borninblood Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 Interesting.... I'll have to see if I can find anything on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuji869 Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 For those of us who want Vick suspended here is a like to an email from the Humane Society to urge Commissioner Godell to suspended Michael Vick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrapeApe Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 I don't know the laws so those will override anything the NFL does. But, I think he should be suspended until the federal case is resolved. Maybe give the falcons cap relief of the pro-rated portion of his signing bonus and salary and let them continue to pay him. If guilty then he should get an additional suspension or ban. If not guity he can be reinstated. I think any felony charge should be handled in this way. The player is not adversely effected and can attempt to get their affairs in order. The team can move on and not have the distraction. And the NFL can save face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 Hell yeah, if Henry, Johnson, and Jones all got suspended for altercations with the law and not even necessarily convictions than the standard has been set Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killerbo Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 Did they care about the Duke players before they suspened them. NO, Vick should get at least 4 games with pay. The only reason I say with pay is becasue he is not guilty. But if he is guilty then he will probaly get kicked out the league and go to Canada in the CFL with Ricky Williams. How the **** does the Duke players case factor into this.......Freaking hypocrite.....Innocent till proven guilty.....:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatSkins27 Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 whilke he is on trial suspend him with pay and if he is exonerated let him come back etc if he is found guilty ban hijm from the NFL for life...and put him under the jail I have to believe while Heavenly Father is merciful he has a special place in hell for those who hurt children, hurt dogs and talk in movies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatSkins27 Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 Doubt it. The dogs will more then likely be put down i saw on the news that the dogs will be put down after the legal stuff but right now the 66 dogs are being given care at special places they put animals in the federal wildlife system...they have good food and proper medical care but the feds believe they are too dangerous for someone to own them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 i saw on the news that the dogs will be put down after the legal stuff but right now the 66 dogs are being given care at special places they put animals in the federal wildlife system...they have good food and proper medical care but the feds believe they are too dangerous for someone to own themEvery one of those dogs should count as a lose of life against these people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Stupid Loser Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 Vick and Pacman should fight to the death. Winner gets to keep playing in the NFL Bravo!:applause: :applause: :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laxpck Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 Slamming a dog on the ground to kill it? Cause it doesnt make you money? That sick f'er ought to be pile driven into the ground. When proven guilty, lifetime ban. Certain things HAVE to be reinforced in todays society. There are norms you HAVE to live by no matter who you are. Mr. Vick, you are fast and quick and laser arm but deep down you are a crappy crappy human being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dockeryfan Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 What a mob mentality there is with regard to Vick. Yes, he's a douchebag. Yes, he PROBABLY knew about the dogs...after all it was his Kennel. Yes, he's been indicted. But that's it. Let the system actually PROVE that he knew about this stuff and that he was involved. People get indicted all the time, and many times they get indicted to further an attorney's career. Case in point, Duke Lacrosse. If they can prove he's guilty, then he should get suspended. For Goodell to suspend him based on an indictment connected to one incident is absurd. Especially since this is the first documented incident. Don't paint me as a Vick apologist. Just let the damn legal system try him before Goodell does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 But that's it. Let the system actually PROVE that he knew about this stuff and that he was involved. People get indicted all the time, and many times they get indicted to further an attorney's career. Case in point, Duke Lacrosse. It's becoming ****ing tedious, the number of times Duke is brought up. The cases have nothing at all in-common, other than the fact that a felony is involved. May as well say Rae Carruth was found guilty, so that means Vick could also go to prison. All three of those have the same in-common. This was a screaming woman with a case pursued by an extremely overzealous Prosecutor trying to further his own cause. DNA proved she was a liar. Michael Vick is actually the owner of this house. That much cannot be denied. The Commonwealth dragged its heels to do anything about this, which was why the Feds stepped in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 Michael Vick is actually the owner of this house. That much cannot be denied. The Commonwealth dragged its heels to do anything about this, which was why the Feds stepped in. I am actually of the belief (based on what AQBCowboy has said) that this has been a bigger longer investigation the Feds have been doing An indictment in 6 weeks? Come on, the feds always take a very long time before bringing someone to indictment just sure they have it right I think the Commonwealth stepped on something bigger when they arrested Vick's cousin in the drug charge. News leaked