http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/football/nfl/07/27/bc.fbn.vickco.defendant.ap/index.html
A break in the story! One of Mike vick’s co defendents is going to plea out!
I don’t know if this means he has to testify against vick and even if he was to testify who know’s what he has to say, but it is pretty early into this and already one of the guys has seemed to “crack”.
Upper Deck is now comming down on Vick. Here is the link and some info:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070729/ap_on_sp_fo_ne/fbn_vick_upper_deck_7
“Of course we appreciate the fact that Mr. Vick is innocent until proven guilty, but the allegations alone have resulted in an outpouring of very strong emotion within our organization and among the collecting community,” Kerri Stockholm, Upper Deck’s director of marketing, said in a statement. “We believe collectors will agree and support this decision as being the best course of action for our football business”
Items pulled from the online store include autographed footballs, helmets, jerseys and the company’s line of “Breaking Through” pieces. His card will be pulled beginning with the Ultimate Collection Football set.
I tried to go on mike vick’s website for the last 7 days and everyday I try the same message comes up that the “Bandwidth has been exceeeded”
Does anybody know what that means?
Does it mean that there are so many people on the site that you cannot get through?
I find that amazing since I have tried several times a day at a whole bunch of different times. Is is possible that somebody is screwing with his website?
Just passin on a pic that was sent to me.
That was funny!
[quote]brunottfn wrote:
does not mean shit you can indicte a ham sandwhich,if he is guitly i hope he get the max[/quote]
I keep hearing that saying, “you can indict a ham sandwich”
Has a ham sanwich ever been indicted? Why not a turkey sandwich? I wonder where that quote originated.
[quote]Nick Ortego wrote:
brunottfn wrote:
does not mean shit you can indicte a ham sandwhich,if he is guitly i hope he get the max
I keep hearing that saying, “you can indict a ham sandwich”
Has a ham sanwich ever been indicted? Why not a turkey sandwich? I wonder where that quote originated.
[/quote]
Hi Nick,
Unfortunately nobody seems to know where the phrase comes from however this guy has a pretty funny take on it.
http://www.lufkindailynews.com/news/content/shared/news/nation/stories/10/1006_COXKELSO_COLUMN.html
Doesn’t the saying come from the rumor that Mama Cass having choked to death on one?
[quote]JokerFMJ wrote:
Doesn’t the saying come from the rumor that Mama Cass having choked to death on one?[/quote]
Joker,
I can’t speak to Momma Cass and the ham sandwhich.
Here is a good link that explains what happened to her:
Mama Cass Death Rumors | Snopes.com
What I do know that more details are in on the Michael Vick Case:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070730/ap_on_sp_fo_ne/fbn_vick_co_defendant
RICHMOND, Va. - One of Michael Vick’s co-defendants pleaded guilty Monday to federal dogfighting conspiracy charges in a plea agreement with prosecutors. Tony Taylor, 34, who will be sentenced Dec. 14, said he was not promised any specific sentence in return for his cooperation with the government.
Taylor, of Hampton, entered his plea in U.S. District Court to conspiracy to travel in interstate commerce in aid of unlawful activities, and conspiring to sponsor a dog in an animal fighting venture.
I wonder what this guy has to say and how it will affect the case?
Here is a fantastic one on one interview that Peter King of SI has with Roger Goodell.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/peter_king/07/30/mmqb/index.html
Here are more details on the co-defendents plea deal:
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-vickco-defendant&prov=ap&type=lgns
One of Michael Vick’s co-defendants pleaded guilty Monday to his role in a dogfighting conspiracy he says was financed almost entirely by the Atlanta Falcons quarterback.
As part of a plea agreement, Tony Taylor pledged to fully cooperate with the government in its prosecution of Vick and two other men accused of running an interstate dogfighting enterprise known as “Bad Newz Kennels” on Vick’s property in rural Surry County.
“The ‘Bad Newz Kennels’ operation and gambling monies were almost exclusively funded by Vick,” a summary of facts supporting the plea agreement and signed by Taylor states.
The plea deal requires Taylor to testify against Vick and his two remaining co-defendants if called upon to do so.
Taylor cannot get a stiffer sentence or face any new charges based on any new information he provides, according to terms of the agreement.
Additional charges are possible, however, against Vick and the other two. Federal prosecutors have said a superseding indictment will be issued in August.
