A dog is a dog...Vick is the dog of all dogs. He should go all the way down (never again be allowed to play NFL or any other profess. sport)and get 20 + yrs. and then executed like he did to some of those dogs PERIOD.

There it is - guilty, guilty, guilty. This case is not about race, its not about unfair media attention. Its about Vick funding an interstate gambling operation based on unbelievable cruelty to animals.

I hope he gets a long sentence in a federal penitentiary. Jail is no joke-he will learn all about that. He is in for a whole new education.

Vick has now admitted what most of us have known for some time...he is an animal. On top of that, he will lie to your face as long as he thinks he can get away with it. Contrition? No way! His apologies now are just part of the game so he can try to get back in the NFL

How is Vick going to apologize to the ones hurt the most by his actions? His family? No, the dogs. Can you imagine what it is like to be penned in and forced to fight another animal to the death? Worse yet, they kidnapped people's beloved pets and used them for training "dogmeat." This is beyond inhumane, and Vick deserves to be imprisoned for years, and to never again have a football career.

my dog gets a special treat tonight! keeping it real!!

I only hope the judge is a dog person - as I am - and sees that he goes away for a long long time. How does a person that does these dreadful things to those precious creatures live with himself?

lets hope he gets at least a year.

then bush can pardon vick (make that commute the sentence) so the falcons don't suffer

I do not for a moment believe the contrition bit, but even if he is contrite, it does not matter. All rhetoric aside, this person should not be in the NFL again, ever. After he serves his time, he needs to find some other career.

Sports is well rid of this dispicable creature. Vick has probably yet to realize that his career is finished forever. He'll have plenty of time to think about it.

Whatever his fate, it will be nothing compared to what he did to defensless animals.

Thanks, Mr. Cohen, for making it clear that this crime is bad... but not really all that bad. I suppose that in order for a life to be truly valuable and appreciated, it has to be a human life.
In this case, since it doesn't really affect "the rule of law or meaningfully change your life -- or mine," it should be whisked as quickly and quietly off of the front page as possible.
Well done. I am so glad someone has finally been able to solve all of my moral quandaries in such a concise turn of phrase. All that "do unto others" stuff can be forgotten or the preciousness of God's creatures. Thou shalt enter heaven by abiding and not significantly disobeying the rule of law. Peace be with you.
Thanks for the insight.
I also love the bit about how this is a "terrible legal situation" for Vick. Yes. Legal situation. Not a longstanding series of exhibiting questionable values, or his spontaneous instinct to initially blame his family. By your account, he is an upstanding citizen and a fine human specimen--he just has a minor legal issue.
You must be a Falcons fan.

To show you how misinformed most Americans are I have read several threads on several sites today and the majority believe that this case is about dogfighting. In fact the government had supplemental indictments ready to serve charging money laundering, income tax evasion, interstate corruption charges, etc. The actual dog fighting part of it is a very minor part.

He lives with himself because its a dog. And a dog is just another animal. There are plenty of fish/birds/bear/deer killed every year in the name of sport. I'm not quite clear how killing a dog makes you a monster but killing a deer makes you a sportsmen. But whatever. Michael Vick is going to jail, so we can all stop pretending that we care about dogfighting.

He lives with himself because its a dog. And a dog is just another animal. There are plenty of fish/birds/bear/deer killed every year in the name of sport. I'm not quite clear how killing a dog makes you a monster but killing a deer makes you a sportsmen. But whatever. Michael Vick is going to jail, so we can all stop pretending that we care about dogfighting.

He lives with himself because its a dog. And a dog is just another animal. There are plenty of fish/birds/bear/deer killed every year in the name of sport. I'm not quite clear how killing a dog makes you a monster but killing a deer makes you a sportsmen. But whatever. Michael Vick is going to jail, so we can all stop pretending that we care about dogfighting.

