This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Please. Virginia is one of the harshest states as far as crime goes. But a lot of state counties (everywhere) are strapped for cash right now. And if they aren't right now, just wait 6-12 months.In addition to the cost savings, I suspect what they're doing by waiting until he's released they can make sure that the subsequent trial (and presumably conviction) won't be concurrent.
Sorry, you are thinking like a normal person, not the way Surry county prosecutor Poindexter thinks. He hasn't wanted to prosecute Vick since day 1. He's recently fired an assistant who went on the record that Poindexter did not view the Vick thing as a big deal, which is why the assistant chose to get the fed involved in the investigation, prompting the fed to take action. When the fed got Vick to admit to everything, Poindexter had every opportunity to get Vick indicted for crimes he could prosecute under Georgia Virginia law. For example, he had a chance to get a grand jury to indict for the killing of animals, which had not been prosecuted under federal law. Instead, despite Vicks confessed involvement in the killing of unfit dogs, and the discovery of dog corpses, he got an indictment for the same animal cruelty charges which had been brought by the fed, and which Vick copped to. Poindexter has already acknowledged publically the result is these Georgia Virginia charges will be thrown out eventually under a Georgia Virginia law which prohibits state prosecution for a crime already tried under federal law. Avoiding concurrent sentencing is the last thing on Poindexter's mind. Once Vick is out of his federal sentence, he has absolutely nothing to worry about from Surry county.ETA correct state.
Noyou don't own a dog do you?
Ok, well that was a mistake. I was thinking Georgia based on Atlanta, but I agree that was wrong since his house was in Virgina. Please see revised as substantively the rest is accurate.
If saving money is the main objective, then they will plea bargain with Vick, and give him a suspended sentence. No trial, no expense, and the prosecutor will look like he did something about it.Ok, well that was a mistake. I was thinking Georgia based on Atlanta, but I agree that was wrong since his house was in Virgina. Please see revised as substantively the rest is accurate.
That depends. First off, I think your 2-year timeframe is off. As I recall, Vick is getting a big reduction under some screwy pot smoker relief rule, where he can get up to 1-year of early release - an absolute crock IMHO since his offense had zero to do with drug addiction. You may personally feel that 1-year is sufficient penalty for leading a dog fighting enterprise, I know a lot of people who think it is way less than he deserves. Also consider that the federal offenses did not include the killing of animals, as that crime is regulated under state law. That said, the fed did get Vick to allocute to participation in killing of animals even though it was not an element of the crime they were charging. Presumably they did that to establish a record using which state officials could prosecute for that offense, but as mentioned Poindexter absolutely refuses to do that.
Saving money is not the objective. Not prosecuting Vick is the only objective. Again, the indictment will be tossed upon the filing of a dismissal brief, and everyone knows that, including the prosecutor.If saving money is the main objective, then they will plea bargain with Vick, and give him a suspended sentence. No trial, no expense, and the prosecutor will look like he did something about it.Ok, well that was a mistake. I was thinking Georgia based on Atlanta, but I agree that was wrong since his house was in Virgina. Please see revised as substantively the rest is accurate.:( Surry county is in Virginia, not Georgia
I highly doubt he will be tried again.I thought i remember the lawyers on the board stating that the Fed will basically tell the state to not pursue charges and that this is normal procedure.It doesn't make sense that he would get tried and convicted in Federal court only to face charges after release from prison for essentially the same crimes (not new crimes).
I think Vick's sentence may have been a bit light considering all of the things involved (illegal interstate gambling rings, etc.) but his sentance is his sentance and there is no justification for another trial (unless it were for NEW crimes untried before). Even if it were for new crimes...to delay trial simply for the conveniance of not transferring him, and to prevent concurrent service of jail time, is just plain wrong....and I have been firmly in the anti-Vick group from the beginning.
FixedI totally disagree to your comment that the Fed was opposed to state prosecutors filing additional charges, or had any agreement on that point. Specifically to the contrary, it made zero sense for the Fed to force Vick to allocute to the killing of animals to support the dog fighting federal crime; the killing of dogs is not even an element of that crime. If anything, the opposite is true: the Fed forced Vick to create evidence of the state crime in order to get a good deal on the federal crimes. Further, the reality is the only reason the fed got involved at all was because Poindexter was doing press releases saying he would not file state charges until he had more evidence, and welcomed the Fed to intervene. I don't believe anyone involved thinks Poindexter will every file state charges he believes will stick.
