agreen_112 Posted May 22, 2007 Report Share Posted May 22, 2007 Here's the link: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2878099 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The PatternMaster Posted May 22, 2007 Report Share Posted May 22, 2007 Portis should know when to say "No comment" or change the subject. Why he wants to be involved in Vick's s**t storm is beyond me, besides it doesn't look like Vick will be charged with anything as the prosecution is just using Vick's name because he is the most high profile name in the investigation although they don't have any evidence that proves that he did anything illegal. Maybe he knew about it or was even involved, but they can't prove it in court with the evidence they have so Vick will get some bad press for a few weeks but come July this will be over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC_Bengals_Fan Posted May 22, 2007 Report Share Posted May 22, 2007 Portis should know when to say "No comment" or change the subject. Why he wants to be involved in Vick's s**t storm is beyond me, besides it doesn't look like Vick will be charged with anything as the prosecution is just using Vick's name because he is the most high profile name in the investigation although they don't have any evidence that proves that he did anything illegal. Maybe he knew about it or was even involved, but they can't prove it in court with the evidence they have so Vick will get some bad press for a few weeks but come July this will be over.According to PFT, the Feds are now involved. It's starting to look like there might be more evidence than you might think. Vick's money financed it, supposedly neighbors can put Vick at the house, and there's supposed to be correspondence from a vet with his name on it. That's a fair amount of evidence.Seems to me, if your money is used to finance dogfighting - for which there is plenty of evidence - it's going to be an uphill fight to prove you didn't know about it. Especially if witnesses can put you there.Prosecutor seems to be going out of his way not to hit this case, but as the media gradually gets into it and if the Feds are involved, he'll get backed into it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The PatternMaster Posted May 22, 2007 Report Share Posted May 22, 2007 Portis should know when to say "No comment" or change the subject. Why he wants to be involved in Vick's s**t storm is beyond me, besides it doesn't look like Vick will be charged with anything as the prosecution is just using Vick's name because he is the most high profile name in the investigation although they don't have any evidence that proves that he did anything illegal. Maybe he knew about it or was even involved, but they can't prove it in court with the evidence they have so Vick will get some bad press for a few weeks but come July this will be over.According to PFT, the Feds are now involved. It's starting to look like there might be more evidence than you might think. Vick's money financed it, supposedly neighbors can put Vick at the house, and there's supposed to be correspondence from a vet with his name on it. That's a fair amount of evidence.Seems to me, if your money is used to finance dogfighting - for which there is plenty of evidence - it's going to be an uphill fight to prove you didn't know about it. Especially if witnesses can put you there.Prosecutor seems to be going out of his way not to hit this case, but as the media gradually gets into it and if the Feds are involved, he'll get backed into it.I heard there was a meeting yesterday and the prosecutors for this case said there wasn't enough evidence to convict him of anything, YET. When you say Vick financed "it", do you mean he paid for the house or he bought the dogs, cages, meds, etc..Paying for a house of a relative is one thing, buying the dogs and equipment is much more damning.In the end this is a minor crime that media is trying to make into a bigger one, but Vick can blame no one but himself. With the kind of contract he signed he put himself in a position where is every move is going to be scrunitized. You don't see guys with similar contracts like McNabb, Peyton, & Carson having there names associated with a fraction of the bulls**t that Vick is associated with, the guy needs to grow up and quit acting like a 19 year old. Fighting dogs is illegal but it's been going on for years, besides it's not like Vick was financing a billion dollar drug syndicate.All in all, it's illegal and hopefully Vick was smart enough to distance himself far enough from this get caught up in it. As for the Feds being involved, don't they have more pressing matters like finding terrorist or child rapist, let's get some perspective here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC_Bengals_Fan Posted May 22, 2007 Report Share Posted May 22, 2007 I heard there was a meeting yesterday and the prosecutors for this case said there wasn't enough evidence to convict