Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Vick indicted on felony charges (superdupermegamerge)

turbodiesel#44

By turbodiesel#44
in Around the NFL

Recommended Posts

turbodiesel#44

turbodiesel#44

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Enabler????LOL....your not very smart. This isn't a court room, your not the judge. I haven't discussed one fact about the case in this thread. And either have you.

I am actually just having fun debating you.

Remember when you Mom was pick up for Prostitution. Were you by her side, or did you turn your back?

:doh: my bad, that was wrong

My mothers dead, rest her soul. She never broke a law or hurt a dog or anyone else. You have crossed the line

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Koolblue13

Koolblue13

Posted
Posted
Here smart guy....say you have two people arrested for the same thing. For instance, you mother was arrested for prostitution. And your most hated girl friend was picked up for the same thing.

I could understand you defending your mother, while hoping your dirty ex does time.

Get it??? It's all about the relationship to the accused.

Deep down you know your Mom's a dirty whore, but you wish the best for her.

This is low. Even for you skins4me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ABQCOWBOY

ABQCOWBOY

Posted
Posted
You were the one talking like the Feds indicting him under RICO (which they didn't) was going to happen...when he's already been indicted.

You were the one that said 'taking Vick's millions out of the equation' as if that could somehow could be achieved under RICO...the Act itself says:

any -

  • (A) interest in;
    (B) security of;
    © claim against; or
    (D) property or contractual right of any kind affording a source of influence over any enterprise which the person has established, operated, controlled, conducted, or participated in the conduct of, in violation of section 1962; and

  1. any property constituting, or derived from, any proceeds which the person obtained, directly or indirectly, from racketeering activity or unlawful debt collection in violation of section 1962. The court, in imposing sentence on such person shall order, in addition to any other sentence imposed pursuant to this section, that the person forfeit to the United States all property described in this subsection. In lieu of a fine otherwise authorized by this section, a defendant who derives profits or other proceeds from an offense may be fined not more than twice the gross profits or other proceeds.

So the Feds are going to indict him on a relatively new law, (just changed to a felony in May (HR 137))...then tack RICO charges to make each charge punishable of up to a max of 20 years?

:rotflmao:

Do you not realize that 3 months ago this was an offense that was punishable by fines and probation????????

No, I did not do that. I simply suggested that this is what I believed they would do.

If you read the indictment, you will see that they have positioned it in such a way that it will would be very easy for them to do this if they can prove gambling.

As for the 3 months, what difference does that make? Do you know that it was legal to kill your wife if you caught her in the act of adultry with another man but it was not legal to kill the man, in some parts of this country 20 odd years ago? That law was changed and three months after it was changed, a man could face the death penalty for a crime that was considered legal just 3 months earlier.

Do ya have a point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lombardi's_kid_brother

Lombardi's_kid_brother

Posted
Posted
He basically took us the the national championship. Built us a new stadium. And before this, has donated tons of money to various causes.

Maybe PETA was one of them.

So he ran really fast and later got paid for it. Good times.

I'm still not impressed.

Bill Bradley is a fellow alum of mine. He is one of, like, 8 athletes or former athletes I actually respect in any way. I'm in awe of a lot of athletes as athletes. Respect? Eh, maybe the way they play their particular game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
turbodiesel#44

turbodiesel#44

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I'm no rocket surgeon, or an attorney either, but it seems with the interstate transport of fighting dogs, an interstate gambling ring and moving illicit cash across state lines, there will be the possibility for many additional charges. Fodder for the plea bargaining.

And when there are large sums of cash involved, the IRS usually pokes its nose in too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TK

TK

Posted
Posted
Enjoying the show TK?:)

Nah really.

Either I get a refund, or a few heads will just roll on out of here for awhile until they can cool off.

Oh wait.

I didn't pay for this show, so I guess I don't get that refund. Guess what choice that leaves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lombardi's_kid_brother

Lombardi's_kid_brother

Posted
Posted

However, since we have made this distinction, the conviction rate on these things is better then 95%, if we can believe what's being reported. One could probably make a case that indictment, in itself, is almost as good as conviction.

That is true. Federal prosecutors are not like local prosecutors. Local prosecutors actually have to "clean up the streets." Therefore, they have to deal with a high volume of crimes and not have the luxury of picking and choosing the easiest ones. They also have a limited budget. Once a year or so, a local prosecutor will try to make a name for himself or herself in a high-profile case. But those usually find the prosecutor, not the other way around.