How about a 1 year federal sentence and no State charges? Far more likely that will be the result since he was fortunate enough to be a pot smoker in addition to a dog strangler.
Plus, don't forget he will have lost or forfeited tens of millions of dollars in past and future salary and endorsements, and probably lost his career.I love dogs and despise what Vick did. I'm okay with it if he serves state time too, but also okay with it if he doesn't, given the heavy price he will have paid either way.
Ummm, he's doing the time.
Yes, but the game can go into overtime.
This has nothing to do with his punishment. I don't have tens of millions of dollars and don't have an NFL career and I haven't killed any dogs. So by your logic I am entitled to this.
Right now? No. Why? Because I LOVE dogs, and would never subject a dog to living in an apartment - I want my dog to be able to run and enjoy a happy and fulfilled life.Grew up with dogs, never had less than two. Love Dogs.But enough is enough. Go beat your wife and get off with a lot lighter sentence than Vick got... its over the top already and people are using a combination of jealousy and schaudenfraude to rejoice in his extended pain. The guy already ruined his life, ruined his career and will spend 2 years in federal prison. Justice is not meant to exact revenge and supply you with your needed joy from other's fall from grace.Zoomanji said:
keep in mind that were on a message board where > 50% of the people would save their dog over another human. Most on here value a dog's life over a humans.
It isn't part of his official punishment from the legal system, but it most certainly does have to do with his punishment - if not for his conviction and prison sentence, he may not have lost his contract, endorsements, and playing career.As for your bolded statement, it is a faulty conclusion.
I agree with this last statement completely. The man will have served over a year in federal jail, lost almost all of his net worth, and faced some of the most prolific public scrutiny this side of Bill Clinton. The objective of the legal system should be to punish and rehabilitate the offender. I don't think it will take an additional year in state to make the message clear to Vick.Yes, I have had dogs my whole life. Diesel prices being so expensive these days, they are actually outside pulling the tiller and bushhog around my ranch to help shoulder the load. They realize they have to do their part.
Actually...it has a lot to do with it. If Joe Blow did the same things, and got the same legal punishments, he wouldn't have lost 20-40 million dollars as a result. Just because Joe Blow didn't have that money doesn't mean we shouldn't take this into account. Michael Vick has already more then paid for his (known) crimes.And FTR, I can't stand him.
I'm with Phurfur. That Mike Vick had more business/financial opportunities at stake when he broke state and federal laws doesn't mean a thing to me. I don't think state prosecutors should consider his lost wealth when deciding whether to enforce state criminal laws, and I don't think federal prosecutors should consider his lost weath when determining a sentence recommendation for federal laws. The only distinction I see is that his lost wealth makes Mike Vick much, much dumber than poor people who risk getting caught doing similar criminal acts.
Not on the state charges.
Most of the dogs I know add more value to society than most people.
Running up the score is a tried and true American tradition.
No kidding.The guy never was and never will be.
He made 3 pro bowls working with a collection of turd at WR,, was one of the biggest fan attractions in the game and while I don't know what is winning percentage is I'd bet the Falcons were a lot better than before he got there and a lot better than they are right now. To say he was a never was is just inaccurate.Andy Herron said:
I understand the reasoning, but believe the Falcons will wind up better off without him.
The short answer to your question is that would not happen in Virginia under your facts. Virgina has a double jeopardy law which provides:
I've highlighted the words 'same act' because that is where the rubber hits the road. In your example, you are clearly looking at a same act, so state and/or federal trial regarding that act would prevent the other from charging for that act. In the Vick situation, the court will no doubt be asked to decide whether commission of the underlying crime constitutes the 'same act' as the federal 'conspiracy to commit' charges. Technically, conspiracy to commit a crime [planning with others to commit, but not necessarily actually doing so] is different than the commission of the act, which is being charged under state law.
Surry county is in Virginia, not Georgia 
Surry county is in Virginia, not Georgia 
