Vick Possibly In HOT Water Again

[Alphadawg7]

The point I was trying to make to WEO (and it can apply to any posters who bashed Hardy and Lynch and are defending Vick, or "setting the record straight" as the case may be) is that he didn't apply the same standard to Hardy or Lynch, despite lack of evidence in their cases. And neither did anything remotely close to what Vick did. Yet he went out of his way to fabricate fantastic scenarios as to why there was no evidence, while he went out of his way to defend Vick (and if you know WEO, if he doesn't care, he won't respond).

 

Gotcha...

 

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasnt the evidence against Lynch and Hardy indisputable and admitted by both? I could be wrong about that, but if memory serves me Hardy owned up to what happened and so did Lynch about the gun. I honestly didnt follow it closely...

 

And I am defintely not trying to make excuses for this fool Vick...like I said before, he has served his time and had time to reflect on his mistakes. For me to label him a habitual criminal I need to see those old habits return. Most of what he did in the past wasnt criminal, and what was criminal was also an accepted sport in his cultural upbringing. I am not supporting dog fighting, but I do also understand if you are raised to accept it that it can look very different in his eyes.

 

Again, its not like he was out conducting himself as a criminal. Poor decisions...YES...habitual criminal...not so much. Now if he regresses back to criminal activity during his second chance, then I will reconsider that opinnion. But as of now, he has done nothing wrong, and if you read the more recent reports, he showed great restraint and did the right thing walking away. So if anything, he has shown just the opposite.

[MattyT]

Restaurant partner says video disputes Michael Vick's claim of leaving well before shooting

 

Fabijan said that two cars carrying Vick, a Philadelphia Eagles quarterback from Newport News, "and his entourage" drove off from in front of the restaurant at 2:07 a.m. Three minutes later, shots rang out from the direction the cars had gone, Fabijan said.

 

Fabijan also disputed Woodward's claim that security removed Phillips from the party.

 

"We know of no incident between him and Michael Vick," Fabijan said. "It was a flawless night until the shooting."

[Doc]

Gotcha...

 

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasnt the evidence against Lynch and Hardy indisputable and admitted by both? I could be wrong about that, but if memory serves me Hardy owned up to what happened and so did Lynch about the gun. I honestly didnt follow it closely...

You're not alone. Most didn't follow either case closely. Hardy denied there was a gun, as did his father (neither is surprising). But no one else stepped forward and the cops didn't even investigate because all they had was the word a 70-year old witness who saw what she thought was a gun, from across her yard. Even if he did pull a gun on his father, I doubt the cops would have done anything, since his father is a convicted felon and Hardy was probably telling him to get and stay out of his life once and for all. I really couldn't have cared less, because I'm not Hardy's dad. Had he pulled a gun (allegedly, or for real) on someone innocent...

 

As for Lynch, he accepted blame for his car being the one that struck the woman, but maintained that he wasn't drunk and didn't know he hit her because of distractions that were verified by videotape of the accident. To this date, no one has come forward saying they saw him drink that night. He did admit to having the gun in the trunk of his car and got a misdemeanor, public service, and probation. But he was never charged for the pot he allegedly was smoking, so no need to address that, and to our knowledge, he's never failed a drug test.

 

And I am defintely not trying to make excuses for this fool Vick...like I said before, he has served his time and had time to reflect on his mistakes. For me to label him a habitual criminal I need to see those old habits return. Most of what he did in the past wasnt criminal, and what was criminal was also an accepted sport in his cultural upbringing. I am not supporting dog fighting, but I do also understand if you are raised to accept it that it can look very different in his eyes.

 

Again, its not like he was out conducting himself as a criminal. Poor decisions...YES...habitual criminal...not so much. Now if he regresses back to criminal activity during his second chance, then I will reconsider that opinnion. But as of now, he has done nothing wrong, and if you read the more recent reports, he showed great restraint and did the right thing walking away. So if anything, he has shown just the opposite.

I don't believe that Vick was guilty of all the things he's been accused of doing, or that he's guilty in this case. I was merely needling WEO over his defense (and again it was, if you know him) of Vick, versus the contortions he's gone through to fabricate evidence against Hardy and Lynch: players on his favorite team. And he knows it.

[yall]

No charges, although police believe they have identified the shooter:

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/...-party-shooter/

 

Maybe Plaxico should have been uncooperative too.

[MattyT]

Looks like Vick is free to play w/o any league discipline.

