Commonwealth of VA v. Michael Vick, et al.

Someone's gonna pay

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20962932/
from JoeUser Forums

Well,  it seems that the Surry County grand jury finally decided to get off their duffs and do something about the mounds of evidence they've been presented with.  According to the linked article (and other local news sources), the grand jury indicted Mr. Vick and his coconspirators with 2 counts  "of beating or killing or causing dogs to fight other dogs and engaging in or promoting dogfighting."  Time for these would be up to 5 years per count.  This would be on top of whatever time he gets in the Federal Penitentary in December.  The grand jury declined to indict them on 8 counts of "killing or causing to be killed a companion animal".  That would've resulted in another 40 years.

My first thought?  About time.  Part of the reason the US Attorney used the Federal Grand Jury was the way the Surry County authorities were dragging their feet. 

My second though?  Vick's got some 'splainin' ta do! </Channeling_Ricky_Ricardo>

The really interesting piece of news in the article is the statement by Vick's lawyers stating that he and his lawyers were going to fight this on the basis of Guilty plea in Federal court.  In my understanding, a trial, regardless of acquittal or guilty verdict, in one jurisdiction doesn't preclude a trial on the same charges in a different jurisdiction.  The Fed's case was based off of the interstate trafficking needed to accomodate the dogfighting activities.  If they'd stuck to only fighting other animals in the Commonwealth, the Fed's wouldn't have had a leg to stand on.  Now, the Commonwealth can try them on the actual, locally generated, charges.  And in this one, the Guilty plea at the Federal level isn't going to be doing him any good with the local guys. 

Given the additional charges, I think he can kiss his chances for resurrecting his professional football career good bye.

So, what are y'all's thoughts on this one?

[Edit.] Okay, Surry County.  :P  The Grand Jury MET in Sussex County due to renovations being done on the Surry County Courthouse.  Weee!  Fibro fog is gonna get me! [/edit]

 

4,207 views 4 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top

In my understanding, a trial, regardless of acquittal or guilty verdict, in one jurisdiction doesn't preclude a trial on the same charges in a different jurisdiction. 

Yes it does.  The Double Jeopardy clause.  however, they can be brought up on different charges, and that is what this is.

Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Double Jeopardy does not apply, as it is a different statute that is violated regardless of what the Federal charge is, because it's a Federal Statute, and then a State statute.
Sins of a Solar Empire II
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
Double Jeopardy does not apply, as it is a different statute that is violated regardless of what the Federal charge is, because it's a Federal Statute, and then a State statute.


That is what I said, but apparently not very well.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
Double Jeopardy does not apply, as it is a different statute that is violated regardless of what the Federal charge is, because it's a Federal Statute, and then a State statute.


Right. There were several crimes committed. The fed is only interested in the federal crimes committed; the state in the state, etc.

TECHNICALLY, the local jurisdiction could charge him with a zoning violation if they so chose. Because they are all seperate crimes that have been violated.

The judge does have, however, the authority to have the sentences run concurrent (meaning he's serving time simultaneously on both charges). And while that's the more likely outcome, given the price of the suits Mike Vick's lawyers wear, it is far from guaranteed.