This thread and the others with similar content demonstrate the inherent problems of a jury system which picks its members from the general public. You are bound to get people who demonstrate the stupidity, illogic and bias of the majority of posters on this thread. We actually know very little of the "evidence" involved in this investigation as reports are based not on "evidence" that has been presented in a legal forum and tested by cross examination but rather from whatever information a journalist happens to present. This is not meant as an assertion that the reports are incorrect but only that the information in those reports have not been independently established as fact (e.g. the dead dogs were "shot....".).
The only FACT established in this case is that Vick owns (owned) the property under investigation for dogfighting. After this sole fact, there are a set of claims that have varying degrees of legitimacy. The evidence used to substantiate the authorities' claims of dogfighting may or may not hold up under cross examination (by an attorney/other experts). However, the most important fact necessary for Vick to be "morally culpable" and perhaps legally culpable, so far consists of "neighbours' claims to local press"? Yet, it is on the basis of this most flimsy of claims that the posters on this board are ready to convict Vick and suspend him from the NFL.
Again..makes you shudder to think that people like these are jury members deciding the fates of others. Also explains why so many innocent people are convicted.
I'll ask the Vick haters to answer the following questions
1. What's the applicable Virginia/federal law concerning a property owner's legal responsibility for crimes committed on his property? I find it difficult to believe that mere ownership confers criminal responsibility for the crimes of another party but perhaps the Vick haters are correct.
2. Show where it has been established that Vick paid frequent visits to that property and that the physical aspects of the dogfighting operation were plainly visible to a casual visitor.
It's possible that Vick is guilty but the reaction on this board has no rational basis in the current established facts.
Lastly, while I don't think race is a significant influence on the Federal investigation, it is obviously a signficant factor in the opinions being expressed on this board. That, as well as a dislike for Vick's popularity that was present on this board long before this case. I also suspect that this racism is in part due to the make-up of this board, both in terms of geography and the type of people. I visit other sportsboards and have not found on them this type of vicious obsession towards Vick. To the silly person claiming that "he's not a racist because Pedro is his favourite athlete", here's a tip. The vast majority of people who buy the jerseys of black athletes are not black but the vast majority of those buyers would have a fit if a close family member entered into an intimate relationship with a black person. One doesn't have to "hate blacks" to be a racist.