 

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/dneagle...red_by_NFL.html

[Mr. WEO]

You're not alone. Most didn't follow either case closely. Hardy denied there was a gun, as did his father (neither is surprising). But no one else stepped forward and the cops didn't even investigate because all they had was the word a 70-year old witness who saw what she thought was a gun, from across her yard. Even if he did pull a gun on his father, I doubt the cops would have done anything, since his father is a convicted felon and Hardy was probably telling him to get and stay out of his life once and for all. I really couldn't have cared less, because I'm not Hardy's dad. Had he pulled a gun (allegedly, or for real) on someone innocent...

 

As for Lynch, he accepted blame for his car being the one that struck the woman, but maintained that he wasn't drunk and didn't know he hit her because of distractions that were verified by videotape of the accident. To this date, no one has come forward saying they saw him drink that night. He did admit to having the gun in the trunk of his car and got a misdemeanor, public service, and probation. But he was never charged for the pot he allegedly was smoking, so no need to address that, and to our knowledge, he's never failed a drug test.

 

 

I don't believe that Vick was guilty of all the things he's been accused of doing, or that he's guilty in this case. I was merely needling WEO over his defense (and again it was, if you know him) of Vick, versus the contortions he's gone through to fabricate evidence against Hardy and Lynch: players on his favorite team. And he knows it.

Huh? What?

 

My defense of Vick? only in your weird mind.

 

I have made no secret of my thoughts about Vick.

 

Fabricate evidence? Nope. Lynch and Hardy both denied acts which others were witness to (the hit and run in Lynch's case). You say Hardy's criminal act doesn't count because his father's a scumbag. Yeah.....OK, because he's on your team. Oy.

 

Lynch stymied a monthlong investigation, as did his only witness to the full night's events---because he was innocent of driving after drinking on that one nite that he hit a pedestrian---right? You make it sound like he never put a beverage to his lips that night because no one has said so.

 

Anyway. I'm glad we agree on Vick.

[Doc]

Huh? What?

 

My defense of Vick? only in your weird mind.

 

I have made no secret of my thoughts about Vick.

 

Fabricate evidence? Nope. Lynch and Hardy both denied acts which others were witness to (the hit and run in Lynch's case). You say Hardy's criminal act doesn't count because his father's a scumbag. Yeah.....OK, because he's on your team. Oy.

 

Lynch stymied a monthlong investigation, as did his only witness to the full night's events---because he was innocent of driving after drinking on that one nite that he hit a pedestrian---right? You make it sound like he never put a beverage to his lips that night because no one has said so.

 

Anyway. I'm glad we agree on Vick.

Like I said doc, you'll believe what you want to believe. The funniest part is that every Bills player is guilty while most every non-Bills player gets the benefit of the doubt.

 

Vick is a known pot head and had a secret compartment in his water bottle, but that couldn't have been used for that! While some septuagenarian from across her yard allegedly spots Hardy pulling a gun on dear old dad, nothing is done by the authorities, and he should be locked-up because he beat-up his girlfriend 3 years earlier? Wow.

 

As for Lynch "stym[ying] a monthlong investigation," everyone and their mother knew he was the drive. What did you think was going to be gained by admitting he was the driver from the get-go? That the alcohol he allegedly ingested (in the bathroom) the night of the crash would magically reappear in his system? That someone, ANYONE, would magically find witnesses of him drinking that night? That the lack of incriminating text messages or phone calls to anyone for hours afterwards, would suddenly appear? That the DA would give him less than a moving violation and everyone would be satisfied with his explanation? Again it's funny that the investigative journalists at the Buffalo News were able to dig up the dirt on him bringing his own alcohol into bars, yet couldn't find ANYONE who saw him drunk those times, much less driving drunk, much much less saw him sneaking his own stuff and/or drinking that night. But hey, in your mind bringing your own alcohol screams "drunk driver!"

 

You've shown youself doc. There is nowhere else to go with this.

[Mr. WEO]

Like I said doc, you'll believe what you want to believe. The funniest part is that every Bills player is guilty while most every non-Bills player gets the benefit of the doubt.

 

Vick is a known pot head and had a secret compartment in his water bottle, but that couldn't have been used for that! While some septuagenarian from across her yard allegedly spots Hardy pulling a gun on dear old dad, nothing is done by the authorities, and he should be locked-up because he beat-up his girlfriend 3 years earlier? Wow.

 

As for Lynch "stym[ying] a monthlong investigation," everyone and their mother knew he was the drive. What did you think was going to be gained by admitting he was the driver from the get-go? That the alcohol he allegedly ingested (in the bathroom) the night of the crash would magically reappear in his system? That someone, ANYONE, would magically find witnesses of him drinking that night? That the lack of incriminating text messages or phone calls to anyone for hours afterwards, would suddenly appear? That the DA would give him less than a moving violation and everyone would be satisfied with his explanation? Again it's funny that the investigative journalists at the Buffalo News were able to dig up the dirt on him bringing his own alcohol into bars, yet couldn't find ANYONE who saw him drunk those times, much less driving drunk, much much less saw him sneaking his own stuff and/or drinking that night. But hey, in your mind bringing your own alcohol screams "drunk driver!"