and the feds figured they better do something quickly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 I think the Commonwealth stepped on something bigger when they arrested Vick's cousin in the drug charge. News leaked and the feds figured they better do something quickly That's always a possibility. The Feds could have been on to the dog fights, which naturally come with an element of drugs and/or gangs. The drug bust is the easy part for the Feds. If the local authorities only knew about the drugs, and made a bust thusly, the Feds could have been making plans all-along that have just recently come to fruition independent of the locals, who were doing their own heel-dragging. Unless the Feds told them to back off, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stophovr6 Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 I am actually of the belief (based on what AQBCowboy has said) that this has been a bigger longer investigation the Feds have been doingAn indictment in 6 weeks? Come on, the feds always take a very long time before bringing someone to indictment just sure they have it right I think the Commonwealth stepped on something bigger when they arrested Vick's cousin in the drug charge. News leaked and the feds figured they better do something quickly I think I read somewhere that the Feds have been monitoring the situation for about two years now. Vick's Kennel, and the house in Surrey have always been under question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dockeryfan Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 It's becoming ****ing tedious ....overzealous Prosecutor trying to further his own cause You answered your own question. Do you need a 2X4 over the head to see the parallel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loxley Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 I wholeheartedly agree with Dockeryfan here to be truthfull. What are you guys? A freaking lynch mob? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 You answered your own question. Do you need a 2X4 over the head to see the parallel? There was nothing overzealous about the Vick case. The Commonwealth dragged its heels like my dog drags his ass on the carpet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passizle Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 Cause Pacman, Tank, and Johnson were suspended for REPEATED, and not just 1 or two or three, but 6 7 8 9 10 11 times they had run-ins with the law. Furthermore, in the case of Pacman and Tank, people are either dead or seriously injured because of their activities. Vick had repeated run ins. Wasnt it him who got arredted or ticketed for getting caught at the airport with pot in his luggage? He had some other stuff too. I cant remember it right now. Arent those dogs dead too? I know they are animals and murdering an animal is different than murdering a human, but come on. Killing is killing either way. It just shows a lack of respect for life in general when you commit acts like that. IMO, they should have waited on the Pacman thing too. Innocent until proven guilty. Remember? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABQCOWBOY Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 You answered your own question. Do you need a 2X4 over the head to see the parallel? It has been covered in these threads already but as a side note, Federal Prosecuters and State Prosecuters are very different. State guys are elected so there are times when there reach exceeds there grasp, so to speak. It is not uncommen for a State Prosecution team or State DA to indict and then conduct investigations to see what can be found. With the Federal guys, they don't do this. They don't answer to a constituancy because there not elected, there appointed. There all about getting convictions on high profile cases. They don't indite and then try to make a case. They investigate extensively, compile evidence and then turn it over to there superiors to see if they believe they can get a conviction. Based on this, indictments are then handed down and in this way, they try to insure the case is already won before it ever goes to trial. This is why the conviction rate is so extrodinarily high. They don't screw it up after the fact because it's already been tried internally. All the I's are dotted and all the T's are crossed in advance, if you will. I'm not saying Vick will be found guilty but I am saying that there is little comparisons to Duke and the Vick case that will be headed to the Grand Jury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wskin44 Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 Vick should be allowed to play but if he underperforms in any game he should be electrocuted on the fifty yardline after the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beer is Food Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 YES- Vick should be suspended and... To all you "don't rush to judgement, innocent until proven guilty, look at Duke" guys: All absurd arguments. Vick is under federal indictment for multiple serious felonies. Included in this indictment are gambling charges. The league has every right to suspend Vick prior to conviction, but may choose not to. It's the wrong choice. By not acting- the league is tacitly giving preferential treatment to Vick and tarnishing the NFL's image. The reason this is the case, is because they have the power and precedent to suspend vick. There are multiple charges and illegal gambling is included in the charge. By not suspending Vick, the commish is in essence saying that the league doesn't think Vick's Federal Indictment is worthy of receiving the full force of his office. As far as "Rushing to judgement" goes- Vick will get his day in court. The fact that he has been federally indicted is enough for any private or public company for that matter, to suspend an employee. Most companies would just fire you. If your employer found out that you were under Federal Idictment, would you not be fired or suspended? Innocent until proven guilty is the measurement used to convict. Civil matters in court are held to a lesser