"Mike Vick will be found innocent..He has never lied to the Atlanta Falcons fans,not once..He (w)as "Brutally Chastised", for being open and honest about not giving 100% in a game...He said he was innocent about the water bottle incident,and Miami police investigated and examined the bottle and found out he was telling the truth [what it was, was that they didn't have enough substantive evidence to indict]...He missed an awards dinner in Washington D.C.,in his honor,for all the charitable events and things he did for kids with his foundation,and his particaption with other players with theirs..In other words,he did more than anyone else..Always giving..

THUGS DON'T GIVE..THEY TAKE..MICHAEL VICK IS NO THUG,PEOPLE!!!!

U may call me a "Vick Apologist",and are tired of people like me coming to his defense..Well,i am someone who believes in being innocent until proven guilty..

ANd i for one,is sick and tired of those of u accusing him of being guilty when u have no proof!!!!

Posted by: Nunna Yo Biznezz | June 28, 2007 10:23 AM

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/benchconference/2007/06/being_fair_to_michael_vick.html

The dogfighting and other potential crimes is enough to really damage Vick's career for good, but in this country a public figure can become a criminal and bounce back. What he did was horrific and sick, and should be punished definately. But let me ask this, do we express the same outrage over DAILY murders of children, women, the elderly? Where is the massive protests in the streets when it comes to the killing and abuse of human beings? We do not have that massive outrage yet, and it is a horrible shame on this American society. We need to get our own dirty laundry as human beings straightened out.

Thanks Aaron(DC) for showing the world that unhumanity, cruelty and cynicism are not confined to NFL players alone.

VT's Frank Beamer does such a great job with his kids. Vick was a thug in college and the coaches let him get away with it -- all in the name of a win. The Washington Post sports writers should keep that in mind as they continues their press on the Virginia Tech football program.

What Vick did IMHO is the most hideous crime ever committed by an NFL player or any other pro athlete. Most other crimes related to drugs, murders, etc. had somewhat plausible, if not particularly excusable explanations.

So why did Vick engage in a dogfighting operation? Surely, no one is naive to think he did it for the money. The answer is simply that he got pleasure out of watching two antagonized animals rip each other to pieces and had no moral conscience to prevent him from participating in drowing and hanging the ones that lost.

Anyone even hinting that this monster deserves another shot in the NFL should have their heads checked. He deserves to live the rest of his life as pariah along with OJ.

Vick is a piece of crap. There are millions of dog owners who took great offense to Vick and his possee. The reason you cant relate is because your housing project does not allow animals.

Individuals commit a fallacy in logic when they become apologists for criminals by comparing the crimes of a crook with a worse criminal. Why a murderer of three or four people like Stanley "Snookie" Williams, who was put down by California two years ago, could be let off by these same morons when they compare his crimes with Hitler's or Stalin's mass murders.

Vick is chicksh(t and a coward. If one of his dogs showed as much cowardice from the consequences as Vicky he would be electrocuted. Vick deserves the same.

If I were Mike's financial planner, I would advise him to cut back on his posse's benefits quickly.

First off, downsize personnel. That's right, cutback, then standback and take a good appraisal. What next, well medical/dental/and life insurance are a no brainer, shop for a less expensive plan for the posse.

Next, cut those generous 401-k matching contributions, cut that fat & get down to the gristle. You gotta separate the real syncophants from the flotsam. Company pimprides, that is so OVER. Weapons purchases, they're scaled down to 3 a month (surrogate buyer, of course). Free posse drugs, that's finished. Luxurious trips, check with P.O. first, then keep to a minimum.

Lastly, Mike, lose the little brother. Yeah I know, tough love, but I forsee BIG Trouble in the near future for TinyThug, & those are capital T's. He's gonna be nothing but a ball & chain on your operation, so be a man and kick him to the curb now.

That'll be 50 large, I'll bill you.

"What Vick did IMHO is the most hideous crime ever committed by an NFL player or any other pro athlete."

Worse than Rae Carruth murdering his pregnant girlfriend? Really?

Comeback? Second act?

Michael Vick's actions weren't simply a "mistake" on the order of taking steroids or using recreational drugs. Vick's behavior is sociopathic. He IS a dangerous criminal.

