Vick accepts plea deal (1 Viewer)

[David Yudkin]

Per ESPN, NFL reviewing things, requested Falcons to not take any actions but NFL is pissed Vick lied.

Also said that details of the agreement are not going to be made public so all those outlets reporting the amount of time plead to are just speculating.Question for legal types. If you go into court and plead not guilty, then change your plea, why do they not tack on an extra charge of perjury?

Because he could potnetially be pleaded to a fraction of the total charges.

 

[TDavi118]

So it's official, he'll soon be converted from a quarterback to a wide receiver.

I'd say he'll be someone's Tight...........End.

 

[StrikeS2k]

I'm sure I'm in the minority but I think if Vick shows genuine contrition at the time of his release, many people will be willing to forgive him. If that happens he would still be a cash cow in terms of jerseys, etc, if he returned in 2-3 years.

You're in the minority because noone would believe him. If he had owned up right when it happened instead of lieing for the least 4 months maybe. But people will believe him now as much as people believe Pete Rose and O.J.

 

[Sopranos]

He will be lucky to play by 2010 if at all. That being the case i would have gambled and gone to trial myself. There was a small chance he could get off... It happens. He pretty much ended his playing days the way he went IMO.. He could have still been out in 3-5 going to trial..That way he could still claim he was not guilty. Either way he is done. Untill today i thought he would play again but if he serves more than 12 months and then get 1 year suspention then thats 2010..

 

[thehornet]

i misspoke regarding the 5th amendment. i'm pretty rusty.

double jeopardy does not attach in separate federal and state cases, so you're right that it's possible that a state case will pop up.

in my experience, which was in overlapping fed/state drug cases, this never happens.

but you are right that it could.

Cruelty to animals is the charge Virginia has already said they would persure and one the feds are not.

this would be a blatant violation of the 5th Amendment. it's not going to happen. i've seen stranger things, but my opinion is that the dog fighting cases against Mike Vick are completely over on the day he is sentenced.

Please elaborate.This wont be about the dog fighting, but about the care of the dogs.

This is the last I am going to say about this topic, but here goes:Vick is being charge by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT on conspiracy and operating a dogfighting ring. These are VERY SERIOUS charges that he is going to prison for violating. The state charges will never be formally brought to court and the rest is history.

If you still are having a hard time believing, then answer these 2 questions:

Do you really think the state is gonna try to stick a little cruelty to animal charge on him after all of this?? Do you really think that the Federal and State government care about the animal rights activist and PETA groups' feelings?

A little cruelty This is NOT little in Virginia. Up to 5 years in prison for each animal. How many animals?

The state DA has stated they already plan on going after Vick, after they get the evidence the Feds are currently using.

Please do not say it anymore. ty

Listen Einstein, A special law prohibits unmarried women from parachuting on Sunday or she shall risk arrest, fine, and/or jailing. Yes, this is an actual law in Florida.

I wonder how many women have actually gone to prison for it?

My point is not that Animal Cruelty is a minor, insignificant law. I personally love animals and think he should be punished in some way for the cruelty part to the dogs (a fine). But wake up, he's looking at 3 years of Federal prison time. There is absolutely NO chance in hell they charge him with a significantly lesser state charge for glorification purposes.

I can't believe I actually had to explain this to you.

 

[dapunisher]

The Mean Machine definitely will be favored now over the guards.

 

[Deranged Hermit]

Not sure is this has been mentioned, but Blank has to be doing backflips. Now they can use the 'personal conduct clause' and void his deal. Pretty sure that voids the remainder of his signing bonus as well.

 

[sheckiec]

He'll be a Raider in 2009.

 

[cstu]

I wonder how fellow inmates view a dogfighting ringleader.Good thing a lot of these guys probably spent their Sundays (if allowed) watching him.

I'm sure they're all PETA members.

 

[suchislife]

He'll be a Raider in 2009.

And promptly suspended until 2010.

 

[shadow2k]

He will be lucky to play by 2010 if at all. That being the case i would have gambled and gone to trial myself. There was a small chance he could get off... It happens. He pretty much ended his playing days the way he went IMO.. He could have still been out in 3-5 going to trial..That way he could still claim he was not guilty. Either way he is done. Untill today i thought he would play again but if he serves more than 12 months and then get 1 year suspention then thats 2010..