A federal prosecutor's entire job essentially is built around 1) always winning and 2) always being in the press. Their budgets are also endless. I've dealth with federal prosecutors. They show up in teams of six with boxes of carefully tabulated evidence and simply overwhelm you. Vick has an advantage in that he is rich. But no matter how rich you are, you are never richer than the US Government. You can be richer than a city prosecutor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CalSkinsFan

CalSkinsFan

Posted
Posted
OJ was not convicted. I wonder if "innocent until proven guilty" folk think he is innocent?:no:

The Duke lacrosse players were indicted, but not convicted because the "victim" turned out to be unreliable (and that's putting it nicely).

Not defending Vick ... just sayin' ;) . I don't know the complete story, but I would hazard to guess the "witnesse(s)" here may be of dubious character as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
turbodiesel#44

turbodiesel#44

Posted
  • Author
Posted
The Duke lacrosse players were indicted, but not convicted because the "victim" turned out to be unreliable (and that's putting it nicely).

Not defending Vick ... just sayin' ;) .

I understand, but the Duke case was an aberration from the start. The yokel DA broke protocols even evident to laymen. He was canned, and all the lacrosse players involved will be getting a free education and a tidy bank account.

I don't see things turning out so nice for Vick, especially with the Big Dogs on him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
skins4me58203

skins4me58203

Posted
Posted
Real funny. Did you know my mom? Is that your best defense of Vick?

It was sarcasm dude. I apologize that you have never heard a "mother" joke before. Granted mine was a bit harsh. But there was a point to the joke. If you didn't get it, I can't help you.

And stop quoting my out of context. If you include the whole statement, other readers will see the point i'm trying to make.

Time to move on.

FREE VICK....RUFF RUFF....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SnyderMustGo

SnyderMustGo

Posted
Posted
So they freeze the 10's of thousands of dollars worth of assets from a multi-millionaire? What exactly is that going to do? He could pay IRS fines out of his pocketchange. What cases have you heard RICO being enacted on threats that weren't living off of primarily the money made from their illegal business???

RICO is a law created to cripple mafia members by freezing assets generated by the illegal activities they're being investigated for. There's no legat precendent of dogfighting related charges being brought forth under the RICO act...why would Vick's case?

Your missing the point. They are not going after him solely under RICO. But the indictment does establish a violation of RICO. First, RICO is punishable for up 20 years per act. There appears to be a number of acts alleged. Second, RICO allows a broader net to cast; once you have an organization, you can get all of the organization's members. Third, the two charges alleged against him are specific elements of a RICO charge ([1]gambling that is illegal and VA and [2] rackateering across state lines). Fourth, RICO can be pursued in addition to the underlying causes. Fifth, it allows them to get Vick for acts he was not specifically charged in.

They aren't going to get him solely on RICO. They are going to get him for the underlying acts they can prove. They will also get him for certain acts that he was not a part of due to RICO. When they establish the underlying acts as well as conspiracy as alleged in the indictments, its simple to also peg him for a RICO violation so that he is tagged for each time he didn't attend a fight.

The issue of assets are a red herring. He can get up to 20 for each act and fined for each act. The fines could be substantial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
megared

megared

Posted
Posted
No, I did not do that. I simply suggested that this is what I believed they would do.

If you read the indictment, you will see that they have positioned it in such a way that it will would be very easy for them to do this if they can prove gambling.

As for the 3 months, what difference does that make? Do you know that it was legal to kill your wife if you caught her in the act of adultry with another man but it was not legal to kill the man, in some parts of this country 20 odd years ago? That law was changed and three months after it was changed, a man could face the death penalty for a crime that was considered legal just 3 months earlier.

Do ya have a point?

Very easy to prove that Arthur Blank...the owner of Home Depot, worth $1.3 billion...gave him any of that money with the knowledge of his interest/involvement in dogfighting? :laugh:

The Feds can only freeze the assets related to what they're indicting you for. AND they have to indict you under RICO to enact it. If you know what the RICO Act was created for, the punishment associated with it, and it's historical usage is, why the hell are you bringing it up in context of Michael Vick?

What more would you like, for him to be locked up in Gitmo? Vick didn't invent dogfighting...He didn't get rich off it either...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
turbodiesel#44

turbodiesel#44

Posted
  • Author
Posted
It was sarcasm dude. I apologize that you have never heard a "mother" joke before. Granted mine was a bit harsh. But there was a point to the joke. If you didn't get it, I can't help you.

And stop quoting my out of context. If you include the whole statement, other readers will see the point i'm trying to make.

Time to move on.

FREE VICK....RUFF RUFF....

There is no context that would let me allow you to call my mother a dirty whore. None.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...