The New Official Michael Vick Thread

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by aukevin

I think plea agreements are stupid. Maybe someone can change my opinion of it. But Vick keeps saying he's innocent, but instead now, he's might change his mind, plead guilty, and get a lesser sentence. Why does a plea of guilty before a trial warrant a lesser sentence than being found guilty in a trial? Is it because when someone pleas guilty the court doesn't have to deal with the time and costs of a trial? Should you reward someone for saving the court time even though they broke the law? Or is it because if someone is scared of a full sentencing they plea guilty to a different crime and then the court decides to forget about the bigger crime that the person was going to trial for? I don't see why pleaing guilty to one charge should allow other charges (and maybe even more serious charges) to be dropped. IMO that is all stupid and lazy. But I'm no lawyer so I'm sure there is some reason that makes sense, not just some sugar-coated reason why it's ok to handle things that way.

Plea agreements are driven by two things: 1) The time and cost of a trial (Trials costs the government and the defendent a significant amounts of money). 2) A DA's win percentage. DAs love to have win percentages in the mid 90's

[Shaver]

Quote: Originally Posted by aukevin

I think plea agreements are stupid. Maybe someone can change my opinion of it. But Vick keeps saying he's innocent, but instead now, he's might change his mind, plead guilty, and get a lesser sentence. Why does a plea of guilty before a trial warrant a lesser sentence than being found guilty in a trial? Is it because when someone pleas guilty the court doesn't have to deal with the time and costs of a trial? Should you reward someone for saving the court time even though they broke the law? Or is it because if someone is scared of a full sentencing they plea guilty to a different crime and then the court decides to forget about the bigger crime that the person was going to trial for? I don't see why pleaing guilty to one charge should allow other charges (and maybe even more serious charges) to be dropped. IMO that is all stupid and lazy. But I'm no lawyer so I'm sure there is some reason that makes sense, not just some sugar-coated reason why it's ok to handle things that way.

There's a huge difference between being innocent and pleading innocent. He can plead it all day, but there's no denying that he owned the property where illegal activities were taking place. Now, if he wants to take the chance and fight to prove that he had no idea what was happening on his property... where he was seen... multiple times... that's a gamble he CAN take. However, there becomes a point where he needs to get out of the pot.

Aaron obviously explained the two significant reasons from "the people's side", but from Vick's side he needs to think plea for a few more reasons. One - damage control... if he can plea to lesser charges, he has a better chance at a future. Two - getting it over with and starting to "serve his time". Roger "The Warden" is going to keep him out of football till this thing is settled (at the minimum). Even if he got 18 months in jail, he's still a young enough man to have a football career down the road. FInally, and this seems like a strange reason... money. He's losing all of his endorsement dollars. He won't be paid by the Falcons anytime soon. A dream team of lawyers ain't cheap when no scoots are coming in on the 1st and 15th. He needs to think about an immediate future where no income is coming in.

[MassNole]

If he is convicted or pleads guilty I don't see any way Michael Vick ever takes a snap again in the NFL. He is or was significantly tied to organized gambling, that may as well be the scarlet letter for an NFL career.

[Double Eights]

Quote: Originally Posted by MassNole

If he is convicted or pleads guilty I don't see any way Michael Vick ever takes a snap again in the NFL. He is or was significantly tied to organized gambling, that may as well be the scarlet letter for an NFL career.

Exactly. If he takes the plea deal, his career in the NFL is over. If he doesn't take the plea deal, he will still more than likely be found guilty on the charges set against him; thus ending his career in the NFL as well.

Either way, he's screwed.

[heitkamp94]

Quote: Originally Posted by Double Eights

Exactly. If he takes the plea deal, his career in the NFL is over. If he doesn't take the plea deal, he will still more than likely be found guilty on the charges set against him; thus ending his career in the NFL as well. Either way, he's screwed.

I hope he's not done for good, if only for what it will do to his legacy. His legacy will be even more overhyped that he is right now. People will act like he would've been the greatest even though in reality he's probably looking at 7 or 8 wins a season for the next 10 years.

[bkrich83]

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/13898519/detail.html

[The GIGGAS]

I doubt he's done. Unless he spends a crazy amount of time in jail... he's WAY too talented for someone not to take a chance on him.

[bkrich83]

Quote: Originally Posted by The GIGGAS

I doubt he's done. Unless he spends a crazy amount of time in jail... he's WAY too talented for someone not to take a chance on him.

If he gets jail time. It depends on when the NFL decides to implement his suspension.

Lets say he gets a year in prison. So he misses this year. Then the NFL implements his suspension after he gets out. So he misses a second year. That would be 2 years away from the game, and he would be 30. Considering he was still developing as a passer, 2 years away from the game would be tough to overcome.