He would have faced additional charges today had he not pleaded guilty. That's why it happened today. The charges they were going to bring against him, and this is speculation, would have carried sentences far, far greater than what he faces by pleading guilty. We're talking 20-30yrs on top of the current charges.It wasn't just about whether he thought he could beat the current charges, it was avoiding additional charges as well.Either way, I don't see any chance he ever plays in the NFL again. You really think any NFL team wants a bunch of PETA members picketing outside their offices/stadiums at every game? PR Nightmare, no way. He's done, I don't care how soon he gets out of jail.You guys can bring up things like Ray Lewis. But in our society...well, people love their dogs.

 

[faulkfan]

I loved my dogs growing up and for the life of me I can't imagine finding joy or entertainment from watching two of them try and kill each other. I also can't fathom torturing them to death and the mere thought sickens me physically.

However, when Vick serves his time and pays the debt to society as prescribed by a federal judge, then I will be nearly as angry if PETA shows up and pickets if he signs with another team in 2010. Once he has met the requirements set up by our legal system then he has a right to make a living in the NFL or CFL or AFL or as a sales rep for Petco or working the drive up at McDonalds. I'm not a Vick supporter, but PETA seems to have lost perspective in this case and I personally believe that is has less to do with sympathy for the dogs that suffered and more to do with their desire for the limelight.

 

[Block]

I'm sure I'm in the minority but I think if Vick shows genuine contrition at the time of his release, many people will be willing to forgive him. If that happens he would still be a cash cow in terms of jerseys, etc, if he returned in 2-3 years.

You're in the minority because noone would believe him. If he had owned up right when it happened instead of lieing for the least 4 months maybe. But people will believe him now as much as people believe Pete Rose and O.J.

Time changes minds...in 2-3 years people will be much more willing to forgive Vick than they are now.

 

[suchislife]

So it's official, he'll soon be converted from a quarterback to a wide receiver.

I'd say he'll be someone's Tight...........End.

He would then be converted to WR after some inmates show him exactly what a rape stand is used for.

 

[Sweat Hog]

2. PR nightmare

I think some people are overestimating how much the average NFL customer will care about this in a couple years.

I'm not saying it's right but he may as well have been molesting kids in the eyes of a large portion of our society. Not likely people will forget or forgive.This is something the vast majority of people just cannot even relate to as they could with DUI or even domestic violence.I mean, I know I've driven buzzed before and regretted it. I've never hit my wife but could I put myself in the shoes of someone who lost their temper once and did something stupid? Yah, probably.Problem is Vick has been involved in this to one degree or another since at least 2000. Clearly he knew it was wrong/illegal/immoral in most people's eyes and yet he not only participated in it, he immersed himself in an ongoing, illegal dirty sub culture operating in the shadows that was centered around the despicably cruel treatment of animals.And if by off chance there is an "out of sight, out of mind" factor that sets in, you know the crazies at PETA will rehash it all over again anytime he hits the headlines when he's released and/or applying for reinstatement.

 

[dgreen]

I'm sure I'm in the minority but I think if Vick shows genuine contrition at the time of his release, many people will be willing to forgive him. If that happens he would still be a cash cow in terms of jerseys, etc, if he returned in 2-3 years.

You're in the minority because noone would believe him. If he had owned up right when it happened instead of lieing for the least 4 months maybe. But people will believe him now as much as people believe Pete Rose and O.J.

Time changes minds...in 2-3 years people will be much more willing to forgive Vick than they are now.

Plus, between now and then, 1000 other people will have done 1000 other bad things for us to focus on.This, like everything else, will go away.

 

[cstu]

If he spends more than 12 months in jail, call it a career...

If he's out by spring 2009 I think he'll end up on someone's roster, at least as a backup.A lot of people are going to feel that he paid for what he did and will be willing to give him another chance. People have done much worse and have been forgiven so I don't see why it won't happen in Vick's case.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

i misspoke regarding the 5th amendment. i'm pretty rusty.

double jeopardy does not attach in separate federal and state cases, so you're right that it's possible that a state case will pop up.

in my experience, which was in overlapping fed/state drug cases, this never happens.

but you are right that it could.

