View Single Post
Old 07-18-2007, 09:32 AM   #47
PSUSkinsFan21
The Starter
 
PSUSkinsFan21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 48
Posts: 1,340
Re: Grand Jury Indicts Vick

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grim21Reaper View Post
I was talking about the stupid story about him breaking a dog's back. Your mind is already made up (based on zero factual knowledge by the way) so it isn't even worth discussing with you.

Like I said before. Is anyone considering the source? I am sure the people who are going to testify are upstanding members of society who just felt like doing a good deed by giving up information on him.

"Government of the people for the people by the people" We aren't the government? Sit on granddad's knee so I can help you find a clue.
First of all, who's mind is made up? According to you, there is "zero" chance Vick gets convicted for this. Exactly what "factual knowledge" do you have about this case that we don't that makes you so sure?

Second, people have been convicted of far greater crimes with worse witnesses than what the government has lined up here. In an interview on ESPN last night they interviewed an informant who has already assisted the feds in numerous other cases leading to search warrants and convictions.

Third, I'm not sure I understand the point of your quote, as the quote is meant to refer to our democratic system of representative governement (not the court systems), but in any event, the fact that Vick's jury will be comprised of members of the public actually works against your argument that he won't be convicted of these crimes. The fact that we are all horrified by the accusations made against Vick and that we all have the common sense to put two plus two together to figure out what really happened here doesn't bode well for Vick.

I mean come on, there are absolute facts here that just don't add up to a "not-guilty" verdict. Vick comes into money for the first time in his life, immediately sets about buying a property that is unquestionably used for dog fighting based on the condition of the property and the instruments found there, numerous witnesses come forward placing Vick at dog fights, and we're supposed to believe he didn't know what was going on? Give me a break. Please tell me one single fact you've heard that tends to prove his innocence.

Finally, as for the "urban legend", the indictment notes that at least one dog was killed by Vick and company by slamming the dog's body to the ground. You might want to read through the whole indictment before you come to this scumbag's defense.
__________________
"Hail to the Redskins!" and "Fight on State!"
PSUSkinsFan21 is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
 
Page generated in 1.68760 seconds with 10 queries