Now it turns out that the AIA is getting involved in this.
The AIA is the American Institute of Architects. One of my clients is an architect and told me that the architect of vicks house is probably going to jail and will definately lose his license. Turns out when the property was being built, the municipality wanted to know why the structures were being built so Vick and company had a house put up to hide the dog fighting/housing structures.
Because the architect but his stamp on all the drawings for the house, he will be part of the conspiracy charge.
When I get more info on this I will provide an offical link but according to my client this isn’t the first dog fighting operation that this architect has alledgedly worked on.
Just add this architect as one more guy who will sell vick out to keep himself from going to jail.
Hmmm… Have you read the indictment, MikeShank? From what I remember, the indictment seems to disagree with what your client told you…
I’ll quote the portions I’m referring to:
Then on to:
This doesn’t necessarily mean that there wasn’t a house built between June 29tj and early September, but it seems unlikely to me. The way I understand those two paragraphs is that the property bought for $34K included a house.
Now, later on in the indictment, if I remember correctly, it mentions Vick et al putting up a metal wall to block view from off the property… But I doubt they hired an architect for that. Maybe they had to so they didn’t violate Virginia penal code, though, I’m not sure.
[quote]JokerFMJ wrote:
Hmmm… Have you read the indictment, MikeShank? From what I remember, the indictment seems to disagree with what your client told you…
I’ll quote the portions I’m referring to:
On or about June 29, 2001, VICK paid approximately $34,000 for the purchase of a property located at 1915 Moonlight Road, Smithfield, Virginia. From this point forward, the defendants, aided and assisted by others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, used this property as the main staging area for housing and training the pit bulls involved in the dog fighting venture and hosting dog fights.
Then on to:
In or about early September 2001, PHILLIPS, TAYLOR, and VICK purchased approximately 4 pit bulls for approximately $1,000 from an individual known to the Grand Jury in Williamsburg, Virginia. One of these puppies was a male pit bull named “Magic.”
This doesn’t necessarily mean that there wasn’t a house built between June 29tj and early September, but it seems unlikely to me. The way I understand those two paragraphs is that the property bought for $34K included a house.
Now, later on in the indictment, if I remember correctly, it mentions Vick et al putting up a metal wall to block view from off the property… But I doubt they hired an architect for that. Maybe they had to so they didn’t violate Virginia penal code, though, I’m not sure.[/quote]
Joker,
I shouldn’t have posted that until I had a link to verify it. I could only go by what Josh had told me so he probably didn’t have all his facts correct. When I get the link I will put it up. Lesson learned.
A minor league team is hosting “Michael Vick Animal Awareness Day”.
Any fan that brings a michael vick jersey will get free admission and the clothing will be burned in protest of vick. People are also allowed to bring their dogs to special seating at the game.
I am not a big fan of michael irvin, always thought he was a fantastic player but I never cared for his attitude which was a little to cocky for my taste (I did think it was sick when fan’s cheered when he hurt his neck).
Scary thing is, he makes a lot of sense here. More so than I do because I am too emotionally connected to this issue.
I don’t agree with Vick not being a “repeat” offender. Maybe he has never been called out officially by the league before, but between Ron Mexico, The finger, and some other stuff, I wouldn’t exactly say this whole thing came out of nowhere. Plus, given the severity of what he is being charged with, I don’t thing the whole repeat offender title even applies here.
when you fry and smash and torture rover (alledgely), it is kinda a one strike and your out policy. At least to me.
When he’s convicted I can see it being a 1 strike thing, however Pacman Jones was dealt with prior to his conviction because of his repeat (constant repeat) offenses.
It’s unfortunate that one issue is being overlooked because of the emotions of dog lovers and PETA. Everybody is forgetting that dog fighting is illegal. People that are aguing for Vick are pretty much saying well dog fighting is not that bad. They can win that argument just by making dog lovers look over emotional.
However when you take a moment and look at the fact that Michael Vick took time out his life to set up an illegal operation that is flat out stupid. If Michael Vick got caught setting up a drug storage house nobody would defend him they would just say wait his day in court but this is turning into something totally different.
Dog Fighting:
Maybe the sickest cruelest sport period.
This is not like cockfighting, MMA, or livestock. They breed these dogs for killing, and kill the ones that aren’t natural born killers. If you understand domestic dogs and biology you will understand that they kill the majority of dogs, most even before teenage years. They look for two traits 1) a dog that will attack any dog it sees, 2) a dog that will fight to the death.
They will keep a one legged dog that was near death and still fighting versus a dog that won all its fights but ran in the last one. A dog like this is in essence retarded. Most dogs do not do this, if you can imagine how many humans you would have to breed just to find one that will fight any human it sees to the death from the moment it’s born. Then you must kill all the other humans that didn’t.