Cruelty to animals is the charge Virginia has already said they would persure and one the feds are not.

this would be a blatant violation of the 5th Amendment. it's not going to happen. i've seen stranger things, but my opinion is that the dog fighting cases against Mike Vick are completely over on the day he is sentenced.

Please elaborate.This wont be about the dog fighting, but about the care of the dogs.

This is the last I am going to say about this topic, but here goes:Vick is being charge by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT on conspiracy and operating a dogfighting ring. These are VERY SERIOUS charges that he is going to prison for violating. The state charges will never be formally brought to court and the rest is history.

If you still are having a hard time believing, then answer these 2 questions:

Do you really think the state is gonna try to stick a little cruelty to animal charge on him after all of this?? Do you really think that the Federal and State government care about the animal rights activist and PETA groups' feelings?

A little cruelty This is NOT little in Virginia. Up to 5 years in prison for each animal. How many animals?

The state DA has stated they already plan on going after Vick, after they get the evidence the Feds are currently using.

Please do not say it anymore. ty

Listen Einstein, A special law prohibits unmarried women from parachuting on Sunday or she shall risk arrest, fine, and/or jailing. Yes, this is an actual law in Florida.

I wonder how many women have actually gone to prison for it?

My point is not that Animal Cruelty is a minor, insignificant law. I personally love animals and think he should be punished in some way for the cruelty part to the dogs (a fine). But wake up, he's looking at 3 years of Federal prison time. There is absolutely NO chance in hell they charge him with a significantly lesser state charge for glorification purposes.

I can't believe I actually had to explain this to you.

Nice strawman.Nice personal attack.

Some find it not so insignificant. Like the state of Virginia who already stated their intentions.

5 years for each animal x (10, 20 , 30) animals certainly isnt insignificant despite your attempt to downplay it.

thehornet - "This is the last I am going to say about this topic,"

 

[Sweat Hog]

And Leonard Little killed somebody and got a reprieve.Although that was with a different sheriff in town (NFL commish: Tags vs. Goodell

This again. Little didn't electrocute, drown, hang or beat a person to death. He drove drunk and UNINTENTIONALLY caused an accident and someone died. Not murder, homicide. Malice and intent are lacking in the Little case.

 

[suchislife]

If he spends more than 12 months in jail, call it a career...

If he's out by spring 2009 I think he'll end up on someone's roster, at least as a backup.A lot of people are going to feel that he paid for what he did and will be willing to give him another chance. People have done much worse and have been forgiven so I don't see why it won't happen in Vick's case.

So you're thinking he won't be suspended by the league after his release from prison? A one year suspension is certainly reasonable to expect. Do you think he'll still have what it takes to play in the NFL after 3 1/2 years away from the game?

 

[Block]

And Leonard Little killed somebody and got a reprieve.Although that was with a different sheriff in town (NFL commish: Tags vs. Goodell

This again. Little didn't electrocute, drown, hang or beat a person to death. He drove drunk and UNINTENTIONALLY caused an accident and someone died. Not murder, homicide. Malice and intent are lacking in the Little case.

Not really. By getting into a car and willfully driving under the influence he showed a serious lack of regard for the safety and well-being of other motorists and pedestrians.

 

[OU#1]

"Michael Con-Vick" aka MCV

 

[BigSteelThrill]

And Leonard Little killed somebody and got a reprieve.Although that was with a different sheriff in town (NFL commish: Tags vs. Goodell

This again. Little didn't electrocute, drown, hang or beat a person to death. He drove drunk and UNINTENTIONALLY caused an accident and someone died. Not murder, homicide. Malice and intent are lacking in the Little case.

Not really. By getting into a car and willfully driving under the influence he showed a serious lack of regard for the safety and well-being of other motorists and pedestrians.

Not comparable.That was a different time in the NFL.The decision with Little was a mistake... they want to stop making these mistakes with the players. If Little did that now, it would likely have a very different outcome.

 

[guderian]

As a parent this sickens me. We hate the Falcons in our household, but if I were a Falcons fan I can't imagine buying jersey's for my son, taking him to games and generally getting him excited about an exciting hometown player only to have to explain to him later on that the guy murdered dogs.

I hope Goodell does the right thing and permanently ban him from the NFL with no option for re-instatement. Players need to know that if they screw up, they'll lose it all.

