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

you asked about easier:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?id=2974225

What's next? Can it get any worse for Vick?

Yes, it could get worse in a hurry. The federal prosecutors in Richmond are preparing a new set of charges, known in legal terms as a superseding indictment. The new charges could come any day. The new charges might include a racketeering allegation under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (known as RICO). RICO originally was designed as a weapon against organized-crime hoodlums but has been used frequently in other prosecutions. A charge under RICO would make Vick's situation significantly worse. It would make the government's case against him easier to prove, and it would increase the prison sentence Vick would face if convicted.

 

asked for what that's from 8/15, i don't understand what you're trying to prove

 

you asked would it make it more difficult to prove under RICO...that guy..the legal analyst for ESPN...suggests otherwise. that's all.

 

its not personal, you're arguing as if you know absolutely what happened. i understand your argument, the elements were there, okay. that doesn't prove it was there. the concrete proof is that his friends flipped, and he pled. everything else is speculation.

 

fine. peace.

 

either way, the fact that it's an interstate crime does not, logically, to me justify in this instance a harsher sentence. And I don't know what the state conspiracy to run a gambling/dogfighting ring statutes are around the country, but I would bet they are basically the same as far as penalties - so that doesn't get us anywhere.

I'm talking about sentencing - a sentence cannot change because "RICO charges might be on the way!!!".

When somebody is sentenced, they are sentenced for the crime they are convicted of or plead to, not for crimes that they theoretically might have had charged with.

That sentiment strikes me as completely antithetical to our justice system. You do the time for the crime that you commit Now, obcviously there are mitigating and aggravating factors taht come into play, but a possible indictment on another charge in and of itself, while it might influence the indvidiual defendant's decision to plead guilty, should not (and, under the fed guidelines, cannot, IIRC) be considered as part of the sentence.

Take Conrad Black, ex Hollinger CEO. He was just convicted of M & W fraud but beat RICO liabiity. Let's say the judge is sentencing him- can the judge make his sentence more severe, because the Gov't indicted him for RICO, and might appeal the RICO acquittal on the grounds that the Judge wrongfully excluded crucial evidence that would make it more likely for them to get a RICO conviction in a second trial? I think that is almost unfathomable and probaby unconstitutional.

Another example, Let's say you extort two people with a baseball bat in violation of the Hobbs Act. let's say you bought the baseball bat with proceeds from MadMax PC and put the extortion cash into MadMax PC. That's two separate RICO persons, and theoretically subjects you to possible RICO liability - you plead out to two counts of extortion - are you going to be sentenced more harshly because (depending on how the circuit interprets the enterprise requirement of RICO) you could have faced a RICO charge? I doubt it.

It is because i said it was for the purposes of what I wanted to discuss that he was the baseline - why should it not be? Who else is the baseline then? Leonard Little? I guess you could say Rae Carruth, but he 1. committed a more severe crime and 2. received a harsher sentence, so he is of limited value to tell us whether or not Vick's treatement was overly harsh.

Lewis WAS charged with Murder as an accomplice. He entered his plea BEFORE the guys were acquitted - and TESTIFIED that his boys murdered the guy, he got 12 months probation, and NO suspension in the NFL, for covering up a murder - again, PRIOR to the acquittal. The punishment handed down for Lewis was a mere slap on the wrist in comparison to Vick.

Now, if we are going to take the "possible charges" into account, what is worse - possible murder conviciton, or possible RICO violation for running a gambling ring? Easy answer.

If Lewis was "merely there" how did he get charged with murder and aggravated assault? Like I said, they had enough for accomplice liability - covering up a murder, even if you didn't particpate in it, is enough in most places, apparently including Georgia..

Cause you altered the facts to be more favorable to Lewis.

 

1. my understanding is that there were two charges against him. the dogfighting charge had a maximum sentence of one year. the conspiracy portion carried with it a 5 year maximum sentence. that was it.

2. of course a sentence can't change because a superseding indictment is on the way...no kidding. i wasn't arguing otherwise.

3. i don't see a baseline. i see this case as really unique. i've been saying that from the beginning. we've seen athletes do stupid things. heat of the moment things. we've rarely seen them be charged with being the money-man and organizer of an organized crime ring that existed for years with overt act after overt act. that's a new one on me. the very fact of RICO potential made this all feel different to me.

4. possible murder is worse...no doubt. no question about it. as i said, i did a cursory look on wikipedia regarding ray lewis. expect a bill for my time. (having said that...he was acquitted, right? see how vick wasn't?)

5. if we're talking merely about the NFL punishment....then it's simple. it wasn't Goodell. new sheriff in town. new rules. he's been pretty clear about that. if you're talking about Nike, Gatorade, etc....would you want to be associated with all this if you ran those brands?

 

would people be taking this less seriously if this were **** fighting?
oh, wait...