[quote]tmoney1 wrote:
Yeah I heard about the ‘extra charges’ statement. I forgot the terminology they used, but they said something along those lines that you said Mike, that someone will rat him out.
I think the co-defendants (his buddies) won’t rat him out. From what I know, these are his childhood friends from his hometown (Newport News, VA), and I think it’s going to be a ‘don’t bite the hand that feeds you’ ordeal.
Since Vick brought his buddies out of the hood, and takes care of them and gives them pretty much whatever they want, in turn, they aren’t going to rat him out because of everything Vick had done for them, in terms of getting them out of the hood. I think maybe his buddies are ‘afraid’ of testifying against their friend (Vick), and if they do, Vick will essentially cut off their ties, and they will be back at square one again, and probably back living a less than lavish lifestyle.
Just my thoughts.
[/quote]
Ha Ha
The ones your brought out the hood are ALWAYS the ones to take you down first. Do not believe in the myth there is no honor amongst theives or else they wouldn’t be theives in the first place. These guys are used to taking hand outs from vick and will take hand outs from prosecuters if it’s better. Some are child hood friends, some are worse…family. But all live by the “live for today mantra”.
It’s a shame though the ones who did the real damage will probably get penalized the least. Hell yeah the whole operation was funded by Vick, they asked him for money he gave it to them. But I am 99.99% percent sure they decided to kill dogs without asking for vicks permission.
I am sure that they were the ones making money off the fights not vick, and they were the ones making money off selling champion litters. He may have bet on a fight or two but the ones ratting him out are probably more the reason dog fighting exists then him. They know it to. It might even help all of them, if the 3 rat out Vick get a light sentence, then Vick’s lawyer shows the jury he had minimal participation and the ones ratting him out did everything Vick can then get off on the hard charges.
Things like this do happen. Ray Lewis lawyers worked out a deal where Ray could snitch and still get his shooter off, and the same with Jason williams and the guy who snitched on him.
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
tmoney1 wrote:
Yeah I heard about the ‘extra charges’ statement. I forgot the terminology they used, but they said something along those lines that you said Mike, that someone will rat him out.
I think the co-defendants (his buddies) won’t rat him out. From what I know, these are his childhood friends from his hometown (Newport News, VA), and I think it’s going to be a ‘don’t bite the hand that feeds you’ ordeal.
Since Vick brought his buddies out of the hood, and takes care of them and gives them pretty much whatever they want, in turn, they aren’t going to rat him out because of everything Vick had done for them, in terms of getting them out of the hood. I think maybe his buddies are ‘afraid’ of testifying against their friend (Vick), and if they do, Vick will essentially cut off their ties, and they will be back at square one again, and probably back living a less than lavish lifestyle.
Just my thoughts.
Ha Ha
The ones your brought out the hood are ALWAYS the ones to take you down first. Do not believe in the myth there is no honor amongst theives or else they wouldn’t be theives in the first place. These guys are used to taking hand outs from vick and will take hand outs from prosecuters if it’s better. Some are child hood friends, some are worse…family. But all live by the “live for today mantra”.
It’s a shame though the ones who did the real damage will probably get penalized the least. Hell yeah the whole operation was funded by Vick, they asked him for money he gave it to them. But I am 99.99% percent sure they decided to kill dogs without asking for vicks permission.
I am sure that they were the ones making money off the fights not vick, and they were the ones making money off selling champion litters. He may have bet on a fight or two but the ones ratting him out are probably more the reason dog fighting exists then him. They know it to. It might even help all of them, if the 3 rat out Vick get a light sentence, then Vick’s lawyer shows the jury he had minimal participation and the ones ratting him out did everything Vick can then get off on the hard charges.
Things like this do happen. Ray Lewis lawyers worked out a deal where Ray could snitch and still get his shooter off, and the same with Jason williams and the guy who snitched on him.[/quote]
On sportscenter today someone said he really doubts there will be anymore plea bargains as they want atleast 1 other person being tried along with Vick so it dosn’t look like they are singling him out because of his star status.
IMO Vick is screwed, and yeah the other people probaly did most of the dirty work but Vick is still screwed.
http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=207187&cl=3526195&ch=207399&src=sports
Mike Vick finally speaks out! He doesn’t really say much at all to the specifics of the case with this statement comming out only hours after one of his co defendents decided to take a plea.