 

[tulane]

Vick was a crappy QB anyway. Any time Joey Harrington comes in and people say he is an improvement over the previous QB, you gotta wonder.

The guy has top be considered radioactive by any possible future nfl team. What a PR nightmare he would be.

 

[Sweat Hog]

And Leonard Little killed somebody and got a reprieve.Although that was with a different sheriff in town (NFL commish: Tags vs. Goodell

This again. Little didn't electrocute, drown, hang or beat a person to death. He drove drunk and UNINTENTIONALLY caused an accident and someone died. Not murder, homicide. Malice and intent are lacking in the Little case.

Not really. By getting into a car and willfully driving under the influence he showed a serious lack of regard for the safety and well-being of other motorists and pedestrians.

Yah really - Did Little intend to kill somebody with his car? Uh, no. Willful disregard is not intent - unless you're talking about his intent to drive a car. His goal was probably getting home - or to the next bar - NOT to kill someone.His disregard for safety of others is why it was a crime and not just an accident but there was no malice involved.DUI is understandable and forgiveable by a large section of society. Cruelty to animals will not be met with the same open arms of forgiveness.

 

[tulane]

And Leonard Little killed somebody and got a reprieve.Although that was with a different sheriff in town (NFL commish: Tags vs. Goodell

This again. Little didn't electrocute, drown, hang or beat a person to death. He drove drunk and UNINTENTIONALLY caused an accident and someone died. Not murder, homicide. Malice and intent are lacking in the Little case.

Not really. By getting into a car and willfully driving under the influence he showed a serious lack of regard for the safety and well-being of other motorists and pedestrians.

Yah really - Did Little intend to kill somebody with his car? Uh, no. Willful disregard is not intent - unless you're talking about his intent to drive a car. His goal was probably getting home - or to the next bar - NOT to kill someone.His disregard for safety of others is why it was a crime and not just an accident but there was no malice involved.DUI is understandable and forgiveable by a large section of society. Cruelty to animals will not be met with the same open arms of forgiveness.

Maybe Vick will say he was drunk when he did it, and then he will just end up in some rehab center for a couple of weeks. He was trying to give the dogs a drink of water, but accidentally drowned them.Sorry - he is a scumbag. I can't wait for the pictures of the guilty ******* to be released. I don't think he would have made a plea without real evidence.

 

[dgreen]

Vick was a crappy QB anyway. Any time Joey Harrington comes in and people say he is an improvement over the previous QB, you gotta wonder.

I agree. You gotta wonder about someone who says Harrington is better than Vick.

 

[PatsFanCT]

And Leonard Little killed somebody and got a reprieve.Although that was with a different sheriff in town (NFL commish: Tags vs. Goodell

This again. Little didn't electrocute, drown, hang or beat a person to death. He drove drunk and UNINTENTIONALLY caused an accident and someone died. Not murder, homicide. Malice and intent are lacking in the Little case.

Not really. By getting into a car and willfully driving under the influence he showed a serious lack of regard for the safety and well-being of other motorists and pedestrians.

Yah really - Did Little intend to kill somebody with his car? Uh, no. Willful disregard is not intent - unless you're talking about his intent to drive a car. His goal was probably getting home - or to the next bar - NOT to kill someone.His disregard for safety of others is why it was a crime and not just an accident but there was no malice involved.DUI is understandable and forgiveable by a large section of society. Cruelty to animals will not be met with the same open arms of forgiveness.

Killing of a human being and killing a dog, even eight of them, are not comparable in the least.Tell me, if you had to do one or the other, even using the poor judgment drunk theory, which would you choose?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Killing of a human being and killing a dog, even eight of them, are not comparable in the least.Tell me, if you had to do one or the other, even using the poor judgment drunk theory, which would you choose?

Thats NOT the question.-- Knowingly killing many dogs.-- Or knowingly driving drunk. And all the risks associated with it.Which do you choose to do?

 

[Block]

And Leonard Little killed somebody and got a reprieve.Although that was with a different sheriff in town (NFL commish: Tags vs. Goodell

This again. Little didn't electrocute, drown, hang or beat a person to death. He drove drunk and UNINTENTIONALLY caused an accident and someone died. Not murder, homicide. Malice and intent are lacking in the Little case.

