Comments on: Michael Vick Was Justice By Example

By: in the know

in the know — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 10:56:45 +0000

I am new to this blog so forgive the lateness. The vast majority of the public do not understand the federal sentencing system. A large number of lawyers who do not practice criminal law also do not understand it. In order address the issues discussed in this column, the United States Sentencing commission was created to equalize federal sentencing. Every federal offense has a point value and then there are various small adjustments, usually not more than two or three points up or down. When someone is sentenced, their point value determined, and based upon their criminal history, a final number determined. That number gives a range of imprisonment of about 6 – 8 months. At sentencing, the judge has the discretion to go anywhere in that range and to go up or down in a limited amount. Some of you may have heard of the Booker case which gave the federal judges discretion in sentencing, Unfortunately, many federal appeals courts have held that the guidelines are reasonable and a judge must give specific reasons for deviating from the guidelines. As a general rule, probation is not available as a sentence in the federal system except for a very small number of petty misdemeanors.

By: Unfair

Unfair — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 10:37:24 +0000

Go to Google and look up operation snowplow and then tell me that the color of his skin got him put in jail. Hell the people in the above mention was killing and selling Big Cat, Tigers, ect…… right here in the USA and only got 4 years and they are white! Now you do the math.

By: adjustidohm

adjustidohm — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 04:43:29 +0000

4] and terry…I don't think wages should be taken into account when imposing a fine, but that's just me! To me, that's a violation of civil rights…FAIR AND EQUAL TREATMENT…albeit, I guess each judge decides what is fair and equal in each case…

Yet and still, I understand that I could be wrong about the points I just made

By: adjustidohm

adjustidohm — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 04:43:20 +0000

ok, I'll try to keep this short,but I've got a lot to say.

1] Vick was made into the EXAMPLE, not justice by example. To the best of my knowledge, he is the highest profiled, most well known "dog fighter" who was caught. The judge and the jury sent a message to ghettos across the nation.

2] about what Rich and Marc said…it appears that things are different when you look aggressive like vick and not sweet and innocent like hilton and stewart. I guess, you could say…that women are given special treatment and I'll refrain from turning to this into a color issue. To me, Vick could never escape how he grew up…

3] I completely agree with Tara!— OJ got off easy, until he started playing stupid, for a point of reference! Alas, Chris Brown hasn't been proven guilty yet and OJ never was, but we all know better…

By: Terry Grinnalds

Terry Grinnalds — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 01:56:27 +0000

There is another element you are not considering – the different circumstances of the defendants. A $1,000 fine might be a true punishment to an impoverished person, but for Vick it would be meaningless. Incidentally, anyone who feels Vick was harshly treated should consider both his conduct: he personally tortured and killed dogs and he financed the operation, provided the place for it, etc., and also consider that he could easily have been charged and convicted of a criminal count for each dog that was fought, or died. The last is the way prosecutors typically charge drug dealers or criminals involved in an ongoing conspiracy. I personally know a man who bought a cemetary and improperly made use of the "perpetual" funds. He was charged and convicted of a single 12-month misdemeanor count for every cemetary site for which funds had been looted. He was sentenced to approximately 100 years of time. Vick got off easily.

By: Tara

Tara — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 16:41:44 +0000

I believe Michael Vick’s sentence was not only too harsh, it was uncalled for. NFL, NHL, NBA, law enforcement, etc. high profile people present themselves PLENTY for crimes that go unpunished. Domestic Violence is a big one. Chris Brown is still strolling the streets after assaulting Rhianna, Michael Jackson is still a creepy child molester, and the list goes on and on. Don’t get me wrong, I love animals, but until we can protect the humans we should be aiming our sites at criminals and laws that should be changed and strengthened to make the world a better place. As a mother, every time I see people get upset over a lost puppy and then turn their head to the child being abused next door it makes me want to vomit! What Vick did was irresponsible, but he didn’t do anything like what is going on out there from a human perspective. Hell, the laws aren’t really protecting the humans that dogs attack and maul! If Vick had killed his wife, beat his child, and then drove drunk to a hospital he would be at home right now raking in more money from the NFL and fans who would still love him! In my opinion, he either didn’t pay his attorney enough, or his attorney sucked!

By: Mark Moran

Mark Moran — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 15:31:37 +0000

I think few people will complain when a celebrity is actually treated more harshly because of their celebrity, given the long history in this country of the privileged getting more lenient treatment, whether for political reasons or access to better lawyers. Add Martha Stewart and Paris Hilton to the examples; the former was not even charged with a crime for her initial conduct but served time for a cover-up of a non-crime; the latter was sent home after two days of a 30 day sentence due to jail crowding, but then brought back so it wouldn't look like she was getting special treatment.

By: Rich Dansereau

Rich Dansereau — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 15:09:18 +0000

High profile individuals have accepted, either consciously or not, their role as role models when they stepped into the spotlight. This heightened status and visibility make their actions templates for many people to emmulate. With this comes more responsibility, not less. It is unfortunate that less responsibility is often the actual reality with high profile individuals often receiving "get out of jail free" cards or much more favorable treatment than the average citizen could hope to receive. Vick is the one responsible for his actions and there consequences.

By: Shane Cooper

Shane Cooper — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 14:50:00 +0000

In my opinion there should be two classifications of incarceration. The first is those who will be rejoining society. These prisoners need to detained grouped in with those who committed the same crime and daily working on actually correcting the behavior which is not acceptable and the establishing a skill set which allows the prisoner to immediately cope with society upon release. The second class is those we deem a risk to society and not to be released. They should be housed as humanely as possible structured around a restrictive internal society. Each class is now intermingled and prisoners are housed by the severity of behavior. There is little treatment going on and very little done to make the prisoner ready to be reintroduced to society.

By: Shane Cooper

Shane Cooper — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 14:49:39 +0000

I disagree in principle. I don’t think you can set up our justice system to treat one individual different than others. If the act of dog fighting is so abhorrent then all convicted of the crime should get the same justice. I believe his sentence is fair but others have been treated lightly when they should get the full merit of the law. Those who are likely to commit the act are the ones who got away lightly in the first place. If I am in an environment where “dog fighting” is the norm and my friend is convicted for it and doesn’t receive jail time, it’s going to play a more important determinant in my future actions than what happened to a pro athlete who is no longer part of that community. I don’t think people should say “they made an example out of Mike Vick” but they should say “Mike Vick didn’t receive any special sentencing”.