him of anything, YET. When you say Vick financed "it", do you mean he paid for the house or he bought the dogs, cages, meds, etc..Paying for a house of a relative is one thing, buying the dogs and equipment is much more damning.In the end this is a minor crime that media is trying to make into a bigger one, but Vick can blame no one but himself. With the kind of contract he signed he put himself in a position where is every move is going to be scrunitized. You don't see guys with similar contracts like McNabb, Peyton, & Carson having there names associated with a fraction of the bulls**t that Vick is associated with, the guy needs to grow up and quit acting like a 19 year old. Fighting dogs is illegal but it's been going on for years, besides it's not like Vick was financing a billion dollar drug syndicate.All in all, it's illegal and hopefully Vick was smart enough to distance himself far enough from this get caught up in it. As for the Feds being involved, don't they have more pressing matters like finding terrorist or child rapist, let's get some perspective here.This prosecutor's been falling all over himself not to get involved. Point 1: There is evidence of animal fighting, so someone goes down for it. Figure out who it is, and make an indictment. The suspect list can't be very long, it's Vick's house.Point 2: Who else in Vick's family makes the kind of money to run this kind of operation? No one. It's his house, his money...I think you'd have to have been a former member of the OJ jury to believe he didn't know what was going on. Add to that witnesses who put him at the house...come on.As for perspective, we're looking at quite a few counts of cruelty to animals. That's not likely to interest the feds. I imagine the associated gambling is. Not to mention the FBI has demonstrated incompetence in finding terrorists, let's let them have success at *something*. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The PatternMaster Posted May 22, 2007 Report Share Posted May 22, 2007 I heard there was a meeting yesterday and the prosecutors for this case said there wasn't enough evidence to convict him of anything, YET. When you say Vick financed "it", do you mean he paid for the house or he bought the dogs, cages, meds, etc..Paying for a house of a relative is one thing, buying the dogs and equipment is much more damning.In the end this is a minor crime that media is trying to make into a bigger one, but Vick can blame no one but himself. With the kind of contract he signed he put himself in a position where is every move is going to be scrunitized. You don't see guys with similar contracts like McNabb, Peyton, & Carson having there names associated with a fraction of the bulls**t that Vick is associated with, the guy needs to grow up and quit acting like a 19 year old. Fighting dogs is illegal but it's been going on for years, besides it's not like Vick was financing a billion dollar drug syndicate.All in all, it's illegal and hopefully Vick was smart enough to distance himself far enough from this get caught up in it. As for the Feds being involved, don't they have more pressing matters like finding terrorist or child rapist, let's get some perspective here.This prosecutor's been falling all over himself not to get involved. Point 1: There is evidence of animal fighting, so someone goes down for it. Figure out who it is, and make an indictment. The suspect list can't be very long, it's Vick's house.Point 2: Who else in Vick's family makes the kind of money to run this kind of operation? No one. It's his house, his money...I think you'd have to have been a former member of the OJ jury to believe he didn't know what was going on. Add to that witnesses who put him at the house...come on.As for perspective, we're looking at quite a few counts of cruelty to animals. That's not likely to interest the feds. I imagine the associated gambling is. Not to mention the FBI has demonstrated incompetence in finding terrorists, let's let them have success at *something*. Your right that someone should be charged, but I don't Vick will be just because of lack of hard evidence that proves he was running and gambling on a dog fighting operation. That witness thing can be tricky, whose to say the witness is credible? Hopefully this is a wake up call for Mike and he realizes that he's not a god and if you don't win they will tear you down even faster. The media is definitely trying to prosecute this case in the court of public opinion. Yahoo had a story on it's main site for days were some journalist was basically asking if anyone had an alleged video of Vick at a dog fight so they could help prosecute him, wtf is that. Let the authorities do their job and if they can prove Vick was involved without any doubt to his innocence then so be it, but the media acts like he's guilty but they can't prove it yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC_Bengals_Fan Posted May 22, 2007 Report Share Posted May 22, 