What caught me the most about this video was the inclusion of the NAACP speaking out on Vick (I believe it was the Atlanta chapter, I am not sure if it involves the national office).
It is not that I don’t agree with their statement of innocent until proven guilty, I have already stated I believe that to be true, I just can’t do it but then again that is why I don’t belong on this jury.
What I found strange was the statement that Vick is being unfairly villianized for a crime he hasn’t been convicted of yet.
I bring this up because the NAACP didn’t seem to hold the same restraint in the duke rape case in which they seemed very active and didn’t seem to care much about the potential innocence of the accused.
Yes, it’s probably true. That’s a Mike Vick record cover.
It suddenly appears that Vick has also been busy making rap records in an effort to clear up his name. (I’m very impressed with his time management skills and enterprenourial spirit, NOT!)
Here’s a little sample courtesy of The Angry T blog.
I’m Mike Vick, don’t you know you cant prosecute the rich?
Even when my cousin turn snitch
On field, there ain’t no need to pitch, I just make an LB look like a bitch
Sometimes I throw it too hard, that’s why my completion percentage is shit
I look into my dog’s eyes, right in his pupils
I tell him, you don’t beat this dog I’m gonna electrocute you?
Press try to throw dirt on my name, cause? all the dogs I maim
Harrington seemed happy when he heard I’m pinched, glad he the starter
He throw with a limp wrist, he can’t fight it
Got the lawyer who represented Jayson Williams, they can’t stop me
Y’all know it, Vicks a fighter
I’m too pretty for prison, on the streets before you know it
Now listen to Vick, those canines who snitch
I’ll hit you with the juice, throw you in a ditch
Forget the white press, Newport News still love us, Ron Mexico forever
O.J. is here, the soul of Kobe hover above us
[quote]MikeShank wrote:
…
It is not that I don’t agree with their statement of innocent until proven guilty, I have already stated I believe that to be true, I just can’t do it but then again that is why I don’t belong on this jury.
What I found strange was the statement that Vick is being unfairly villianized for a crime he hasn’t been convicted of yet.
[/quote]
I think he is being attacked because of his status. If he is guilty I want to see he suffer the maximum penalty, but it certainly appears the media and the prosecutor are setting him up as the primary target when it is likely that others were more heavily involved.
I imagine that for much of the year he does not have time to get involved in the dog fight business, although he doesn’t look like he spends much time studying the playbook.
Hypocrites.
[quote]MikeShank wrote:
It is not that I don’t agree with their statement of innocent until proven guilty, I have already stated I believe that to be true, I just can’t do it but then again that is why I don’t belong on this jury.
What I found strange was the statement that Vick is being unfairly villianized for a crime he hasn’t been convicted of yet.
I bring this up because the NAACP didn’t seem to hold the same restraint in the duke rape case in which they seemed very active and didn’t seem to care much about the potential innocence of the accused.
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/gaynor/061122
[/quote]
While I believe the NAACP can at times be hypocritical, I don’t see it in the Examples you gave. In Michael Vicks Case they merely said that the media is vilifying him from the mere mention of dog fighting.
Then in the first example you gave that actually quotes them, they merely requested that the trial be fairly investigated.
The second example they again seeked to move the case outside of the media, which the lawyers to be “playing like a banjo”.
The third example was some guys personal opinion of how bad the NAACP acted AFTER the case was over. Even though throughout his opinion based article he cites quotes of the NAACP begging for a fair trial.
The NAACP fights for too many issues to put itself out there on one side or another for cases with minimal evidence. In those cases they tend to fight for a trial that is not played out in the media, as the media has the biggest effect.
The chapters tend to be very non coherent, and the organization as a whole is in shambles right now. What one chapter does is almost of no concern to others unless there action is requested.
With public incidences sometimes they will volunteer their presence but in a lot of cases what happens is someone goes to the NAACP and ask for there help. So Vicks Lawyer can go to the NAACP and request that they make a statement asking for the media not to overtake the case.
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
MikeShank wrote:
It is not that I don’t agree with their statement of innocent until proven guilty, I have already stated I believe that to be true, I just can’t do it but then again that is why I don’t belong on this jury.