Not really. By getting into a car and willfully driving under the influence he showed a serious lack of regard for the safety and well-being of other motorists and pedestrians.

Yah really - Did Little intend to kill somebody with his car? Uh, no. Willful disregard is not intent - unless you're talking about his intent to drive a car. His goal was probably getting home - or to the next bar - NOT to kill someone.His disregard for safety of others is why it was a crime and not just an accident but there was no malice involved.DUI is understandable and forgiveable by a large section of society. Cruelty to animals will not be met with the same open arms of forgiveness.

Little's actions show that he didn't care if he killed anyone. That's malice.Vick killed dogs, but the key is they are dogs. They don't have rights. I have much more sympathy for Vick than I do for Little or many other felons. That being said, he needs to show contrition to be forgiven.

 

[Block]

Killing of a human being and killing a dog, even eight of them, are not comparable in the least.Tell me, if you had to do one or the other, even using the poor judgment drunk theory, which would you choose?

Thats NOT the question.-- Knowingly killing many dogs.-- Or knowingly driving drunk. And all the risks associated with it.Which do you choose to do?

I would choose knowingly killing many dogs. It's not as bad.

 

[dgreen]

Killing of a human being and killing a dog, even eight of them, are not comparable in the least.Tell me, if you had to do one or the other, even using the poor judgment drunk theory, which would you choose?

Thats NOT the question.-- Knowingly killing many dogs.-- Or knowingly driving drunk. And all the risks associated with it.Which do you choose to do?

I'd kill the dogs.

 

[tietzjd]

Killing of a human being and killing a dog, even eight of them, are not comparable in the least.Tell me, if you had to do one or the other, even using the poor judgment drunk theory, which would you choose?

Thats NOT the question.-- Knowingly killing many dogs.-- Or knowingly driving drunk. And all the risks associated with it.Which do you choose to do?

I'd kill the dogs.

I am willing to bet you or anyone else that even answers this question has driven drunk but as not killed a dog.

 

[tulane]

I am willing to bet you or anyone else that even answers this question has driven drunk but as not killed a dog.

But - If you drove drunk and killed a dog, you would feel bad, but likely not be prosecuted. Let's all just agree that people are more important than dogs. I think that is pretty obvious.

I think the point here is that some people view that some felons are not being treated as fairly as others. Tough crap. They are both felons. When you commit a felony, be prepared for some "unfair things" to be headed your way and quit whining. Is it all fair. No. Can it ever be "made fair?" No.

 

[Sopranos]

He will be lucky to play by 2010 if at all. That being the case i would have gambled and gone to trial myself. There was a small chance he could get off... It happens. He pretty much ended his playing days the way he went IMO.. He could have still been out in 3-5 going to trial..That way he could still claim he was not guilty. Either way he is done. Untill today i thought he would play again but if he serves more than 12 months and then get 1 year suspention then thats 2010..

He would have faced additional charges today had he not pleaded guilty. That's why it happened today. The charges they were going to bring against him, and this is speculation, would have carried sentences far, far greater than what he faces by pleading guilty. We're talking 20-30yrs on top of the current charges.It wasn't just about whether he thought he could beat the current charges, it was avoiding additional charges as well.Either way, I don't see any chance he ever plays in the NFL again. You really think any NFL team wants a bunch of PETA members picketing outside their offices/stadiums at every game? PR Nightmare, no way. He's done, I don't care how soon he gets out of jail.You guys can bring up things like Ray Lewis. But in our society...well, people love their dogs.

I think we agree. I didnt say Ray Lewis.. Anyway a crime is a crime. I like dogs but i could care less what he did. If it jail time its jail time.. My point is with what he settled for is nothing that really opens the door to play again. If he wanted to ever play again i would have gambled. He could still face 5+ years. The judge doesnt have to honor the ageement. What would have happend if OJ settled? My point is Vick ended his career today. No other way to look at it. He wont make it on a normal income when he gets out..

 

[Doug B]

Killing of a human being and killing a dog, even eight of them, are not comparable in the least.Tell me, if you had to do one or the other, even using the poor judgment drunk theory, which would you choose?

