What should the NFL do to Michael Vick if he's found guilty?

[eastender]

Aware

Eastender,

What you said is true, but you have omitted something else from the analysis, which is the specter of State charges still being filed for the same offense. That could still happen between now and the sentencing in December.

I imagine that Judge Hudson at sentencing will be torn between pressure to impose a sentence longer than what is being recommended due to some of the things you mentioned, and balancing that with considerations of the enormous financial punishment already levied (as previously discussed in this thread) and the fact that Vick is a 1st time offender. As you note, the exact nature of what Vick did in terms of killing the animals is unclear - I don't know what "collective efforts" means. The Judge is likely to be bombarded with letters and testimony of Vick's good character which he will also have to consider. In the end, balancing all these things, the easy way out for him will be to impose the prosecution recommended sentence of 12-18 months, going on the high end. Will he do that? Who knows.

Aware of the spectre of state charges but do not wish to visit that scenario until it actually happens. Somewhat akin to filling charges or a claim on the basis of what may happen. If things happen then appropriate discussions and actions will take place.

 

[EagerBeaver]

Again you raise interesting ideas and points but lack the willingness to work at supporting or developing them.

Eastender,

You have nailed it on Korbel's posts. There is nothing else really to say.

By the ways, I made a key modification in my original post which you have not quoted: development of further facts if State charges are filed. That COULD impact sentencing in the federal case, of course it is speculation but it could happen.

 

[korbel]

Korbel,

Within the context of a court room or an academic debate EB's comments would be viewed as mild but dismissive.

Again you raise interesting ideas and points but lack the willingness to work at supporting or developing them. Do not expect others to do the work for you or drop their standards of vigor.

Hello Eastender,

I really don't see any qualitative difference between what anyone is saying here. Only the slant of the approach is different. I make the point I want to make. If others want encyclopedic data analysis then they can go for it if that is what they rely on. I am not asking for any of that and I don't think it's necessary.

Cheers,

Korbel

 

[EagerBeaver]

Daringly,

It is not a question of being right or wrong but intellectually lazy. That is the point I was trying to make and which Eastender also made. Korbel's posts are not necessarily wrong - and in fact I have agreed with most of what he has said. But they are intellectually lazy, in that he contradicts himself frequently with other posts he has made, but makes utterly no effort to try and reconcile the obvious contradictions. This is what Eastender meant, I believe.

 

[eastender]

Federal Judges

Eastender,

You have nailed it on Korbel's posts. There is nothing else really to say.

By the ways, I made a key modification in my original post which you have not quoted: development of further facts if State charges are filed. That COULD impact sentencing in the federal case, of course it is speculation but it could happen.

Doubt that Federal judges would like the perception that they are influenced by lower courts. The weight of evidence would have to be truly significant to the point of the Feds saying that in this case Michael Vick misled them or withheld information or evidence. Doubt that Vick's legal team is this weak.

 

[eastender]

Would Qualify a Bit

Daringly,

It is not a question of being right or wrong but intellectually lazy. That is the point I was trying to make and which Eastender also made. Korbel's posts are not necessarily wrong - and in fact I have agreed with most of what he has said. But they are intellectually lazy, in that he contradicts himself frequently with other posts he has made, but makes utterly no effort to try and reconcile the obvious contradictions. This is what Eastender meant, I believe.

EB,

Intellectually lazy is a catchall.

My point tended towards intellectual rigor in the long run tends to save time, focus your thoughts and streamlines the final presentation while avoiding contradictions.

 

[EagerBeaver]

Doubt that Federal judges would like the perception that they are influenced by lower courts. The weight of evidence would have to be truly significant to the point of the Feds saying that in this case Michael Vick misled them or withheld information or evidence. Doubt that Vick's legal team is this weak.

State courts are not really thinking of themselves as "lower." In our system, there are state trial courts and federal trial courts, and then appellate courts in both systems. It is these courts which are the higher courts. Appeals do not happen unless there is a trial, or what is called an "interlocutory appeal" gets filed. The scope of what this means is probably beyond this thread.

What I meant is that a state prosecution, if it occurs, could lead to the development of further facts that shed light on the questions that still arise from the federal case. This does not necessarily mean Vick misleading anyone - you are right that the plea was crafted so as to not allow this possibility. I am talking about the State investigators finding new witnesses or taking statements that the feds were not privy to. It could happen, and it could be that the State's investigators are simply better than the feds'. It does not seem likely, but it does in fact happen.

 

[Dee]

Here's something I didn't know:


http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0405051vick1.html

Michael Vick Hit With Sex Suit

Woman claims star NFL quarterback passed along herpes in 2003

APRIL 5--Claiming that Michael Vick gave her herpes, a Georgia woman is suing the star NFL quarterback for negligence and battery. According to the below lawsuit, Sonya Elliot, a 26-year-old health care worker, was infected with the sexually transmitted disease in April 2003 after an unprotected encounter with Vick at the athlete's Duluth, Georgia home. Elliott alleges that after testing positive for Herpes Simplex 2, she confronted the Atlanta Falcons star, 24, about her condition. "I've got something to tell you. I've got it," Vick admitted to her, according to Elliott's State Court complaint, which alleges that Vick then told her that "he had not known how to tell her about his condition, and that it was not something that he liked to talk about." Elliott's complaint also contends that Vick "apologized profusely" for not telling her he was infected with the STD. Elliot's lawsuit alleges that Vick has used the name "Ron Mexico" and, in a related court filing, her lawyers are seeking Vick's admission that he used the "Mexico" alias--and perhaps other fake names--"for the purpose of herpes testing and/or treatment." In her lawsuit, which does not specify monetary damages, Elliott states that she met Vick at a Virginia Beach nightclub in May 2001 and, shortly thereafter, began a close personal relationship with the football star (though the couple did not have sex until late-2002). Last December, Vick, the top overall pick in the 2001 National Football League draft, signed a ten-year, $130 million contract with the Falcons, the richest deal in league history.