2007 Your right that someone should be charged, but I don't Vick will be just because of lack of hard evidence that proves he was running and gambling on a dog fighting operation. That witness thing can be tricky, whose to say the witness is credible? Hopefully this is a wake up call for Mike and he realizes that he's not a god and if you don't win they will tear you down even faster. The media is definitely trying to prosecute this case in the court of public opinion. Yahoo had a story on it's main site for days were some journalist was basically asking if anyone had an alleged video of Vick at a dog fight so they could help prosecute him, wtf is that. Let the authorities do their job and if they can prove Vick was involved without any doubt to his innocence then so be it, but the media acts like he's guilty but they can't prove it yet.Any piece of evidence (like a witness) can be impeached, but fighting many different pieces of evidence and multiple witnesses will be tough. It is his money. It is his house. He can be put at the scene by multiple people, some of whom probably aren't felons. If I was on a jury that would be enough for me to conclude that he was at least involved, if not the ringleader.I think the media is getting involved because the authorities seem very disinterested in pursuing the case. The prosecutor is elected and it may be perceived to be a bad career move to go after Vick in his home state.As for court of public opinion...everybody makes their own conclusion. At this point, I think you'd have to be naive, a Falcons fan, a VT fan, a defense attorney, or playing Devil's Advocate to honestly believe he's not involved and had no idea this was happening at his house. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengalsfan17 Posted May 22, 2007 Report Share Posted May 22, 2007 This is sad that clinton portis shows total disregard for the law and it looks soo bad on the nfl the way he spoke, as for vick...if you have witnesses that put him there and its his money then that should be enough to find him guilty and the nfl has to come down on him big time...its a felony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengalsfan17 Posted May 22, 2007 Report Share Posted May 22, 2007 This is sad that clinton portis shows total disregard for the law and it looks soo bad on the nfl the way he spoke, as for vick...if you have witnesses that put him there and its his money then that should be enough to find him guilty and the nfl has to come down on him big time...its a felony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agreen_112 Posted May 22, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 22, 2007 Pit (dog) fights in the south : poker in vegas. Vicks been there, he's watched them fight, and he's probably made waggers as well, IMHO. Dog fighting is part of the culture that he's been raised up in. Anyone that fights dogs should burn, that's one thing I can not stand. The thought of fighting dogs makes me sick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edogger Posted May 22, 2007 Report Share Posted May 22, 2007 Portis should know when to say "No comment" or change the subject. Why he wants to be involved in Vick's s**t storm is beyond me,I agree with you. Portis should have known better to comment on this type of topic especially a comment like this. Vick puts a big name to the case. Adds more notoriety to the case. If Vick wasn't involved, we wouldn't of had a clue this happened. And for Vick (if he is convicted)...how could you be so stupid! Everyone should know it is illegal to raise dogs for fighting. Why would you jeopardise your career? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlainThePain Posted May 23, 2007 Report Share Posted May 23, 2007 Pit (dog) fights in the south : poker in vegas. Vicks been there, he's watched them fight, and he's probably made waggers as well, IMHO. Dog fighting is part of the culture that he's been raised up in. Anyone that fights dogs should burn, that's one thing I can not stand. The thought of fighting dogs makes me sick.Agreed. Anybody that fights dogs is a soulless human being. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stripes Posted May 23, 2007 Report Share Posted May 23, 2007 Having trapped insects in bottles together with the intent to watch them tear each other apart (as a little kid, granted), I am unqualified to speak negatively of Vick's alledged actions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agreen_112 Posted May 23, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2007 Having trapped insects in bottles together with the intent to watch them tear each other apart (as a little kid, granted), I am unqualified to speak negatively of Vick's alledged actions.LOL, I've killed many animals too. But to sit and watch 2 dogs fight to the death is just ........... I can't even think of the word for how I feel about that. They're mans best friend for crying out loud, how could you do