He does not belong in the NFL or professional sports. Anyone who tortures and kills animals for fun and profit, is not fit for human society, let alone, making millions of dollars and holding himself up as a "sports hero", especially to kids. I'm shocked that anyone back his return to football, most of all a WaPo columnist.

From Wikipedia:

Psychological studies have shown that individuals who take pleasure in inflicting harm on animals are more likely to do so to humans.

According to the New York Times, the FBI has found that a history of cruelty to animals is one of the traits that regularly appears in its computer records of serial rapists and murderers. A survey of psychiatric patients who had repeatedly tortured dogs and cats found all of them had high levels of aggression toward people as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruelty_to_animals

"The reason you cant relate is because your housing project does not allow animals."

This made me laugh out loud. And call me cynical, inhumane and cruel if you want, but I doubt that you or any of the other millions of dog owners who were offended can explain to me why killing dogs in the name of sport is worse than killing any other animal. Our commitment to human treatment of animals is arbitrary, And Vick is a victim of this inconsistency.

Well if its on Wikipedia, it MUST be true!

Look, let's not act like Vick was sitting alone in his basement slaughtering animals. The guy was into dogfighting. There are PLENTY of people all over the world who enjoy this, however barbaric and cruel you think it is. Michael Vick was in it for the gambling and the thrill of the violence. A football player getting off on violence and competition? Unheard of!

Micheal Vick is going to punished, but if you believe for one second that this will do anything to hurt the popularity of dogfighting -- not jsut among the public, but even among pro athletes -- you're dreaming.

Andrew,

Your seemingly, easy going attitude, towards Michael Vick and the crime of dog fighting is beyond comprehension. In the hope that your position, springs from a lack of knowledge on the subject, I've included an excerpt from the Humane Society web site on dog fighting.

Isn't it time that we as a society started asking the best from our sports and entertainment stars, rather than giving them a pass for their worst behavior?

.......

http://www.hsus.org/acf/fighting/dogfight/dog_eat_dog_the_bloodthirsty_underworld_of_dogfighting.html

Fighting dogs are bred, conditioned and trained to do one thing--win. But no matter what the outcome, every fight has the potential to be a dog's last. Dogs who make it out of the pit alive often receive little or no aftercare for broken bones, deep bite wounds and internal injuries inflicted during fights. "It's not unusual for a dog to die from blood loss or infection afterwards," says Goodwin.

In addition to the extensive injures they sustain, many dogs, once outside the ring, are barely provided with the basics they need to survive--food, water and shelter--and live in extended isolation. "Fighting dogs live on chains their entire lives, only getting off for training or a match," says Maloney.

***The dogs aren't the only ones who suffer. It's impossible to estimate how many other animals and humans have been harmed by violent people who are desensitized to brutality, in part as a result of watching or participating in dogfighting and other forms of animal cruelty. "Violence begets violence," Maloney explains. "Research proves that people who abuse animals are more likely to abuse people. In addition, fighting enthusiasts often bring young children to the fights, desensitizing them to violence and teaching them that violence is accepted by society."

Animals in communities where dogfighting exists are also in danger for another reason--birds, rabbits, cats, small dogs and other animals are often captured or stolen and typically killed during training sessions where they are used as bait for fighting dogs.

***In addition, dogfighting is connected to other forms of crime, including money laundering and drug trafficking. "Crime doesn't happen in a vacuum," says Goodwin. "When you have violent people betting large sums of money, you're going to have problems. Dogfighting is heavily linked to gambling, drugs, prostitution, gangs, and guns."

Notice non of you are wishing the same or worse for his co defendents? They lived at the house and ran the business in vicks name yet we have this image of vick being the leader of a dog killing enterprise. How he has the time to kill dogs on a regular bases and play professional football is beyond me. Its like regarding the guys that were really killing the dogs, his buddies we act as if they were standing by when they were actually more hands on than he was. Please someone name the other defendents without having to go back and read the story. They dont even matter and nor would this story if Michael Vick was not a celebrity athlete. I will be glad when another celeb does something dumb so we can move past this because this is way overhyped just like paris hilton going to jail. Im glad he pleaded because I would have been too tired of every person who wants to get on their own soapbox and act holier than thou using michael vick to wash away their own sins.

I'll see if I can explain it to you Aaron. Yes, we eat cows and chickens. But we do not starve them and then set them to tear each other apart while wagering on the outcome. We do not hang them after defeat in battle. We do not drown them or electrocute them when they fail to be vicious enough.

For you to call Vick a "victim" in any context shows that you lack a moral compass.

FEED Michael Vick to his dogs!

Or as Senator Byrd of West Virginia said so eloguently," (Vick) and his ilk should be executed"

I hate to say it...I really, really, do because I have pets also and I think on a personal and visceral level what Michael Vick did is horrible, especially when he and/or his compatriots involved animals that were kidnapped, stolen or otherwise obtained from other non-dog fight purveyors. However, the dogs directly involved were bred for fighting. That's their purpose. As long as there are people who will pay for this, it's going to exist, and these animals weren't suitable for any other use, such as pets. The same can be said for the billions of animals we as a species raise for food every day, often treat badly, slaughter thoughtlessly and consume constantly. If we think about it at all, we dismiss it as "well, that's their purpose - to be food". How is that so different? I suppose Vick wouldn't be in nearly so much trouble if he admitted he was a part of a religion that eats dogs as part of their culture. Again, we're drawing an arbitrary line about what species are OK to kill (and how) and those that aren't. It makes no sense.

So this is what "keepin' it real" gets you? A trip to the penitentiary and a ruined career? Wow, more than a little bit self-destructive this philosophy... Anyway, I suppose Ookie might play "tight end" for his cellmate in prison but I doubt he'll be playing QB again anytime soon. Oh, and Aaron, you only need to hit "submit" once. Your original posting betrayed you as a retard the first time, you didnt need to reinforce that perception by posting it in triplicate.

Yeah, he is an animal. He deserves to suffer the same fate that he inflicted on his dogs. Let's hope he gets it in prison.

Aside from the pros and cons about how heinous a guy Vick was for what he did to the animals, he's probably going to have some major problems with the NFL regardless of how long he's behind bars. What's the main reason dogfighting exists? Gambling, folks, gambling. To the NFL, that's a far worse offense. Stay tuned to see whether Vick has a career to come back to. (BTW, I see the online bookies already are offering -- of course! -- bets on whether he will return to the field when all is done.)

Football fans will welcome back back Vick with open arms and a huge salary.

"But we do not starve them and then set them to tear each other apart while wagering on the outcome. We do not hang them after defeat in battle. We do not drown them or electrocute them when they fail to be vicious enough."

No, but we do pump the full of chemicals toensure that they make meat/eggs/milk to our liking. And what about all of the bears/deer/fish/birds who are killed for no other reason than for people to have stuffed and mounted? How is that any less barbaric.

And spare me the "moral compass" talk. I'm not advocating murder, rape, or theft or any crime against a human being. I'm not really even advocating dogifighting. I just don't see this as a crime that someone should lose years off his life for.

To Dennis:
Do you have any idea what goes on in a meat-packing plant? A rendering plant? A chicken processing plant? A commercial swine or cow processing farm or facility? It would make you sick. We may have come a long way from Upton Sinclair but it's not nearly as far as you'd think, given the advances we've made in other areas. It's still a nasty, painful, dirty business and part of the immigration debate, actually. Yes, there ARE jobs that most people with a choice flat out would not take, including most of those in the commercial meat producing industry.

I think the appropriate punishment for Vick and his cohorts is to be thrown into a ring and mad to fight to the death. That's what gladiators were made to do in ancient Rome. Why not have the fans of dog fighting watch professional athletes fight to the death?

This time last year, the Duke Lacrosse players were facing a trial in which "There would have been no true presumption of innocence" yet they didn't plead guilty.

Why ???

Innocence perhaps, unlike Vick ??

He could have walked by playing the OJ card to a jury.

His sentence could be mitigated by the fact that he got rid of some of these pit bulls, which are a menace to everyone especially when they are in a neighborhood and owned by criminal thugs.

CSA,

The OJ card only works when you commit your crime alone. In this case too many whitenesses.

As for getting rid of the pitbulls, thats a matter of who's raising them. In the West Village of Manhattan in the '90's we had a dozen pit/mixes as well as three 120+ lb Rottwilers, and to a one they were all sweethearts.

Years later I had to live in Antigua in the West Indies and I had to hide my dog behind double fenses ( spaced based on my best estimate of how far a poisioned piece of goat meat could be thrown) since I was afraid of the "humans" poisioning my dog.

It all comes down to the "culture" of the neighborhood.

In the article titled, "The Least Surprising Plea Deal of the Year", writer Andrew Cohen wrote, "But the fate of Vick and Co. is not going to alter the rule of law or meaningfully change your life -- or mine."
Mr. Cohen just as Cancer is Cancer, a Criminal is a Criminal. You have no idea what will change our lives. What criminal convicted of any crime, has changed your life? You are obviously rather ignorant as to what affects any human being.

Why cant this guy have a job after he serves his debt to society? Playing in the NFL is merely a job. It just happens to be more public facing than most other jobs. I'm sorry, but if we kept all felons from getting jobs, then why not just keep them all in prison for life?

You can't ban handguns until you ban pit bulls.

I was a major Michael Vick / NFL fan, and am a vegetarian for ethical reasons. I don't wish harm to either Vick or any animal, whether by dog or cock fighting, hunting, or the meat industry.

But Vick knowingly stepped over the line, and in today's culture, dog fighting is "over the line". Hopefully our culture will see the farm meat industry as also cruel and inhumane. Most farmed animals, especially pigs, are as intelligent, emotional and social as dogs - and live a life of imprisonment until butchered.

Meanwhile, I don't want to see Vick play professional football again.

Audrey,

Apparently the judge IS a dog lover.

when the preist molested over 500 children, i didn't hear this outcry, when there have been over 3 thousends deaths in IRAQ i don't hear this outcry,and what about the injustice in GA and LA. I am a dog lover myself.My dog is part of the family, but her life does not out weigh my daughters..and what he did is wrong,,,,but people lets not lose fucos on the real price...and thats human life. let's punish him, send him to jail, but after he is punish let him have a life

The prosecution did not do justice if they dropped the gambling charges against Vick. Under NFL rules, gambling on dog fights could end Vick's football career, a more appropriate punishment for a guy who, until today, kept telling America that he was innocent. His "I'm sorry" is really only an "I'm sorry I was caught."

It starts with animals, it progresses to humans. No mercy, no pity, for one who had neither for creatures helpless against him.

I really dont think anyone on here condones what Vick did. I think the public outrage and the media has made this the worst crime ever committed.

Vick will get his punishment but he most likely will play in the NFL again. There are players (one is Leonared Little of the Rams) who were convicted of drunk driving and actually killed people, and they were able to resume their careers.

This is a crazy world that we live in. One minute we are immune to the murders, rapes, wars, etc and then the next minute we wake up and try to measure a dog killing crime as something that requires a death sentence. We need to look in the mirror and make a change for our younger generation!!

Cohen's apologia for Vick's brutality and sociopathic actions--it's only a little matter of torturing and killing defenseless animals--is absolutely revolting. The downright viciousness of such an illegal operation is merely brushed off, like one might brush off a playful dog. For Cohen, morality isn't an issue; it's all just an inconvenient legal matter. Now that's genuinely disturbing.

Unbelievable. Another Washington Post columnist following the now familiar path of telling us mentally challenged readers what stand we ought to take toward a multi-millionaire celebrity caught redhanded engaging in criminal--and, in this case, unspeakably cruel--behavior. And the columnist's smug advice is that we should now welcome a relatively moderate sentence and then just forget the whole thing!

As a native Georgian, I know where I have heard this type of crud before. Every time someone pointed to the evidence of the evil results of a system of segregation, along would come the calm voices of reason telling us not to sweat the small stuff and to keep our sights focused on the big-picture proof that segregation was a wonderful system that ultimately worked to the benefit of both blacks and whites. These smug voices would keep at it, even after another black man was lynched.

