There's an aspect of this that troubles me. I'm not familiar with the physical evidence in the case, nor with the records of any of the accused. But we've known for a long time that the State can buy a man's testimony, truthful or not, by confronting him with the alternatives of a costly, high-jeopardy trial and a lenient plea bargain.

I'm opposed to plea bargains in general. They don't appear to satisfy the Constitutional requirement that an indictment for any crime to which a defendant must answer must first pass muster with a grand jury.

If the State thinks it has a sound case against Michael Vick, it should try him on it. If he's convicted, he should face the statutory penalty. But let's bear in mind that perfectly innocent men have felt compelled to accept plea bargains because the cost of defending themselves, including the cost to their reputations and personal relations, was likely to ruin them even if they were acquitted. It's not certain that that's not the case here, where the prosecutors stand to "score big" by putting away a high profile sports celebrity.

FWP--And I am the King Of Siam--BS.

FWP,
Good luck with that idea. There are some key players in this process you will need to get on board: defense attorneys, prosecutors, judges, victims and ,yes, even the defendants.

And get your wallet out too. Trials are enormously expensive. I can't even fathom the cost of taking every case to trial.

HughS is correct: the costs of taking every case to trial would mean hiring several times the prosecutors and judges, building more courthouses (since they are frightfully backed up already), and more prisons to accommodate the longer sentences which should result.

Plea bargains keep the system moving. No one has to agree to plead guilty. There have been several court challenges to the federal system - although I am unsure if the constitutional argument put forth by Francis was used in any of the - which all failed.

Vick's first book:

"How I Blew $200 million"

Hosed.

A lack of means to defend himself, is hardly the case in Vick's case.

Faced with his own guilt, of which he is certain to know, and the overwhelming evidence arrayed against him, he's taking the prudent path of least harm and least time incarcerated.

His only defense at trial at this point would be to attack the laws that ban dog fighting to begin with. That would be a public relations debacle that he'd never recover from.

Vick lied, dogs died.

How are the race baiters & poverty pimps going to explain this downfall? They can't blame poverty, they can't blame society, they can't blame racism.

He had the world in his hands and he blew it. I've always said it's not about race or poverty. It's about character.

Francis,

Cost of a possible Vick trial really doesn't come into play. Vick's loaded; it's a non-issue for him.

When he's got two of his cronies already testifying that Vick himself killed the dogs, well, the man might as well plead guilty rather than more charges (which the DA is threatening), face a lesser sentence than he would should he go to trial and lose and, then, maybe after his time is up, resurrect what's left of his pathetic career and life.

Jo

How are the race baiters & poverty pimps going to explain this downfall? They can't blame poverty, they can't blame society, they can't blame racism.

Come on, isn't it obvious, they'll blame the dogs.

Come on, isn't it obvious, they'll blame the dogs.

You're probably right!

Along those lines, some members of the NAACP were on Hannity last week trying to tell everyone to quit rushing to judgment. That he is innocent until proven guilty. And we all know they did that in the Duke Lacrosse case, right?! lol.

You can't make this stuff up.

Somewhat related, but I've lost any respect I might have had left for Tiki Barber.
Last night, during the game, they started talking about Vick.
One guy said something about Vick rolling over on other players. Barber's (angry) reaction was that Vick would not be allowed in any locker room if he talked about others doing the same thing. It was as if he was doing an ad for a "Don't Snitch" campaign.
I thought it was pretty despicable.

Veeshir ~ I saw that, too, and was equally disappointed. If, as Barber seemed to be saying, the players would welcome back a dog-torturer so long as he didn't expose any of them for torturing animals or gambling, then the NFL has apparently adopted some sort of prison culture.

I wasn't happy to see a Virginia alum saying it, but if it's true, it isn't his fault. However, he did seem rather emphatic on the point.