 

[EagerBeaver]

Dee-

That suit was settled out of court for an undisclosed amount. Apparently, there was a confidentiality agreement. I recall reading the story at the time and I was amused by the "Ron Mexico" alias. I am not sure what the significance of that name is.

 

[Dee]

Thanks EB...

 

[master_bates]

I predict Vick to be back in the nfl for the 2009 season

Prison + nfl suspension = 2 years total

 

[korbel]

Daringly,

It is not a question of being right or wrong but intellectually lazy. That is the point I was trying to make and which Eastender also made. Korbel's posts are not necessarily wrong - and in fact I have agreed with most of what he has said. But they are intellectually lazy, in that he contradicts himself frequently with other posts he has made, but makes utterly no effort to try and reconcile the obvious contradictions. This is what Eastender meant, I believe.

Hello EB,

Again, why don't you just make your point on the issues. You would have a lot more credibility if you just made a good argument and dropped the pseudo-superiority act. The writing and cognitive skills you have displayed are only slightly better than basic...at best. Your obvious need to lace your position with rudeness displaying the immaturity of your thought process and totally invalidating your pretentiousness in assessing anyone.

As for Eastender, he likes to emphasize certain elements of issues that suit his training and personal skill. Then he insists others answer to his strengths and fit into his style. Well, that's not how it works. Actually, he seems to have a large capacity for reasoning, but he often dances around the point of an issue into irrelevance. And when asked for clarity he avoids the issues with superfluous dodging of the topic.

The fact that the two of you agree in your quote here only shows a convergence of two people with similar preferences for a narrow style of reasoning and criterias of assessment. Two good buddies agree and that automatically makes theM right??? That's...LAUGHABLE! You guys are no better than anyone else. Live with that fact and...

deal with it like men,

Korbel

 

[eastender]

Funny,Sad.

Hello EB,

Again, why don't you just make your point on the issues. You would have a lot more credibility if you just made a good argument and dropped the pseudo-superiority act. The writing and cognitive skills you have displayed are only slightly better than basic...at best. Your obvious need to lace your position with rudeness displays the immaturity of your thought process and totally invalidates your pretentiousness in assessing anyone.

As for Eastender, he likes to emphasize certain elements of issues that suit his training and personal skill. Then he insists others answer to his strengths and fit into his style. Well, that's not how it works. Actually, he seems to have a large capacity for reasoning, but he often dances around the point of an issue into irrelevance. And when asked for clarity he avoids the issues with superfluous dodging of the topic.

The fact that the two of you agree in your quote here only shows a convergence of two people with similar preferences for a narrow style of reasoning and criterias of assessment. Two good buddies agree and that automatically makes theM right??? That's...LAUGHABLE! You guys are no better than anyone else. Live with that fact and...

deal with it like men,

Korbel

Funny,sad comment.

Should never blame others because you choose to underachieve. Intellectual rigor has many advantages - one being that it requires a lot less effort, others have been listed previously.

EB and I tend to disagree about alot of things and have had heated exchanges on both boards and via PM. However they are consistant , concise,terse and on topic.

 

[korbel]

Funny,sad comment.

Should never blame others because you choose to underachive. Intellectual rigor has many advantages - one being that it requires a lot less effort, others have been listed previously.

EB and I tend to disagree about alot of things and have had heated exchanges on both boards and via PM. However they are consistant , concise,terse and on topic.

Hello Eastender,

I guess poor spelling is part of your "intellectual rigor"...chordle...chuckle...giggle...lol! Or is underachive something I should looks up? It must be embarrassing when you promote perfection...but can't follow through yourself. Really, pseudo-superiority is not your best trait, so why emulate the worst of others???

Try again,

Korbel

 

[eastender]

Korbel

Hello Eastender,

I guess poor spelling is part of your "intellectual rigor"...chordle...chuckle...giggle...lol! Or is underachive something I should looks up? It must be embarrassing when you promote perfection...but can't follow through yourself. Really, pseudo-superiority is not your best trait, so why emulate the worst of others???

Try again,

Korbel

It is the striving for improvement that matters. BTW it is look up NOT looks up as you prefer.

 

[korbel]

Lol!

It is the striving for improvement that matters. BTW it is look up NOT looks up as you prefer.

Hello Eastender,

Well, you did want me to follow YOUR standards. You know...intellectual rigor mortis...lol.

Gotcha,

Korbel

 

[korbel]

Saddest thing.

The saddest thing about it is he had endless options in his position. Now his future is "dog meat". One of the most exciting quartebacks to watch is now persona no grata. What a huge waste.

Tragic,

Korbel

 

[korbel]

I think they must all start with: "I'm a pathetic idiotic pervert so I..."

Whew,

Korbel

 

[Dee]

At The Smoking Gun they have copies of all the papers he signed and all the warnings he got about not having to plead guilty and it can only be done if you really are guilty.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0828071craig8.html

 

[EagerBeaver]

Vick Indicted on State Charges

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/09/25/vick/index.html