Vick indicted

[JasonEvans]

Apparently Vick has been indicted on following charges…
- Transporting animals across state lines for the purpose of fighting
- Sponsoring dog fights

So, even though "innoncent until proven guilty" is a fundamental part of our justice system, it is not a part of the NFL. These charges bring shame upon Vick, the Falcons, and the entire NFL. As a result, I fully expect Vick to get a suspension from the commish.

How long will it be? I am guessing 4 games.

-Jason "hmmm, should the Falcons cut him, take a massive cap hit this season, and just move on with someone else? Probably a terrible idea but I hate Vick right now" Evans

[captmojo]

Careful. Hate him after he's convicted.

[ChrisP]

With the LAX case still very fresh in my mind, I'm trying REALLY hard to give Mike Vick the benefit of the doubt. While I certainly don't admire it, I can tolerate most of the other stupid things he's done, but as a huge animal lover, I can't look the other way here. I was reading some other board the other day (might have been ESPN, I can't recall) and some moron on there was trying to compare dog fighting to boxing and UFC fighting and that kind of thing. I can't believe some people cannot or will not see the distinction between two WILLING human participants stepping into a ring and dog fighting. Perhaps those idiots should also be thrown into the dog ring. Might help filter out the old gene pool.

Anyway...if - notice I'm saying IF - Vick is connected to dog fighting, I hope he gets the maximum possible sentence available. And if he does somehow manage to get out of it and play football again, I sincerely hope he breaks his neck and is paralyzed for the rest of his life. I mean that. In case you can't tell, I have ZERO tolerance for people that are cruel to animals. Payback's a B***CH Mike!

[dkbaseball]

Sounds lenient to me. I think the league should do whatever it can to stamp out this culture, which is far more unsettling than players getting their own dumb arses into fights in bars. At least a one year suspension upon conviction or the commish's office being convinced he's guilty, and if Vick becomes an unwanted pariah in the league and his career is torpedoed...that's fine with me. He's made plenty of money, and if there was ever a justifiable occasion for ruining an individual's career in order to set an example, this is it.

[billybreen]

The NFL should suspend him indefinitely until the legal proceedings complete. I think that's the right thing to do for several reasons:

1) He was indicted on felony charges
2) The evidence presented points to abhorrent, disgusting crimes
3) Other NFL players have made light of the situation, so the NFL needs to take a hard stance to show zero tolerance
4) Mike Vick is a star. Not giving him a suspension that mirrors the severity of Pacman's may look like favoritism.

If the allegations are proven, I won't be happy until Vick and the other 3 do as much time as the law allows for these crimes.

Now, some have pointed to the Duke case as an example of overreaction. I don't expect the Falcons to have their season canceled, the coach to be fired, or for the media to explode around this story in analogous ways. This case doesn't have all the race and privilege implications that made the Duke situation such a tangled mess. But these are very serious allegations, a significant amount of evidence, and a federal indictment.

The NFL has taken the stance that their athletes need to be held to a higher standard since they are role models in the community. If Vick is innocent, he should at least have given more attention to what people were doing on his property and in his name. That's the burden of being a superstar millionaire athlete in the nation's most popular sport.

[captmojo]

The NFL should suspend him indefinitely until the legal proceedings complete. I think that's the right thing to do for several reasons:

1) He was indicted on felony charges
2) The evidence presented points to abhorrent, disgusting crimes
3) Other NFL players have made light of the situation, so the NFL needs to take a hard stance to show zero tolerance
4) Mike Vick is a star. Not giving him a suspension that mirrors the severity of Pacman's may look like favoritism.

If the allegations are proven, I won't be happy until Vick and the other 3 do as much time as the law allows for these crimes.

Now, some have pointed to the Duke case as an example of overreaction. I don't expect the Falcons to have their season canceled, the coach to be fired, or for the media to explode around this story in analogous ways. This case doesn't have all the race and privilege implications that made the Duke situation such a tangled mess. But these are very serious allegations, a significant amount of evidence, and a federal indictment.

The NFL has taken the stance that their athletes need to be held to a higher standard since they are role models in the community. If Vick is innocent, he should at least have given more attention to what people were doing on his property and in his name. That's the burden of being a superstar millionaire athlete in the nation's most popular sport.

I agree with this assessment only I would add that the NFL assist with any legal investigations and all due speed to see this to trial.

[billybreen]

I agree with this assessment only I would add that the NFL assist with any legal investigations and all due speed to see this to trial.

Absolutely. They have a tricky line to walk because they need to show no bias (in either direction) but should expedite proceedings to whatever extent possible. Given the commish's actions to this point, I think he can handle this situation well.

[hurleyfor3]

I think I'll just award the nfl a one-year suspension from my teevee. I'm too busy traveling in September and October (see photographs from other thread) to turn it on much anyway.

[rthomas]

What year IS this?

[billybreen]

In the interest of disclosure, I donate frequently to the Humane Society and participated in campaigns to help get animal fighting elevated to federal felony status. As much as it disgusts me to read the details of these allegations (I've pretty much forced myself to stop), I only hope that increased awareness of the crime will help give it the social stigma it deserves.

"Dog fighting" makes light of it. What really happens is nothing less than animal torture and killing.

[dkbaseball]

What really happens is nothing less than animal torture and killing.

Did anybody post on here about the findings a week or so ago of the various ways they offed dogs at Vick's place who lost the fight but managed to survive? Really shocking. This is one of the biggest malignancies in American life today. It really came home to me about a year ago when a young college girl, who had just moved to Madison, WI the day before, took her dachsund outside and it was killed by a pit bull trained for fighting. The UW football player who owned the pit bull didn't seem to think it was any big deal.

This culture needs to be eradicated, and it can be. If these characters think they are going to jail they will stop, because catching them shouldn't be that hard. The NFL should do whatever it can to help stigmatize this behavior, which is taking thuggery to a whole new level.

[mapei]

This case doesn't have all the race and privilege implications that made the Duke situation such a tangled mess.

It doesn't?

[billybreen]

It doesn't?

It's not rich white kids allegedly raping an underprivileged African American woman. That has a salacious taste to it that this doesn't.

In fact, there is no race angle here aside from the fact that a rich African American man was charged. Is that what you are referring to? I don't see how that compares.

[AtlBluRew]

Let's make Nifongs fight each other instead!

[hurleyfor3]

It's not rich white kids allegedly raping an underprivileged African American woman. That has a salacious taste to it that this doesn't.

In fact, there is no race angle here aside from the fact that a rich African American man was charged. Is that what you are referring to? I don't see how that compares.

There most certainly are rich white team owners and league brass who want to make sure rich white corporate advertisers, teevee execs and season ticket holders continue to approve of the nfl enough to keep spending money on it.

[sportsgirl4]

As a dog lover, hearing some of the details of some of the things he is accused of doing made me sick to my stomach.

[billybreen]

There most certainly are rich white team owners and league brass who want to make sure rich white corporate advertisers, teevee execs and season ticket holders continue to approve of the nfl enough to keep spending money on it.

The issues of race and class divisions between ownership and players are at best ancillary. I didn't hear a huge racial outcry about Pacman's suspension (though I wasn't paying that much attention), and I think that is more analogous.

Cases like Kobe's and the Lax situation involved accused and alleged victims of different races, with class differences thrown in. That makes for a very different story. I still fail to see how this is comparable.

[4decadedukie]

Among my many deficiencies, I tend to be too quickly judgmental. However, our recent Lacrosse Hoax truly served as a strong re-indoctrination not to conclude precipitously and to view media reports with skepticism. Nevertheless, WTOP (DC’s all news station) reported this morning some truly horrible examples animal cruelty on Vick’s Virginia farm. If these allegations are proven through the legal system – and that’s “big if” – Vick’s conduct warrants serious NFL sanctions (beyond any legal penalties invoked). One has to wonder what type of human being would allow such maliciousness.

The WTOP report can be found at: http://www.wtop.com/?nid=119&sid=1191923.

[Bluedawg]

The NFL should suspend him indefinitely until the legal proceedings complete. I think that's the right thing to do for several reasons:

1) He was indicted on felony charges
2) The evidence presented points to abhorrent, disgusting crimes
3) Other NFL players have made light of the situation, so the NFL needs to take a hard stance to show zero tolerance
4) Mike Vick is a star. Not giving him a suspension that mirrors the severity of Pacman's may look like favoritism.

1) A prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich so that means nothing. Ask the duke guys
2) But he has not been proven guilty of those crimes.
3) Use him as an example…regardless of the truth.
4) So you use his stardom against him; guilty forever

[BlueDiablo]

1) A prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich so that means nothing. Ask the duke guys
2) But he has not been proven guilty of those crimes.
3) Use him as an example…regardless of the truth.
4) So you use his stardom against him; guilty forever

1) Contrary to popular belief, no ham sandwiches have actually been indicted. (In seriousness, I take federal indictments more seriously than state court indictments because I think federal prosecutors generally have more credibility and resources.)
2) The NFL is not bound by the same standards as the criminal justice system. The prosecutors will need to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury of twelve. The NFL need only conclude that there are enough facts to demonstrate that Vick's conduct has brought the league into disrepute. (I'm not familiar with the exact language of the character provision from the collective bargaining agreement, but my understanding is that it's fairly broad.)
3) I think it's pretty clear by now that some pretty heinous things were going on (from the perspective of the NFL's consumers, at least) and that Vick is connected to those things, at a minimum through owning the property and raising the dogs.
4) Star treatment goes both ways. Again, whether the prosecutors prove Vick's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to the crimes charged in the indictment is almost collateral from the NFL's point of view.