Most people don’t see this element because they confuse dog fighting with the local hardcore bullies who train their dogs to be mean then fight their friends dog in the backyard. While this is bad too, it’s not nearly as cruel as the dog fighting culture.
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
It’s unfortunate that one issue is being overlooked because of the emotions of dog lovers and PETA. Everybody is forgetting that dog fighting is illegal. People that are aguing for Vick are pretty much saying well dog fighting is not that bad. They can win that argument just by making dog lovers look over emotional.
However when you take a moment and look at the fact that Michael Vick took time out his life to set up an illegal operation that is flat out stupid. If Michael Vick got caught setting up a drug storage house nobody would defend him they would just say wait his day in court but this is turning into something totally different.
Dog Fighting:
Maybe the sickest cruelest sport period.
This is not like cockfighting, MMA, or livestock. They breed these dogs for killing, and kill the ones that aren’t natural born killers. If you understand domestic dogs and biology you will understand that they kill the majority of dogs, most even before teenage years. They look for two traits 1) a dog that will attack any dog it sees, 2) a dog that will fight to the death.
They will keep a one legged dog that was near death and still fighting versus a dog that won all its fights but ran in the last one. A dog like this is in essence retarded. Most dogs do not do this, if you can imagine how many humans you would have to breed just to find one that will fight any human it sees to the death from the moment it’s born. Then you must kill all the other humans that didn’t.
Most people don’t see this element because they confuse dog fighting with the local hardcore bullies who train their dogs to be mean then fight their friends dog in the backyard. While this is bad too, it’s not nearly as cruel as the dog fighting culture. [/quote]
[quote]JokerFMJ wrote:
Hmmm… Have you read the indictment, MikeShank? From what I remember, the indictment seems to disagree with what your client told you…
I’ll quote the portions I’m referring to:
On or about June 29, 2001, VICK paid approximately $34,000 for the purchase of a property located at 1915 Moonlight Road, Smithfield, Virginia. From this point forward, the defendants, aided and assisted by others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, used this property as the main staging area for housing and training the pit bulls involved in the dog fighting venture and hosting dog fights.
Then on to:
In or about early September 2001, PHILLIPS, TAYLOR, and VICK purchased approximately 4 pit bulls for approximately $1,000 from an individual known to the Grand Jury in Williamsburg, Virginia. One of these puppies was a male pit bull named “Magic.”
This doesn’t necessarily mean that there wasn’t a house built between June 29tj and early September, but it seems unlikely to me. The way I understand those two paragraphs is that the property bought for $34K included a house.
Now, later on in the indictment, if I remember correctly, it mentions Vick et al putting up a metal wall to block view from off the property… But I doubt they hired an architect for that. Maybe they had to so they didn’t violate Virginia penal code, though, I’m not sure.[/quote]
What would the Penal Code have to do with a house?
Also, the house that is currently on the property was not there at the time of purchase.
A minor league team is hosting “Michael Vick Animal Awareness Day”.
Any fan that brings a michael vick jersey will get free admission and the clothing will be burned in protest of vick. People are also allowed to bring their dogs to special seating at the game.[/quote]
That’s a great idea. I hope people come in droves. There were stories a while back when all these domestic Rottweilers were getting stolen at night and then used for dog fighting. The owners were pretty shattered to find out their lovable pet was stolen for that purpose. One even put a $10k reward up for the safe return of his dog.
The dog was presumably found in a shallow grave with 10 or so other Rotties.
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
What would the Penal Code have to do with a house?
Also, the house that is currently on the property was not there at the time of purchase.
[/quote]
I may be wrong, it may not have anything to do with the penal code, but i’m sure there are some permits and such you have to file for in order to build structures on your property.
And that is an awfully fast time to build a house. I’m not saying it’s impossible, but to design/build a house in 2 months is quite fast.
But I don’t know if it was there prior to the property purchase or not and i’ve seen no proof to suggest either way, it was just the conclusion I personally drew from reading the indictment. If you have proof can you provide it?
Also, MikeShank, I saw that press conference today. Initially I was glad they were planning on taking action, but after some (read: brief) thought I’m not sure if it’s good or not that ownership will join the court of public opinion and take action to appease to said “court”.
Regardless, I don’t see him playing in Atlanta or being the starter for any other NFL team again.
[quote]JokerFMJ wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
What would the Penal Code have to do with a house?
Also, the house that is currently on the property was not there at the time of purchase.
I may be wrong, it may not have anything to do with the penal code, but i’m sure there are some permits and such you have to file for in order to build structures on your property.
And that is an awfully fast time to build a house. I’m not saying it’s impossible, but to design/build a house in 2 months is quite fast.
But I don’t know if it was there prior to the property purchase or not and i’ve seen no proof to suggest either way, it was just the conclusion I personally drew from reading the indictment. If you have proof can you provide it?