People need to keep framing it like this. It's a gigantic strawman, and has nothing to do with anything. Just because someone "got away" with "killing a person" doesn't mean that everyone that kills dogs should get a pass. Michael Vick broke the law -- do you think his defense team can get away with "What about Leonard Little?" Come on.But ... if you want an opinion: wanton killing of dogs is worse than vehicular homicide to me. Not at all because of the value of the lives lost , but because of the intentions of the perpetrators. Your mileage may vary.

 

[redman]

Cruelty to animals is the charge Virginia has already said they would persure and one the feds are not.

this would be a blatant violation of the 5th Amendment. it's not going to happen. i've seen stranger things, but my opinion is that the dog fighting cases against Mike Vick are completely over on the day he is sentenced.

Incorrect.

 

[Sopranos]

I am willing to bet you or anyone else that even answers this question has driven drunk but as not killed a dog.

But - If you drove drunk and killed a dog, you would feel bad, but likely not be prosecuted. Let's all just agree that people are more important than dogs. I think that is pretty obvious.

I think the point here is that some people view that some felons are not being treated as fairly as others. Tough crap. They are both felons. When you commit a felony, be prepared for some "unfair things" to be headed your way and quit whining. Is it all fair. No. Can it ever be "made fair?" No.

I have hit dogs before. And for the record if i had to i would kill a dog. A Person? No. Its not the dogs with me it that it is a crime. If you dont agree then try to change the law..

 

[redman]

And Leonard Little killed somebody and got a reprieve.Although that was with a different sheriff in town (NFL commish: Tags vs. Goodell

This again. Little didn't electrocute, drown, hang or beat a person to death. He drove drunk and UNINTENTIONALLY caused an accident and someone died. Not murder, homicide. Malice and intent are lacking in the Little case.

Of course he got a subsequent DUI charge too. I'll bet that was unintentional as well, poor unlucky guy that he is.

 

[Big Score]

2. PR nightmare

I think some people are overestimating how much the average NFL customer will care about this in a couple years.

Agreed.

It's not about the average NFL Customer... it's about the PR the team that dares to sign him will endure by non-customers (special interest groups), leading into the media which ends with the general public.Who wants to deal with that for Micheal Vick?

Ray Lewis was present when somebody was murderedmurdered someone and nobody even cares anymore!!!! You guys are nuts if you think anyone is gonna give #$%* about dogfighting charges in 2+ years.

Corrected.

whatever helps you sleep at night.

I'm no Ray Lewis fan, but if you really think he murdered that person you're just living in fantasy land.

Actually, Ray Lewis was an eye witness to TWO people being brutally stabbed to death & then by his silence, made sure the murderers got off scott free.

...Jacinth Baker and Richard Lollar had died from multiple stab wounds to their chests...

Ray Lewis Murder Trial

 

[ookook]

Say it ain't so, Ookie. Say it ain't so.

It ain't so.

 

[Doug B]

People ... Leonard Little and his cases mean nothing at all to the Vick case. Different times, different "rules", different results. Why is it being brought up so often? Vick will do more time than Little ... so what? Vick's case is it's own thing ... and it's not "8 dogs versus one person". Vick's activities indirectly funded more crime (e.g. his buddies using gambling proceeds to bankroll drug-dealing operations).

Some of you must have read Ron Wolf's take. He's being quoted almost word-for-word here. Wolf is wrong to make the Leonard-Little comparison, too.

Wolf's on the outside looking in -- he's not anyone's GM anymore. Note that even speaking anonymously, no active GMs will admit to being willing to pull the trigger on Vick in the future. To me, that speaks volumes.

 

[Big Score]

This again. Little didn't electrocute, drown, hang or beat a person to death. He drove drunk and UNINTENTIONALLY caused an accident and someone died. Not murder, homicide. Malice and intent are lacking in the Little case.

Oh...well...since he was driving drunk & only UNINTENTIONALLY killed someobe, that makes that persons loss of life less important than the dogs Vick drowned.Dead is dead regardless of circumstances & a Human Beings life > Dogs life. I imagine the parents, husband, kids & friends of the lady Little killed, might disagree with you on how you rank Little's crime - vs - Vick's crimes.