that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The PatternMaster Posted May 23, 2007 Report Share Posted May 23, 2007 Having trapped insects in bottles together with the intent to watch them tear each other apart (as a little kid, granted), I am unqualified to speak negatively of Vick's alledged actions.LOL, I've killed many animals too. But to sit and watch 2 dogs fight to the death is just ........... I can't even think of the word for how I feel about that. They're mans best friend for crying out loud, how could you do that?So hunting animals for sport is more humane than making two dogs fight each other, and btw they don't fight to the death, just until a clear victor is found. Why would an owner let his cash cow get killed?As for Portis, I saw his interview last night on NFL Network and he didn't help his cause, please Clinton just shut the hell up!! When your team has to issue an apology to fans on your behalf then you have said way too much. He made a point about Vick being treated like he's guilty before he's been charged with any crime, but he's not Vick's lawyer and if he had half a brain he would know that the last thing Vick needs is some dumbass with a 9th grade education trying to fight his battles for him in court of public opinion vs. the media.My personal opinion on fighting dogs is it is cruelity to animals, I live in a neighborhood were many people breed dogs for fighting and to see what effect this has on the dogs is sad. But don't you think this is more of a case for the Animal Police than the FBI, I know there was some gambling going on but it's not like it's a billion dollar operation. Look, it's been established a long time ago that Ron Mexi...errr Mike Vick isn't the best decision maker to walk the earth, but he's not Tony Montana either and there are bigger fish to fry than illegal dog fights. I know Virginia is becoming a hotbed for gang activity, especially the notorious Latino gang MS-13. The FBI could investigate that, imo that would be a better use of resources. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacD BengalFan Posted May 23, 2007 Report Share Posted May 23, 2007 In the end this is a minor crime that media is trying to make into a bigger one, but Vick can blame no one but himself.This is not a "minor" crime as you suggest. In the state of Virginia, it is a Felony!!!! He could spend time in jail for this and the way the NFL is cracking down on misbehavior this could put his career in jeopardy. Some people may think of dog fighting as entertainment, it is not. It is INHUMANE to the dogs!!!! They suffer just as humans do when injured. These dogs are brutalized to satisfy certain individuals need for violence and the dog did nothing to deserve it. If Vick is involved, and I hope he is not, he will be subject to not only the criminal system but the NFL and public opinion. And he will lose on all three fronts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derekshank Posted May 25, 2007 Report Share Posted May 25, 2007 So hunting animals for sport is more humane than making two dogs fight each otheryes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacD BengalFan Posted May 25, 2007 Report Share Posted May 25, 2007 It is amazing how the individual in the mask didn't have the b@@ls to show his face stating how he loves the dogs!!!! If he loves them so much, why maime them? He is a coward as far as I am concerned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stripes Posted May 26, 2007 Report Share Posted May 26, 2007 I love a good dog as much as the next guy, but this entire debate seems inconsistent.Why is it anymore disgusting to hold a dog fight than to kill a bull in front of thousands of raving spectators?Why is a dog's life so much more important to the world than the life of a cockroach or a termite living under a floorboard?I don't view the animal's general intelligence as relevant when judging whether an act is cruel or not. It seems like people take offense when common American pets get killed for game or for sport but not when other animals of just about any variety die in the same manner.It's all relative, and despite the grimace that forms on my face when I think of a dog fight, my opinion of the people responsible really doesn't change much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derekshank Posted May 27, 2007 Report Share Posted May 27, 2007 I love a good dog as much as the next guy, but this entire debate seems inconsistent.Why is it anymore disgusting to hold a dog fight than to kill a bull in front of thousands of raving spectators?Why is a dog's life so much more important to the world than the life of a cockroach or a termite living under a floorboard?I don't view the animal's general intelligence as relevant when judging whether an act is cruel or not. It seems like people take offense when common American pets get killed for game or for sport but not when other animals of just about any variety die in