What I found strange was the statement that Vick is being unfairly villianized for a crime he hasn’t been convicted of yet.
I bring this up because the NAACP didn’t seem to hold the same restraint in the duke rape case in which they seemed very active and didn’t seem to care much about the potential innocence of the accused.
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/gaynor/061122
While I believe the NAACP can at times be hypocritical, I don’t see it in the Examples you gave. In Michael Vicks Case they merely said that the media is vilifying him from the mere mention of dog fighting.
Then in the first example you gave that actually quotes them, they merely requested that the trial be fairly investigated.
The second example they again seeked to move the case outside of the media, which the lawyers to be “playing like a banjo”.
The third example was some guys personal opinion of how bad the NAACP acted AFTER the case was over. Even though throughout his opinion based article he cites quotes of the NAACP begging for a fair trial.
The NAACP fights for too many issues to put itself out there on one side or another for cases with minimal evidence. In those cases they tend to fight for a trial that is not played out in the media, as the media has the biggest effect.
The chapters tend to be very non coherent, and the organization as a whole is in shambles right now. What one chapter does is almost of no concern to others unless there action is requested.
With public incidences sometimes they will volunteer their presence but in a lot of cases what happens is someone goes to the NAACP and ask for there help. So Vicks Lawyer can go to the NAACP and request that they make a statement asking for the media not to overtake the case.[/quote]
Hey Airtruth,
Thank you for clearing that up as well as explaining some things about the NAACP that I didn’t understand.
I guess where I am coming from this (and If I am wrong, please do not hesitate to correct me) is that I thought this would be a wonderful opportunity for the NAACP. I don’t mean this in a “jump on the bandwagon” kind of way in that they should start damning him to hell also, but as a way to reach out and go after a major problem in the black community.
Let me explain. In the area I live in (major cities being Philadelphia, Trenton, and Camden) young black males (between the ages of 16 to 28) are, if you will forgive me for my insensitivity, becoming an endangered species.
In areas like Princeton we have many educated (much more than me), successful black males however I don’t see that everywhere else. If you look at the typical murder victim in Philly now (the rate is skyrocketing) you will see that he tends to be from that demographic.
I guess I am taking a Juan Williams/Bill Cosby approach here in that there seems to be a certain set of behaviors that these young men engage in regardless of the reason, that always contributes to damning them to be a statistic. I say mostly because I am not naive enough to believe that racism and the cycle of poverty doesn’t play some part in this.
Amongst these behaviors are drugs, drug dealing, and gun possession, using violence in an irresponsible way, gambling, gang association, and truancy.
Dog fighting as well as the irresponsible ownership of power breeds like rotties and bully’s seems to be a growing part of the status of that culture too.
I thought the NAACP could use this situation as an opportunity to reach out to young black men on an incredibly broad front (this case has drawn the attention of all dog lovers regardless of race) and start a dialogue on how young black men can start to see that there are certain behaviors that don’t help your situation out, particularly if you are already living in a society that is in some cases stacking the cards against you to begin with. .
I think they have dropped the ball in that regards.
If you don�??t know what I mean about Juan Williams then here is a link:
Juan Williams on African-American 'Victimhood' : NPR
Thanks,
Mike Cruickshank
[quote]MikeShank wrote:
http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=207187&cl=3526195&ch=207399&src=sports
What caught me the most about this video was the inclusion of the NAACP speaking out on Vick (I believe it was the Atlanta chapter, I am not sure if it involves the national office).
It is not that I don’t agree with their statement of innocent until proven guilty, I have already stated I believe that to be true, I just can’t do it but then again that is why I don’t belong on this jury.
What I found strange was the statement that Vick is being unfairly villianized for a crime he hasn’t been convicted of yet.
[/quote]
Yeah I saw this about the NAACP yesterday as well. In my opinion, the NAACP has shown up to the party late. This ordeal with Vick has been going on for several weeks, and the NAACP just now decided to make a statement? The latest they should have made a statement was 2 weeks ago, but that’s just me.
I might be the only person, but I’m still saying innocent until proven guilty, and I support Vick all the way (although I DO NOT support dog fighting).
Once again Mike, no disrespect, but it seems sad to me that dogs are taking precedence over humans, and I think that’s odd.
In case anybody missed it, here is a picture and a link with more info on Vick’s co defendent that has turned against him: