Yes
2007-08-01 14:48:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by Steven C 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well besides the Indictment there are doubts in some minds that Vick is still involved in the dog fighting. Now since the FEDs have gotten into this case. Everyone stands to do alot of time as well as spend alot of money. So why not squeeze one member by the balls until someone tell them what they want to hear to really pin Vick. Also Tony Taylor really is the ringleader of the whole operation. Vick provided the property and if he didnt do it the funds. Taylor go the dogs and probably did the cruels acts. But let back track for a min. When the police were searchin Vicks house do you honestly think they were looking for Dogs, no , the main things they were looking for was drugs, in most dog fight bust they always find drugs, the dogs just were icing on the cake. maybe the that reason they chose Taylor first maybe to sweep away those drugs charges. just a thought
2007-08-02 00:21:41
·
answer #2
·
answered by sc_baller2002 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
It's clear the federal goverment is targeting Michael Vick. Would the federal goverment even be involved if Vick wasn't in connection to these allegations. People are arrested all the time for animal cruelty, how many of those cases involved the federal goverment.
I think that Tony Taylor agreed to testify against Vick to lessen his sentence. It's been reported that in the past that Vick and Taylor had a falling out, so Taylor could used his testification against Vick in revenge.
2007-08-01 20:48:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
I believe Tony Taylor pled guilty because he saw the writing on the wall. His attorney, who must be very smart, knew that the first to plea would be in a better position than the others. It is being said that if any of the others want to plea, the Feds will not accept more than one more plea deal. Hence, the race for all of the defendants to be the 'first'.
To those who say he 'flipped' on Vick to get a reduced sentence, this cannot be true. He did NOT get a promise of a reduced sentence, he didn't get a promise of ANYTHING from the Federal prosecutors, according to all news sources.
2007-08-02 08:53:33
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
i agree with Sc_baller2000, jkels, and meow.....Tony "the stool pigion" isn't snitching for nothing. That would make me question his creditability.
Remember, Vicks house was raided for drugs. Vick doesn't live there, but the Stool Pigion does. The feds said they didn't give him time reduction on the dog charge, but what about other charges from the drug raid or his past. He may have back-up time from a past charge that the FEDs made dissappear.......
This case is like Transformers, "theirs more, than meets the eye"
Vick is sick is just a hater.....
2007-08-02 14:13:11
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
He turned against him because the evidence was stacked against the four defendants, and he knew it was. It will very probably work against Vick's case because Taylor was in on the whole thing the whole time, and is a very strong witness.
2007-08-01 20:16:08
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
He's not turning against Vick he's trying to save himself by ratting everybody. Tony knows that the Fed. got alot of evident and a strong case against everybody that's involved in the case, so he became a gov. witness in exchange to get a lighter sentences for himself. Look you have to look out for yourself first right.
2007-08-01 20:24:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
They should've learned loyalty from the dogs instead of killing them. That pretty much sealed the deal - even with Vick's high priced lawyer
2007-08-01 20:12:48
·
answer #8
·
answered by PAPA N 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
CYA, man... cover your assets. He knew the way this case was heading and took the deal when it was offered. Smart move, I think. He knows they're all going down, so any way he could save his own rear, he might as well take it! Nothing to lose, a lot to gain...
2007-08-01 20:19:18
·
answer #9
·
answered by El_Refe 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Because he wanted less time in prison/jail...He knows the Feds have the evidence...
2007-08-01 21:08:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by Terry C. 7
·
1⤊
1⤋