That's what Andrew Cohen reminds me of.

I look forward to Virginia prosecuting this slimeball to the fullest extent of the law. And God help any sports team that ever again hires this immoral cretin. I will joyfully join in organizing a total boycott of that team, including a boycott of any business that seeks the endorsement of ANY player on that team, and I will be there to participate in the demonstrations outside the stadium as long as this cretin wears a uniform.

There's a lot of outrage about this dog thing- may well be justified- but I seem to see rather less outspokeness and condemnation as far as what is done by our country to innocent people abroad and in our trials. Do we just assume that humans in some foreign countries are automatically more guilty just by living in an area than a dog? Don't misunderstand-not diminishing mistreating animals either.

Speaking of "satisfying resolutions of cases before they go to trial", how about that quiet multi-million dollar Imus settlement? How does that make look all the vindictive willingness to ruin someone's life without conscience for people's paper-thin self-importance?

Geez, the bloodthirsty comments posted on this column lead me to the conclusion that many of you are no better than the criminals that ran the dogfighting ring.

What Vick and his co-conspirators did was horrible, and they should be subject to severe punishment. But the point of the column was more about the interesting legal choices that Vick faced and the likely outcome. Those of you who read some sort of advocacy into the column ought to read it again with a little more objectivity. This is, after all, a blog about the law, not whether we agree or disagree with the cruelty Vick and his posse inflicted on their dogs.

lets see, some idiot compares hunting for food to placing dogs in the ring to fight till the death(after having been tortured so that they only know to fight other dogs... or if not death, vick hangs them slowly so that they die over a few hours.

hardly the same thing.
why not place to deer in a ring to fight

Funny Andrew, last time you didn't seem to care. Here is what you said back in June in a story critical of those investigating Mr. Vick:

"I have no idea whether Vick knew that dog fighting was going on at his property or whether he was involved in it (and, really, I'm not sure I care). But I do know from covering the law that people deserve more from the media than Vick has received in this instance."

Now suddenly you care about the dogs. Well, that's nice. Now you see virtue in trying to rehabilitate a man who has been fingered as electrocuting and I believe strangling dogs. Pretty sicko compated to slaughtering horses for France's steak chavalier.

it's obvious that people kill animals in this country. Henceforth, Vick's case is not unique. The only difference is that Vick is a renown athlete and the court of public opinions is trying to do the thing it is best known for by fomenting and manufacturing false facts to convince the American public that Vick is guilty. Would I be surprised if he is found guilty? Of course, not.

Do I believe that he has committed a crime that he should be responsible for? Well, I don't believe that this incident should be labeled as "crime," but mistake. I think that Vick should have been responsible not to let this mistake happened on his property. Therefore, I am sick the way we treated legal issues in this country. How many folks have committed horrendous crimes in this country, but they are not treated harshly the way the media treated Vick's case, Michael's case, Kobe's case, and O.J.'s case.

Lawstudent, I don't think your implied playing of the race card is fair or appropriate. Here we have evidence that Vick did some really horrendous things that happen to violate federal law. He is about to plead guilty and admit the factual basis for his guilt. If your problem is his selection for prosecution in this case, I agree that his celebrity had something to do with it. But I'd argue that his status as a sports hero and idol in some ways makes him a better choice for prosecution. Prosecutive decisions ought to deter people from committing similar crimes. Vick's celebrity and the publicity over his case, and his punishment, give the prosecution a big bang for the buck where general deterrence is concerned. We don't want people doing the kinds of things he is going to admit to doing.

The unfortunate racial aspect of the case reared its head when people like Deion Sanders started defending Vick with statements that amounted to a defense of dogfighting as a sort of "black thing" that others wouldn't understand. I personally thought this argument denigrated the African-American community, but that's just me.

ExAUSA,

Lawstudent never mentioned Vick being black in his post. Why are you making "Vick being black" out to be the base of Lawstudent's arguement?

