Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Michael Vick legal discussion thread

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Cashmoneydrew View Post
    and the waterbottle
    I hate when people do this. Vick was cleared of ANY wrong-doing in that case. Why are you holding it against him?

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Moses View Post
      I hate when people do this. Vick was cleared of ANY wrong-doing in that case. Why are you holding it against him?
      because it counts as a "run-in" with the law.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Cashmoneydrew View Post
        because it counts as a "run-in" with the law.
        So if I'm a suspect for murder but it turns out I wasn't involved at all and I did nothing wrong, it should still be held over me? After all, I was a suspect in a murder case.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Cashmoneydrew View Post
          because it counts as a "run-in" with the law.


          How is an airlines complete **** up a run in with the law?

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Moses View Post
            So if I'm a suspect for murder but it turns out I wasn't involved at all and I did nothing wrong, it should still be held over me? After all, I was a suspect in a murder case.
            read what i wrote again. it says its a run-in with the law. you cant deny that it wasn't.

            Comment


            • #21
              The water bottle is relevant. It wasn't that Vick was cleared due to evidence exhonorating him, it was a matter that it wasn't a case worth pursuing. It was a trace amount of marijuana residue, not nearly enough to pursue any intent to deal charges. Even had they found up to an ounce of actual marijuana in that bottle, Vick would have faced only a fine similar to that of a speeding ticket. It wasn't worth tying up crime labs and district attorneys to pursue, especially in light of the expensive attorneys Vick would have employed to defend himself. It just wasn't a big enough deal to bother prosecuting. It stayed off his police record, but Mike Vick sneaking weed around was another bad story for the league, and it does speak to his character as a guy who isn't exactly a model citizen.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Scar View Post
                The water bottle is relevant. It wasn't that Vick was cleared due to evidence exhonorating him, it was a matter that it wasn't a case worth pursuing. It was a trace amount of marijuana residue, not nearly enough to pursue any intent to deal charges. Even had they found up to an ounce of actual marijuana in that bottle, Vick would have faced only a fine similar to that of a speeding ticket. It wasn't worth tying up crime labs and district attorneys to pursue, especially in light of the expensive attorneys Vick would have employed to defend himself. It just wasn't a big enough deal to bother prosecuting. It stayed off his police record, but Mike Vick sneaking weed around was another bad story for the league, and it does speak to his character as a guy who isn't exactly a model citizen.
                On Monday, January 22, 2007, the test results indicated there were no illegal substances in the water bottle and Vick was cleared of any wrongdoing. Vick also was drug tested and the results were negative.[17]
                He used it to store jewellery in. Know your stuff before you comment.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Cashmoneydrew View Post
                  read what i wrote again. it says its a run-in with the law. you cant deny that it wasn't.
                  What are you talking about? A "run-in" with the law is irrelevant if you didn't do anything wrong.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    If that's what you want to believe, I've got some waterfront property to sell you. What happened there was making a minor charge quietly go away. It had already made the news, but they didn't have enough to press any meaningful charges. Saying the bottle was clean saved black eyes all around. Jewelry my ass.
                    If OJ Simpson came to your house selling knives, would you tell your wife, "Sure, babe, let him in, he was cleared of all charges..." Or could you come off the constitutional rights soapbox long enough to use your head and see the obvious?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Scar View Post
                      If that's what you want to believe, I've got some waterfront property to sell you. What happened there was making a minor charge quietly go away. It had already made the news, but they didn't have enough to press any meaningful charges. Saying the bottle was clean saved black eyes all around. Jewelry my ass.
                      If OJ Simpson came to your house selling knives, would you tell your wife, "Sure, babe, let him in, he was cleared of all charges..." Or could you come off the constitutional rights soapbox long enough to use your head and see the obvious?
                      LOL are you kidding? What's more likely:

                      1) Vick used the water bottle to store jewellery in to prevent it from being stolen. Airport security mistaked it as a device used to transport drugs.

                      2) Airport security discovered Vick transporting drugs. They didn't feel like charging him. A crime lab illegally reported that there were no drugs in the water bottle. Vick was released.

                      Gimme a break. The bottle was TESTED and found clean by a crime lab. What evidence was there supporting your theory?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        This isn't even a discussion worth continuing. The evidence is massive. The evidence is damning. The charges are being brought by the United States of America. I highly suggest you read the charges and evidence brought against him, but I get the feeling you could watch me shoot someone between the eyes and you'd need a judge and jury to tell you that I'd murdered someone.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Moses View Post
                          What are you talking about? A "run-in" with the law is irrelevant if you didn't do anything wrong.
                          well tell that pacman.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Scar View Post
                            This isn't even a discussion worth continuing. The evidence is massive. The evidence is damning. The charges are being brought by the United States of America. I highly suggest you read the charges and evidence brought against him, but I get the feeling you could watch me shoot someone between the eyes and you'd need a judge and jury to tell you that I'd murdered someone.
                            Don't bother. Moses is too stubborn to ever admit he was wrong. He won't jump off the bandwagon until Vick goes to jail. Someone447 and Moses are the only ones left on the bandwagon. I kind of feel bad for them, it's kind of pathetic.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Look, all my dogs have come from rescue shelters, I have done training with a number of them that needed to taught to stop aggressive habits caused by previous owners, so this issue hits real close to home for me.
                              Moses is an intelligent guy. I've seen that all over this forum. I don't mean to come across as belittling him. It's just come on, forget the animal rights tangents and fair trial textbooks and look at the facts. This is one of the most shut and sealed cases in history. There's no leg to stand on to try and defend Vick other than the same inane technicalities and loopholes that his lawyers will employ to try and get him off. Even if they find one that works, it'll never change what Vick has so painfully obviously done.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Scar View Post
                                Look, all my dogs have come from rescue shelters, I have done training with a number of them that needed to taught to stop aggressive habits caused by previous owners, so this issue hits real close to home for me.
                                Moses is an intelligent guy. I've seen that all over this forum. I don't mean to come across as belittling him. It's just come on, forget the animal rights tangents and fair trial textbooks and look at the facts. This is one of the most shut and sealed cases in history. There's no leg to stand on to try and defend Vick other than the same inane technicalities and loopholes that his lawyers will employ to try and get him off. Even if they find one that works, it'll never change what Vick has so painfully obviously done.
                                If only Johnny Cochrane was still alive . . . . .

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X

                                Debug Information