Also, MikeShank, I saw that press conference today. Initially I was glad they were planning on taking action, but after some (read: brief) thought I’m not sure if it’s good or not that ownership will join the court of public opinion and take action to appease to said “court”.
Regardless, I don’t see him playing in Atlanta or being the starter for any other NFL team again.[/quote]
It doesn’t have anything to do with the Penal Code.
Here is the info on the house.
"A Newport News native, Vick bought the land in 2001 for $34,000 and had the house built in 2003. The 4,608-square- foot house has five bedrooms, 41/2 bathrooms and a fireplace.
Vick doesn’t live in the house, which was most recently occupied by his cousin, Davon Boddie.
Boddie was arrested on drug charges in Hampton in late April, leading to a search of the property by Virginia State Police, who found the dogs and equipment sometimes used in dog-fighting, including treadmills for training, scales, supplements and antibiotics, and a “rape stand” used to hold female dogs so that male dogs have easier access for breeding."
A “rape stand” what a sick no good.
he’s a guilty sick fuck. Don’t let the fan-shine blind you.
First off, i’m a Bengals fan. I’ve never thought that highly of Michael Vick and thought even less after the Ron Mexico and other cases. So there is no fan side of me, i’m just trying to be objective.
Don’t let the pet lover side blind you. In this country we are innocent until proven guilty so I find your comment of, “he’s a guilty sick fuck,” disturbing.
After rereading the indictment, however, in Section 11 it states that they were still developing the property in 2002 [quote]“for the ongoing dog fighting venture, including building: a fence to shield the rear portion of the compound from public view; multiple sheds used at various times to house training equipment, injured dogs, and organized fights;[/quote] a house to be occupied by the defendants and others associated with maintaining the property;[quote] and kennels and buried car axles with chains for the pit bulls.”[/quote]
So this does seem to support what you said about the house not being there when the property was purchased.
And “rape stands” are used quite a few places legally… So it’s not something that he or his associated thought up.
MikeShank, sorry about what I said earlier, it appears it was my mistake by not rereading that portion of the indictment not your clients mistake.
To put this case in perspective however, there was recently a man who was indicted on 9 counts of rape, sex abuse and child abuse on a 7 year old and 18 month old released and case dismissed in Maryland when the courts could not find an interpreter.
Animal cruelty is horrible but let us not focus so much on this that we forget about anything else.
[quote]JokerFMJ wrote:
Oh, and not that I don’t believe you because the indictment seems to support you… But I don’t consider newsday a very credible new source. =D
But that’s just a personal comment, heh.[/quote]
I am not actually a big fan of Newsday either.
But yes I do believe he is guilty. Do you really think he had no idea what was happening on his property? I think he did. The Feds know what they are doing and right now it is a horse race to turn over evidence.
True the pet lover in me makes me more biased, but then again, just weighing what they’ve found, some common sense, and the statements in the indictment, he’s toast.
Oh, don’t get me wrong, I think there’s a good chance he’ll be convicted and from what i’ve read I do believe he’s guilty.
But as of now, those are just my beliefs. I’m not a lawyer by any means and I have no idea what real evidence they have (indictments are not evidence) proving his guilt. So we’ll have to wait until the trial is over (or a plea bargain happens, which i’d be willing to bet on).
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
… and a “rape stand” used to hold female dogs so that male dogs have easier access for breeding."
…
[/quote]
The term “rape stand” sickens me. I dislike Vick intensely but using the term, “rape stand” is so inflammatory and ignorant it makes me question the intelligence and impartiality of any reporter that uses it.
All farmers and breeders use a variety of bizarre methods to breed animals. Is it all rape?
But yes I do believe he is guilty. Do you really think he had no idea what was happening on his property? I think he did. The Feds know what they are doing and right now it is a horse race to turn over evidence.
True the pet lover in me makes me more biased, but then again, just weighing what they’ve found, some common sense, and the statements in the indictment, he’s toast.
[/quote]
Guilty of what is the question? All factual evidence I’ve seen doesn’t put Vick IN the same location as actual dog fighting contest. Also doesn’t put him as the purchaser of equipment(besides the land, and possibly the house of course).
The only evidence I’ve seen(not to say feds dont’ ahve anything else) is people that were already caught and making deals. Do I think he knew about it? YES. Bet on it? probably at one time or another.
Did he set it up? Can’t say I know this for sure. I’ve seen rich athletes with poor families, cousins they don’t even know beg for money. Half the time there not even the ones giving it out, they designate some other close family member to give it out or just say heres 10000 leave me alone.
The funny thing is how come they didn’t try to get him on drug charges also? Did they know people get much more emotional about dogs so the mere mention of dogs will make them declare his guilt?