standard- Preponderance of the evidence. And, as far outside of a court room- Business makes it's own decisions and public opinion is for each of us to decide. So why would the NFL be rushing to judgement if they suspend Vick? They don't have to use the same criteria a courtroom does for an employee. And, ask yourself... would you invite a person charged with a violent felony to your home or work? Would you be "rushing to judgement" if you said no- because a court of law hasn't determined if he's been proven guilty? C'mon! As far as, Duke goes. PLEASE! Just because there has been one injustice doesn't mean you have to throw out the entire system. And, in fact, there wasn't an injustice because the Duke players were proven innocent and let off in the end. The criminal Lawyer was punished. Did the players suffer in public opinion? YES! Was it wrong for the public to judge these guys negativley? NO! It was common sense based on experience. And, with the Duke case, I think there were many people besides myself who were more shocked that the case went as far as it did. If the NFL decides it should spot light an accused felon as one of their "stars", so be it. I just hope the fans and more importantly the sponsers, show gumption enough to make the so called "get tough" commish suffer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Day Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 I work for the state of wv and when a person is indicted they are suspended indefinitely pending the outcome of their trial.i think this would be a safe and classy move for both the falcons and nfl.... This is how most government works. For instance I was a MP in the army and in the military if you are ACCUSED of any crime (outside of speeding and other minor offenses) you are immediately removed from duty, if you have a security clearance and that clearance is required for your assignment. As a civilian employee of the government most (if not all employees) have some level of clearance that once again gets pulled if you are indicted or accussed of a major or federal crime. It would be most prudent for the FALCONS to suspend MV immediately with pay. He is going to turn their training camp and all team activities into circuses as the press and the animal rights groups will be in attendance. They need to move on as a team as if he is being fitted with his orange jumpsuit as we speak. They owe it too their fans to put the best product on the field, and they can not do it with MV at QB either because of the distractions he will cause or the fact that he could be here literally today and gone tommorrow, or because his presence on the roster precludes the falcons from obtaining and bringing up to speed another QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABQCOWBOY Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 This is how most government works. For instance I was a MP in the army and in the military if you are ACCUSED of any crime (outside of speeding and other minor offenses) you are immediately removed from duty, if you have a security clearance and that clearance is required for your assignment. As a civilian employee of the government most (if not all employees) have some level of clearance that once again gets pulled if you are indicted or accussed of a major or federal crime. It would be most prudent for the FALCONS to suspend MV immediately with pay. He is going to turn their training camp and all team activities into circuses as the press and the animal rights groups will be in attendance. They need to move on as a team as if he is being fitted with his orange jumpsuit as we speak. They owe it too their fans to put the best product on the field, and they can not do it with MV at QB either because of the distractions he will cause or the fact that he could be here literally today and gone tommorrow, or because his presence on the roster precludes the falcons from obtaining and bringing up to speed another QB. The question the public will ask is, "If it were an employee at one or Arther Blanks Wallmarts, what would happen?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megared Posted July 19, 2007 Share Posted July 19, 2007 This is how most government works. For instance I was a MP in the army and in the military if you are ACCUSED of any crime (outside of speeding and other minor offenses) you are immediately removed from duty, if you have a security clearance and that clearance is required for your assignment. As a civilian employee of the government most (if not all employees) have some level of clearance that once again gets pulled if you are indicted or accussed of a major or federal crime. It would be most prudent for the FALCONS to suspend MV immediately with pay. He is going to turn their training camp and all team activities into circuses as the press and the animal rights groups will be in attendance. They need to move on as a team as if he is being fitted with his orange jumpsuit as we speak. They owe it too their fans to put the best product on the field, and they can not do it with MV at QB either because of the distractions he will cause or the fact that he could be here literally today and gone tommorrow, or because his presence on the roster precludes the falcons from obtaining and bringing up to speed another QB. Why don't we make all NFL players pass a top secret security clearance as well? They play football...a game for the public's entertainment. No, they shouldn't be subject to the same background scrutiny as government employees...jeez. Whatever Blank decides to do is his decision. I doubt he wants to see himself in a situation like the Bears (jumping to conclusions), especially with their franchise player. By the end of this whole thing, what's to say he isn't offered a deal, takes it, and pleads guilty to something lesser? I would've hate to think that Goodell could've suspended Sean Taylor for like 2 years because of the seriousness of his charges (3 felonies worth up to 46 years)...when he only ended up pleading guilty to a misdemeanor battery charge when it was all said & done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.