Anyway, I believe Vick took the plea deal because he was trapped. and he was trapped not because he was guilty or nor guilty. But because of his celeberty, the fact that the dog fighting took place in a home he owned, and co-defendants took plea deals willing to testify against him. So how could any impartial jury be created when most citizens have been tainted with what the media has said. And the media always prints facts. (heavy sarcasm) This is the point that Cohen is making. Vick is taking the plea deal because most of America believes he is guilty, and the trial with both sides presenting their evidence has yet to begin.

And agreeing to a plea deal by admission of the defendant, is a guilty plea, however (as silly as this will sound) that does not necessarily mean that the defendant is turely guilty. Many folks take plea deals because they look at the situation as Cohen says, and that is the best option. If you throw in legal fees for a long drawn out trial that could put a good size hurting on the defendant, even if he wins. Remember the drycleaners that were sued for some massive sum (something like over a million dollars) by a DC official for allegedly losing his pants (which were probably not worth so much). The cleaners won the case, but were left with legal fees that might bankrupt them. So if there were offered a plea deal on the order of $500 would they take it? Probably even though they know they are innocent, because going through the process would be so expensive to prove (actually affirm) their innocence.

Dare I say it, but OJ was found not guilty in criminal court, i.e. there was not enough evidence beyond a shadow of a doubt that OJ did the crime, and the American public still thinks he did it. BTW don't post about the civil case because in that case the burden of proof is much lighter, i.e. the jury needs to think there is a 51% chance that OJ did it instead of the 100% chance that OJ did it in criminal court.

Last thing. The Aaron (DC) mentioned hunting for sport, not food. Which very easily on the moral level is the same as what Vick's family members and he allegedly did WRT dogs and dog fighting. What is the difference?? hunting is legal, not more morally right, but just more legal. The sad thing is with his money Vick could have purchased a casino or a casino boat to get his gambling fix. Pretty sad that he was so stupid to put himself in such a vulnerable position especially when his younger brother pissed away his potential NFL career.

This was actually a good blog and Cohen makes excellent points.

"How many folks have committed horrendous crimes in this country, but they are not treated harshly the way the media treated Vick's case, Michael's case, Kobe's case, and O.J.'s case."

Sorry, I call it as I see it.

And O.J. was not found innocent. He was found "not guilty." That means the jury did not find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. And I will not allow you to treat the civil case as if it is not a basis for some or even many members of the public to believe that he did it. Evidence in that case and the criminal case strongly supported a belief in his guilt.

You are wrong about reasonable doubt. It doesn't require a 100% certainty. Most courts in fact refuse to define it for the jury.

For what it's worth, I didn't have a problem with the jury's verdict of acquittal in the Simpson case, even though I felt then and feel now that he committed this heinous double murder, this absolute butchering of two human beings including the mother of his own children. But we can't convict and incarcerate him for it unless we can present the jury with a case strong enough to persuade 12 people of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It requires confidence in the state and its agents and prosecutors. Fuhrman was someone they had to put on the stand, and he put in a key piece of evidence. Furhman took the Fifth on cross-examination. End of case, right there.

Not that it had anything to do with Michael Vick. You are right that people do plead guilty to avoid the risk of a trial. That is why the judge will not accept the plea unless the defendant admits a factual basis for his guilt. Watch for the plea agreement, which will be a public document. Watch for how detailed the factual basis is.

I can just see it, this slimeball will come out a year from now having found jesus. And the gullible fools will let him laugh all the way to the bank, instead of kicking him in the nuts that he deserves.

"And O.J. was not found innocent. He was found 'not guilty.' That means the jury did not find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."

And under our system of law people are presumed innocent until proven guilty. The state could not prove OJ guilty, therefore OJ is innocent.

"Evidence in that case and the criminal case strongly supported a belief in his guilt."

But not strong enough to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. Again therefore OJ is innocent under our system of criminal law.

Sorry GC, I disagree with you.

The presumption of innocence is something O.J. is entitled to in the criminal courtroom. We instruct jurors to presume innocence. I disagree that he is entitled to that presumption in the court of public opinion. I'm not on O.J.'s criminal jury. I'm entitled to my opinions about his guilt, as is anyone else who followed the case. The state's failure to prove him guilty, through its various errors including sponsoring a witness who took Five on cross, does not require me to believe him to be innocent.