 

Well why do you keep arguing that "supeseding indictment was on the way!" you've said it like 5 times now, I don't understand.

See - you just said the superseding indictment should mean a sentence can't change, now you're saying that "RICO potential" makes it "feel different" - sorry but that is just confusing.

But anyway, who cares if it is unique - I am gauging collective reaction to two criimes committed by NFL players, one of which is markedly more harsh, and IMO, irrational.

Lewsi was not acquitted, he pleaded guilty to obstruction. The perpetrators - in an OJ "let's find the real killers" verdict, were acquitted - months (years?) AFTER Lewis' light punishment from both the law AND the NFL had been handed down. So that ultimately does not factor in to judging the collective harshness of the punishments.

EASports, among others, has proudly feautred Ray Lewis as an endorser and he is regarded with reverence by commentators.

 

Sam --

I brought up the superseding indictment in OUR discussion in passing. I never once argued that it changed his sentence...because I'm quite aware it was never brought. He plead out before then.

The superseding indictment WAS NOT filed. That's why it doesn't factor into the time he will serve. I think it was a stick used to bring about a guilty plea early. I've read it included RICO charges. That's all.

I'm saying RICO potential makes it "feel different" outside of the legal context. I didn't say that was objectively true...I said that's how it made me feel about the situation. If you'd rather me use the term, "organized crime element" instead of RICO, then I'll do that. That element makes this feel different TO ME than other cases against athletes. The indictment paints him as a crime boss...not the typical, "i can't control my anger in a heated moment" situation we typically see.

My understanding with Lewis is the dropped the murder/accomplice charge in exchange for him entering the plea on the obstruction issue...which was ultimately expunged from his record. Am I wrong?

Again...the NFL punishment for Lewis was handed down pre-Goodell. I think it's that simple on that angle.

You're right about EA Sports. I don't think I've ever heard anyone praise him for anything other than his football prowess. But the man wasn't convicted. He plead guilty to a MISDEMEANOR which was ultimately expunged. Vick's plead guilty to a FELONY. One for which he will serve time....not get probation. He will serve about 18 months behind bars, likely missing 2 seasons. Had they had more evidence with regard to Lewis, I think his story would be very different. They didn't.

 

Not that it excuses the fact that he was never punished for (at least) being an accessory to murder, but Ray Lewis has been a model citizen since that murder. He does as much charity work as anyone in the league, and gives like I wish I could. Whether you or I think he has earned redemption or not, many do.

 

I don't think an accomplice charge was ever brought. There was a murder charge, which was dropped when he pleaded guilty to the obstruction charge and agreed to testify against his buddies. When he finished his probation, the obstruction conviction was expunged.

 

Accomplice is a theory of liability, not a crime in and of itself. He was charged with murder, which makes him either the principal or the accomplice - you can guess which one is more serious.

I find this rather hard to believe, given that RICO is almost exclusively a legal construct that even most lawyers do not fully understand. It might have made you feel different, but as to the average 'man in the street' - or the kind of guy who goes on a BBS and posts "VIck should be strung up by his nuts and then whipped with a wet noodle covered in acid blah blah blah" is thinking. Again, I am not questioning you here, but the popular outcry.

, fine then use the term "organized crime element", but ican tell you from experience that every athlete (or non-athlete) that has a posse/friends/associates etc, can be said to be a part of what can be pleaded as an "association-in-fact RICO enterprise". From there on all you need is two related predicate acts, and provided you fill the very technical and formalistic (except for when they are not), open- or closed- ended continuity requirements - it is a short trip down to RICO.

I don't know or care, I'm talking about the collective reaction at the time (when he was charged with murder and pleaded down) and how it is utterly inconsistent. I wonder if this has anything with the fact that a few presumably gangsterish negros bled to death in an atlanta streetcorner in January vis-a-vis the specatacle of man's best friend being harmed? (let the record show, by the way, that a substantial number man's best friend/victims of dogfighting from the Bad Newz Kennels are due to be euthanized in a few days - I don't see anybody whing about th potential massive genocide. Hell with the money that the state has spent on prosecuting Vick, I bet all those dogs could have been set up in a pound for the rest of their lives.

Fine, then let us remove Goodell from the equation. I don't see the NFL establishment - meaning the press, league officials etc - coming down in the same way. Did Dogfighting somehow become worse now than murder was seven years ago? Doubtful.

ehh - you know as well as I do how arbitrary that line is. 1 year and 1 day = felony, one year or less = misdemeanor. The fact that Lewis was able to finesse the formalities of it in a way that Vick wasn't does not, in my mind, seem to be a sufficient explanation of why the reactions to the two are so disparate.

Look,I'm not here to say that Vick should walk or Lewis should hang. But the points I raised are very valid on a logical basis, and I think any observer can sense why things are problematic and inconsistent with respect to Vick when compare to Lewis, who, like it or not, is the best analogue that we have at the moment.