Posted on 07/23/2007 6:42:58 AM PDT by GeorgiaDawg32
I think this is what most 'law and order conservatives' really think of our system of justice.
I think a lot of "law and order conservatives" recognize the reality of the matter that it is the government -- the state -- that must presume a defendant innocent until proven guilty. That presumption extends no further than the state.
..don’ worry - we’ll beat ‘em.
If you inferred that from what Boortz wrote (I can't believe I'm on a thread defending Boortz for his comments), then you must not have been paying attention. He very clearly stated that the state must presume a person innocent until proven guilty. Thus, a district attorney cannot "hang 'em first" since the district attorney is the agent of the state.
Bring in Daunte Culpepper to the Falcons and replace Vick.
Even if Culpepper does not make the grade the race issue is put to bed. Get rid of this poisonous thug Vick.
Wrong.
A hearty portion of the NFL has absolutely no problem with what Vick did. Hell, a bunch of them probably attend dogfights on their own.
The fact of the matter is that the hiphip lifestyle has polluted the NFL and the NBA and it is 180* out of phase with the beliefs of most of the fan base.
I forget the guy’s name, but the media was interviewing some player right after this story broke, and his response was “What’s the big deal? They’re his dogs”.
The NFL has the right to suspend Vick indefinitely. The Atlanta Falcons have the right to terminate his employment immediately. Neither of these actions requires the organization in question to wait until he is convicted of a crime.
My guess is that Michael Vick is going to work out a deal with the team and the NFL to take a paid leave of absence this year. And he won't put up much of a fight about it, either -- because his paycheck from the Atlanta Falcons for the 2007 season is likely to be the last dime he earns for a very long time, and he's going to need a lot of that money to pay his legal bills for the next five years.
Yeah, it worked so well in the Duke LAX case!
Sorry Neal, but I’ve got to disagree with you here.
Mark
I haven't paid attention to the NBA since the early 90s. Got tired of all the posing and primping, and (honestly) I felt like the fix was in, in a lot of the games - usually you could tell a winner early on, I thought.
The government and the courts MUST consider a suspect charged with a crime innocent until proven guilty, but there's not a DAMN THING that says we, as individuals, must do so.
So you agree with the actions of Duke University and the group of 88 professors?
Mark
I take it you haven't been keeping up with disputes in Washinton, DC for the last 6 1/2 years. Lefties have been accusing conservatives of unproven crimes for this period, at least. They have been demanding resignations, firings, indictments, convictions, impeachments, and in a few cases, executions of conservatives. So far no one has lifted a finger against them.
Besides, here in Florida, I am judgement proof.
Dont paint with too wide a brush...there are many blacks ready to join the conservative ranks if we educate and promote conservative values in an attractive way. The trouble with conservatism today is we have NO major statesmen who know how to communicate like Reagan did.
Don’t give up on winning over African-Americans....the Dems have snookered them greatly. We must win them over to conservatism where true freedoms prevail.
Jim Mora told them that a year ago and it got him fired.
My bad. Yeah, he was speaking about a private employer and I skimed over that. Still, I’m uncomfortable with it.
Several people in the media have raised comparisons of this situation to the Duke Lacrosse case, but such comparisons are completely off base for several reasons:
1. In the Duke Lacrosse case, you had a DA running for reelection pandering to the black community with his rush to bring a well-publicized indictment. Here it is a federal grand jury where there is no political/reelection angle to pursue.
2. In the Duke Lacrosse case, there was never any evidence that a crime had even occurred, and the complainant had a history of making false accusations. Here, there is a mountain of evidence that not only did a crime occur, but it was an ongoing criminal enterprise.
3. The Duke Lacrosse case might be a good case study for a textbook on how not to conduct a criminal investigation except for the fact that with so many things done wrong every step of the way no criminal justice student would ever think the case was believable. The Vick dogfighting case appears to be a case not of questionable lineups and testimony of discredited witnesses but rather a case built on substantial documentary evidence, beginning with the fact that Vick is the owner of the property where the dogfighting and training facility was discovered.
So far their actions have cost them nothing, and because of their ads actual wording, the Duke 88 are unlikely to have any difficulty whatsoever. Naturally in my opinion, their opinions are mistaken. Duke may well lose a lawsuit because of its unjustified ACTIONS.
I think you misunderstood. He says it applies to the Govt but NOT to individuals. We can put a verdict out on him. So that being said. It was his property he knew exactly what was going on. He is a THUG and that is all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.