the same manner.It's all relative, and despite the grimace that forms on my face when I think of a dog fight, my opinion of the people responsible really doesn't change much.I'm not inconsistent. There are differing degrees of the importance of life. There is a difference between setting a mouse trap in your house and murdering your wife. There is a general difference in my mind between an insect (cockroach) and a mammal (pitbull). But I don't think that torturing either is okay. That's the real difference here. A hunter doesn't nurse a deer back to health just to shoot it again a few weeks later. Dog fighting is cruel, and it has nothing to do with the fact that dogs are American pets.I'm not an animal rights activist... but I under no circumstances think that torturing animals for sport or financial benefit is in any way acceptable. I don't like bull fighting either because I find it cruel... but that's not really something I have any control over (as it isn't an American problem). If a guy finds it a fun sport to go deer hunting... I say "whatever." It's not my thing, but as long as they aren't torturing the thing I don't much care. But if you can't see the difference between ridding your house of pests and torturing dogs for sport - then there's not much left to debate. I'm not a psychologist, so I can't help you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted June 1, 2007 Report Share Posted June 1, 2007 It's all relative, and despite the grimace that forms on my face when I think of a dog fight, my opinion of the people responsible really doesn't change much.It's all relative...but relative to what? I look at it this way:When it comes to dogs, we -- humanity -- are gods.I don't mean that in the sense that I control the fate of my dog and could fight it or torture it or kill it or whatever. I mean that in the sense that dogs would not exist without humanity. We created them.In wild canids like wolves and foxes, nature selects for agressivness: it's the alpha males and females that get to mate and produce offspring; it's the biggest, toughest, canniest offspring that survive. But experiments with foxes in Russia decades ago showed that if you select for docility, breed foxes who aren't agressive towards humans with one another, you start to get dogs in a single generation. Physical and behaviorial changes start almost immediately: ears start to droop; tails start to wag; barking starts.I would not be surprised if something similar happened with the domestic cat, but I haven't seen any research saying so. As far as I know, dogs are the only species who have effectively been created by mankind. To me, that suggests that we have a special responsibility to dogs; we owe them a special debt. If there is a God, I think he'd have little better to judge us by than by how we have treated the dog...and I suspect dogfighting wouldn't earn us any "pearly points" if you get my drift... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesperateDerelict Posted June 8, 2007 Report Share Posted June 8, 2007 Does the involvement of feds make this case bigger? Faster? More Drawn out? I have no clue.Link from NFL.com: Feds on Vick's Case Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted June 8, 2007 Report Share Posted June 8, 2007 Florio over at PFT has been doing a pretty good job staying on top of developments; he even created a seperate page devoted solely to posts on the Vick case:http://www.profootballtalk.com/VickInvestigation.htmI tend to agree with his two main contentions, that, one, the Surrey County prosecutor, a part-time guy, was never interested in trying to charge Vick, who has enough money to buy half the lawyers in America to defend him; and two, the Feds are getting involved because of the Vick celebrity factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The PatternMaster Posted June 8, 2007 Report Share Posted June 8, 2007 Does the involvement of feds make this case bigger? Faster? More Drawn out? I have no clue.Link from NFL.com: Feds on Vick's CaseAppearantly the Feds have nothing better to do, since when did dog fighting become a national security issue. Living in the post 9/11 world were are freedoms are constantly under attack by evil doers who wish to do evil to us , don't you think they should have bigger fish to fry. Aren't there some missing children, rapist, murderers that need to be found. Maybe the government is trying to distract people from the fact that Bush's approval rating is a record low. As a taxpayer I find this troubling that this is what the government chooses to spend their resources on. Is convicting Vick of dog fighting going to make the world a safer place for the tax payers of America, hardly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Posted June 8, 2007 Report Share Posted June 8, 2007 I honestly think that is sick. Fighting ANY animal is wrong. I lost all respect for Portis and Vick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.