 

You've shown youself doc. There is nowhere else to go with this.

Again, the Vick stuff I agree.

 

The cops had nothing but the old lady's complaint and a victim who wouldn't press charges. What did you expect them to do?

 

And poor ol Marshawn. You've kept this one alive with your insistence that he could NOT have been drinking that night. You know the guy spikes his own drinks (why, do you think?). No one saw him drunk, so he could not have been driving under the influence. If you could step away, you would see how silly that position is. And, he betrayed your blind trust by getting arrested less than a year later.

 

Look, I guess I'm just not as super a fan as you as to not support the antics of a guy who has no regard for your fan support. You and I are different like that.

 

And trying to bolster your argument by painting me as a Vick apologist (of all things!) for correcting someone else's factually incorrect post is, as usual, pathetic. You well know my position on Vick.

 

But hey, as others have pointed out, this is the way you make your points.

[Doc]

Again, the Vick stuff I agree.

 

The cops had nothing but the old lady's complaint and a victim who wouldn't press charges. What did you expect them to do?

 

And poor ol Marshawn. You've kept this one alive with your insistence that he could NOT have been drinking that night. You know the guy spikes his own drinks (why, do you think?). No one saw him drunk, so he could not have been driving under the influence. If you could step away, you would see how silly that position is. And, he betrayed your blind trust by getting arrested less than a year later.

 

Look, I guess I'm just not as super a fan as you as to not support the antics of a guy who has no regard for your fan support. You and I are different like that.

 

And trying to bolster your argument by painting me as a Vick apologist (of all things!) for correcting someone else's factually incorrect post is, as usual, pathetic. You well know my position on Vick.

 

But hey, as others have pointed out, this is the way you make your points.

Talk about missing the point! Again doc, your "set the record straight" post on Vick was your defense of him. You know it, I know it, we all know it, as does your alter ego Sisy. The only other player you've defended was Stallworth, whose crime, like Vicks', was FAR worse than anything Lynch or Hardy did. yet you're ready to convict those 2 based on virtually NO evidence. And in TO's case, it's nothing criminal, just how he treats QB's he's played with. Again I'm merely pointing out the hypocrisy. No wonder you can't see it.

[justnzane]

aside from doc and WEO's pissing contest above. Here is a quote from the article from Matty that i thought was rather entertaining

Virginia Beach police say they know the identity of the shooter but cannot file charges because witnesses are being uncooperative.

That is just bizarre to me. The cops know who the shooter is, but can't prove it? Can't they get a warrant and confiscate the guy's gun? Or is it possible that it was somebody close to Vick, perhaps Vick himself and no one wants him back in jail?

[Doc]

aside from doc and WEO's pissing contest above. Here is a quote from the article from Matty that i thought was rather entertaining

 

That is just bizarre to me. The cops know who the shooter is, but can't prove it? Can't they get a warrant and confiscate the guy's gun? Or is it possible that it was somebody close to Vick, perhaps Vick himself and no one wants him back in jail?

The vic knows who the shooter is, but won't name names and doesn't want to press charges. Word is it's Marcus Vick.

[BillsfaninFl]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/...tion-with-vick/

 

Will this guy ever learn?

 

edit: This just may bring down the hammer from Goodell. Vick may have just kissed his NFL career goodbye.

 

Just think: if the Bills would have acquired Vick, as some of our posters recommended, there would be national articles about the Bills again. So the guys who are frustrated about no national attention would be happy. But I have an uneasy feeling that the article would cite T.O.'s year of probation here and then Vick's, and conclude that Buffalo is where they send the Lindsay Lohans of the league. Meanwhile, T.O. is pissed that his year of "no trash talk" didn't fool anyone and he may now be forced to do it again in Cincinnati. There truly is "no rest for the wicked."

[Mr. WEO]

Talk about missing the point! Again doc, your "set the record straight" post on Vick was your defense of him. You know it, I know it, we all know it, as does your alter ego Sisy. The only other player you've defended was Stallworth, whose crime, like Vicks', was FAR worse than anything Lynch or Hardy did. yet you're ready to convict those 2 based on virtually NO evidence. And in TO's case, it's nothing criminal, just how he treats QB's he's played with. Again I'm merely pointing out the hypocrisy. No wonder you can't see it.

wow. I still can't find the part where I defended Vick's crime. Another fabrication to sustain your imaginary reality.

 

These guys are right...