have actually been brought against him. the dog fighting charge carried a maximum of one year. the interstate conspiracy stuff carried a max of five years.

2. i'll be honest with you...i have no idea what you're saying. pretend i'm not a lawyer, because i never touch criminal stuff. what i'm saying is....RICO charges were on the way. there were multiple sources saying that. he was given a deadline by which to plea to the charges that had already been brought against him. had he not plead, they would have filed the superseding indictment. that was a "stick" in this little game. he effectively avoided having to deal with the RICO charges at all. i'm saying...given that RICO charges were on the way, i believe him ultimately spending 18 months or so in jail (since he never had to deal with the superseding indictment) is intensely fair, if not extremely lenient. he settled out without ever having to face the charges that carried the stiffest penalties.

3. Again, I'm not sure why Ray Lewis is the baseline. My understanding from a brief reading of this is that they didn't have evidence to connect him to the murder....and they ultimately allowed him to plea out on a MISDEMEANOR charge of obstruction. There was so little evidence he was allowed to expunge this from his record. In addition, the guys he was supposedly protecting were all acquitted. This is a far cry from a guy pleading guilty to the charges Vick has been brought up on. A far cry particularly in terms of the consequences....

and I think the consequences are the key difference. an NFL superstar quarterback, with endorsement deals from the biggest athletic endorsers on the planet (Nike and Gatorade) will be in jail over roughly the course of the next two seasons. he was DIRECTLY connected to brutal facts. not that he was merely there...but that he participated. that he was the guy doing this stuff.

i just don't see the raw deal, here.

 

RICO is pure speculation

secondly you guys are talking past each other, max you're using RICO, which is speculation, to justify the moral outrage. a) laws and morals are two separate subjects, b) there's no proof that the government was even considering that.

 

They did summon the grand jury on Monday.

 

I'm not using RICO to justify moral outrage at all. I'm not making that point. I am suggesting that it fuels interest when reporters are suggesting the guy might have to negotiate off a 20 year sentence instead of a 5 year sentence.

RICO isn't speculation. Numerous sources cited that the superseding indictment had at least one RICO charge in it. I told you from the beginning that this had RICO written all over it. You told me I was blowing it out of proportion and that this had nothing to do with RICO. I showed you sources then which were saying the same thing. It's organized crime, pgabriel. These were the charges coming. This was the stick he was avoiding.

http://www.mercurynews.com/sports/ci_6637120

"Federal prosecutors announced at Vick's arraignment last month that they will seek a superseding indictment before the end of this month. And that indictment includes at least one additional charge under the federal RICO statute, both people said."

http://publicbroadcasting.net/wabe/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=1131719&sectionID=1

"But by Monday, the stakes could get higher. If Vick rejects the plea deal, federal prosecutors plan to hit Vick with more serious charges of racketeering and corruption spelled out in the RICO act. Former US Attorney Kent Alexander says Vick's lawyers must take the looming indictment very seriously."

http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-now-vickqa.au16,0,6469473.story

But federal prosecutors plan to file a superseding indictment on Monday morning under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act -- more severe charges carrying heavier penalties.
The prosecutors reportedly have made Vick an offer: plead guilty to the current charges and we won't file the RICO charges. If he doesn't accept a plea deal by 9 a.m. Friday, they will file the RICO charges on Monday

http://content.hamptonroads.com/story.cfm?story=130275&ran=3186

If Vick does not accept a deal, according to the source with knowledge of the investigation, prosecutors plan to seek a superseding indictment against Vick with an additional charge. That charge would fall under the federal Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, punishable by up to 20 years in prison, according to the source, who requested anonymity.

 

no matter how many articles you site its speculation, that's what speculation is.

honestly, why would they settle for a plea that can only get him a couple of years when they can get RICO

 

lalalalalalalalalala..nananananananna...not listening to you...not listening to you...lalalalallalalalalalalala.

 

show me why it's not rico, pgabriel. i posted the elements earlier in a thread. i showed you how it fits. please, pretty please...show me why it isn't.

 

because it was never filed

 

please stop moving the ball. i never argued that it was filed.

 

exactly, but you can't argue it was there.

and besides, you assume that they have concrete proof that bad knewz kennels exist.

 

wow....

ok, pgabriel. thanks for the discussion.

 

max,

do you agree that the feds don't go filing rico charges all willy nilly. do agree that it is a tough charge to prove by the articles you posts.

I mean, wow, I can't believe i have to argue something doesn't exists when it doesn't. that's the true wow. you're the one still hanging on

 

I for one will argue vehemently that the Vick court paperwork to date has been done on #28 regular bond paper, white, uncoated.

 

pgabriel

just because the prosecution does not bring a particular charge, does not mean the elements can be met. my understanding is that RICO is not difficult to prove in a scenario like this. but i've never prosecuted a RICO claim. RICO was put together to make it easier on prosecutors...not more difficult.

again...i'm not arguing they did file it. please stop pretending that's what you're arguing against.

i'm arguing it was the stick they used to get him to plea out. they said, "hey...we'll give you until Monday to get a plea in. after that, we're filing a superseding indictment." guess what he did on Monday? they positioned this case beautifully. and these particular prosecutors have a reputation for that, given what I've read of them in the Atlanta Constitution-Journal and elsewhere.

despite having a kickass lawyer, he and everyone who was charged plead out. and you're still holding on to the, "could they prove up bad newz kennels"??? seriously?