i cant belive that michael vick pleaded not guilty when those dogs were on HIS property. but the good thing is that he cant own dogs anymore. do other ppl think that too?
2007-07-27 03:09:04 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Football (American)
You almost always plead Not Guilty. that leaves room to plea bargain to lesser charges, or for your lawyer to get you off on some technicality (OJ Simpson...)
And Lindsey Lohan claimed that the cocaine found in her pocket was someone else's...
2007-07-27 03:12:03 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Everybody pleads not guilty until their high priced attorneys work a deal for a plea bargain. He won't go to trial in November, he'll be slapped lightly on the wrists by then and next year, he'll be right back on the field. Money can get you out of so many troubles.
The NFL should ban him for life. Poor Pete Rose bet on his own team to win and baseball can't look past that.
2007-07-27 03:19:20 · answer #2 · answered by supersizejewels 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Whats he gonna do PLEAD GUILTY? Who in the right mind would plead guilty. If he didnt plead not guilty I would just call the case. Because HE would know that he did it. So yeah he did the smart thing by pleading not guilty. He's probably guilty but still.
2007-07-27 03:16:09 · answer #3 · answered by trevor_gleadle 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Every criminal pleads not guilty at the first hearing. He'll eventually plead down to a bunch of probation and years upon years of probation.
Him not owning dogs again? There is no way to insure that. It took years for them to discover what he was doing, and he'll start doing it again if given the chance at a different location.
Pardon the pun, but you just can't teach an old dog new tricks.
2007-07-27 03:14:04 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
He plead not guilty so he could have a trial and get out on bond. Had he plead guilty, the judge would have sentenced him to prison. Pleading not guilty doesn't mean the defendant is innocent.
2007-07-27 03:16:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The dogs were on his property, but he wasn't (supposedly).
If someone comes onto your property and kills someone, should you be tried for murder? If you let your best friend live at your place and he bought some drugs and there was a police raid... you should be just as guilty and sentenced too? If you bought a house and let your mom live there.... and she happened to run a "massage parlor" / brothel out of there... should you too be charged with prostitution as well?
Come on now... Let them PROVE he knew about it all, he'll have his day in court. That's why we have a Justice system in the US.
And why can't he own dogs anymore?
2007-07-27 03:17:35 · answer #6 · answered by HOKIEMAN 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Just b/c he pleaded not guilty doesn't mean he is not going to prison. The process will just take longer plus he made bail (probably chump change out of his pocket) and his new court date is November. This is where the jury will come in, and prosecuting attorneys and all and really decide for themselves his innosense or guilt.
2007-07-27 03:13:42 · answer #7 · answered by babysteaks3 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Innocent till proven guilty. And he could work out a plea deal by pleading guilty, actually. Lower the punishments if he pleaded guilty. I've got a feeling he's going to try and fight this, so we shall see what comes of it.
2007-07-27 03:13:57 · answer #8 · answered by psyduck702 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
One of the prosocutions witnesses received money from Michael Vick from the dog-fighting. He IS guilty.
2007-07-27 03:13:03 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I have a pitt named Kain and i love him so much. He is so loving and very good nature. I wish i knew a program so i can donate money to help put michael vick in jail for a long time.
2007-07-27 03:15:18 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