I'm not going to review the evidence here but there was plenty to suggest his guilt, and quite strongly. Ignore it if you want. You are entitled to believe what you want to believe, just like I am. I find it a little intriguing that you are so bent on defending the guy. He killed two people; he got off; he and the rest of us are moving on.

T, re this notion that a crime is just a "debt to society" to be paid, just some commodity to be paid, this is false relativizing. No, it is wrong, a crime, maybe of varying seriousness, but if one agrees to the laws and if they have any meaning outside themselves, still a violation of something outside the law.

Why did he do it? Well, you know, that desire for "extreme", sensationalized reality, that is otherwise pretty ubiquitously celebrated in the US. Please don't complain, until a large amount of the American public isn't entertained by these things, or when they aren't directly or indirectly glamorized by our gutter media and entertainment groups.

examples of previous are the recent celebration of "evolution" and struggle/competition, Survivor, primitive survival, as "reality". Deeply sick a society that desires and celebrates these things, actually seeming to prefer such "reality" to trying for civilization.

Gee. I wonder if Michael Vick reported any income from winnings, or deductions for losses or depreciation, on his income tax for the past few years. Does this mean the IRS can't investigate him for possible tax-evasion? Somehow, I don't think it does. Stay tuned!

If one truly wants authentic experience rather than a fake prescripted genre of a situation, go live in an African jungle without your cellphone and other modern conveniences.

Those who celebrate the reality, the "truth" of competition, why don't you go struggle for survival with your beloved tribespeople in the jungle.

As a devout atheist I've always embraced religion's 'eye for an eye' right across the board.

Before Aaron and others can advocate a value judgement about the relative value of a dog's life compared to a human life, they MUST demonstrate why the latter has more value. Lotsa luck kiddo!

eg.Was Hitler of more value than the dog who saved a family from a burning house? What makes George Bush more valuable than some Iraqi child shredded by shrapnel?

Christi Pemberton indirectly raises the same point. We don't get "massive protests in the streets when it comes to the killing and abuse of human beings". The real question is 'Why not'?

trjohn0's argument falls into the same trap - the 'special' value of human life - but even less validly. I point out that his indignance "over 3 thousends deaths in IRAQ" (sic) clearly demonstrates his egocentric and irrational bias, given that there have been perhaps a MILLION deaths in Iraq. Perhaps Iraqi lives are only worth as much as a dog's???

Instead of a limp-lettuce slap on the wrist in some cushy jail, perhaps Vicks should be designated an American hero and sent off to Iraq, where he could freely practice his perversions and perhaps get some of his own back.

However what else you say, don't see how " eye for an eye" is a right, much less called OK by anything that can legitimately call itself a religion (and if something calling itself a religion condones that, it's a horrid travesty as far as I am concerned) nor why "eye for an eye" is necessarily equated with atheism.

Well there IS something significant about a human life (for various should be obvious reasons), but some discussion about deciding who or what gets to live I find tasteless (not in a good way!)

Of course, "dabbles" must be joking in most of what they say.

As satisfying as it would be to see Michael Vick go to prison, why have him fed and cared for by the taxpayers for a year or two and then released and sent back to his millions, his endorsements and his sports career - and to being a sickening role model for kids?

I'm incensed by the "it was only dogs" crowd. With very few exceptions, people who kill other people do it only once. Vick made a career from the torture and death of creatures who, for the most part, are our only true friends in nature - sometimes I wonder why - and who almost never indulge in the kinds of gratuitous evil that we humans are so good at.

As a condition of avoiding prison, Vick should be made to renounce professional sports, give 90% of his past, present and future sports and endorsement earnings to animal rescue groups, do a long term of community service at animal shelters and, perhaps most important, tour the nation for a year lecturing children and teens about the need for respecting God's creatures and about how much he regrets what he has done.

Hi, there!..7673e5dcb25f1c7b6f4c08e6bfdb22d6

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.