 

[Doug B]

Oh...well...since he was driving drunk & only UNINTENTIONALLY killed someobe, that makes that persons loss of life less important than the dogs Vick drowned.Dead is dead regardless of circumstances & a Human Beings life > Dogs life. I imagine the parents, husband, kids & friends of the lady Little killed, might disagree with you on how you rank Little's crime - vs - Vick's crimes.

And again ... none of this is important.

 

[tietzjd]

This again. Little didn't electrocute, drown, hang or beat a person to death. He drove drunk and UNINTENTIONALLY caused an accident and someone died. Not murder, homicide. Malice and intent are lacking in the Little case.

Oh...well...since he was driving drunk & only UNINTENTIONALLY killed someobe, that makes that persons loss of life less important than the dogs Vick drowned.Dead is dead regardless of circumstances & a Human Beings life > Dogs life. I imagine the parents, husband, kids & friends of the lady Little killed, might disagree with you on how you rank Little's crime - vs - Vick's crimes.

Have you ever driven drunk? Have you ever had a drink or 2 and then drove? Should I lump you with Little too? Or did You just got lucky enough not to hit another car or person??

 

[Big Score]

Oh...well...since he was driving drunk & only UNINTENTIONALLY killed someobe, that makes that persons loss of life less important than the dogs Vick drowned.Dead is dead regardless of circumstances & a Human Beings life > Dogs life. I imagine the parents, husband, kids & friends of the lady Little killed, might disagree with you on how you rank Little's crime - vs - Vick's crimes.

And again ... none of this is important.

Maybe to you it's not important, but I'm looking at the bigger picture. Personally, I find it a sickening picture of our society, when a person can take another persons life while driving drunk, or be an eyewitness to two brutal stabbing murders & then help the murderers get off scott free by their silence, while somebody else who takes some dogs lives & gambles, has garnered far more public outrage, is looking at a longer prison sentence & a tougher suspension from the NFL.What is wrong with us?

 

[Big Score]

This again. Little didn't electrocute, drown, hang or beat a person to death. He drove drunk and UNINTENTIONALLY caused an accident and someone died. Not murder, homicide. Malice and intent are lacking in the Little case.

Oh...well...since he was driving drunk & only UNINTENTIONALLY killed someobe, that makes that persons loss of life less important than the dogs Vick drowned.Dead is dead regardless of circumstances & a Human Beings life > Dogs life. I imagine the parents, husband, kids & friends of the lady Little killed, might disagree with you on how you rank Little's crime - vs - Vick's crimes.

Have you ever driven drunk? Have you ever had a drink or 2 and then drove? Should I lump you with Little too? Or did You just got lucky enough not to hit another car or person??

I don't drink.

 

[j3r3m3y]

This again. Little didn't electrocute, drown, hang or beat a person to death. He drove drunk and UNINTENTIONALLY caused an accident and someone died. Not murder, homicide. Malice and intent are lacking in the Little case.

Oh...well...since he was driving drunk & only UNINTENTIONALLY killed someobe, that makes that persons loss of life less important than the dogs Vick drowned.Dead is dead regardless of circumstances & a Human Beings life > Dogs life. I imagine the parents, husband, kids & friends of the lady Little killed, might disagree with you on how you rank Little's crime - vs - Vick's crimes.

Have you ever driven drunk?

No

Have you ever had a drink or 2 and then drove?

No.

Should I lump you with Little too? Or did You just got lucky enough not to hit another car or person??

Your questions imply that you might be in this group though. You should be careful.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Oh...well...since he was driving drunk & only UNINTENTIONALLY killed someobe, that makes that persons loss of life less important than the dogs Vick drowned.Dead is dead regardless of circumstances & a Human Beings life > Dogs life. I imagine the parents, husband, kids & friends of the lady Little killed, might disagree with you on how you rank Little's crime - vs - Vick's crimes.

And again ... none of this is important.

Maybe to you it's not important, but I'm looking at the bigger picture. Personally, I find it a sickening picture of our society, when a person can take another persons life while driving drunk, or be an eyewitness to two brutal stabbing murders & then help the murderers get off scott free by their silence, while somebody else who takes some dogs lives & gambles, has garnered far more public outrage, is looking at a longer prison sentence & a tougher suspension from the NFL.What is wrong with us?

The NFL agrees. Thats why they are taking a different/better path today.