Big Dakota
New Member
- Messages
- 11,876
- Reaction score
- 0
It was pretty much a given that Michael Vick was going to plead not guilty during Thursday's arraignment. But there were a few developments that weren't quite so clear cut.
Fortunately, FOXSports.com legal analyst Rob Becker was on hand to sort through it all for us.
What about today's proceedings particularly intrigued you?
The feds announced that they will be filing a superceding indictment in August. Since there was only one count in the original indictment, I would expect that there will be multiple counts added that could elaborate on the dogfighting and gambling aspects of the crime and, to make matters worse, there could be racketeering charges filed against Vick based on the gambling aspects of dogfighting.
The maximum sentence for racketeering is 20 years in prison, although if convicted it's unlikely Vick would serve anywhere near that amount
Why might the government hold back some charges and threaten to bring them later in a superceding indictment?
It's possible that they're hoping the threat of enhanced charges will increase their leverage on Vick to get him to come in and plea bargain to some or all of what he has already been charged with.
Does it surprise you that Vick was released without bond?
No. The only two issues that the judge is supposed to consider when deciding on whether there should be bond are one, is he a threat to the community? I think it's obvious that he isn't. And two, is he a "flight risk" — in other words, is there a possibility that if they let him go he will not show up for trial? Since Michael Vick has a face that everyone recognizes, there really is no possibility that he could become a fugitive, and if he did, he would destroy any remaining possibility he has of resuming his lucrative football career. So I think the judge showed common sense in determining that he was not a flight risk and that he should be released without bond.
One of the restrictions the judge did place on Vick was that he is not allowed to travel outside of his federal district. What implications, if any, does this have on his ability to resume his NFL career this season?
The judge's travel restriction places 49 states off limits to Michael Vick. This means that even in the unlikely event that NFL commissioner Goodell's investigation ends with a reinstatement of Vick to his team, he simply could not function as the quarterback of the Atlanta Falcons.
However, in that event I would expect his attorneys to go back in front of the judge and argue that he should be allowed to leave his state of residence solely for the purpose of playing in NFL games and earning his livelihood. And the same reasons why he was not given a bond — namely, that he is almost certain to show up in court — should be the reasons he is allowed to travel to NFL games
What did you think of Vick's statement today in which he professed his innocence?
Full text of Vick's statement
"Today in court I pleaded innocent to the allegations made against me. I take these charges very seriously and look forward to clearing my good name. I respectfully ask all of you to hold your judgment until all of the facts are shown. Above all I would like to say to my mom I'm sorry for what she has had to go through in this most trying of times. It has caused pain to my family and I apologize to my family. I also want to apologize to my Falcon teammates for not being with them at the beginning of spring training."
If you haven't pled guilty, the only rational thing to do is profess your innocence. So what he said today doesn't change my opinion of the case at all. In fact, it would have been a bit more convincing if the words had come out of Michael Vick's mouth rather than his attorney Billy Martin's.
So what comes next for Vick?
The judge scheduled the trial for Nov. 26. That date can often be put off. However, Vick has the misfortune of being prosecuted in the federal court in Virginia, which is so notorious for moving cases along quickly that it is known as the "rocket docket." Therefore, I would expect Vick's attorneys to move quickly to obtain from the government the evidence relating to the case, to the extent they can.
That's what I expect to see in public, but in private, I would bet there would be plea bargaining negotiations. And if Vick's defense team starts to see that the government's case against him really is as strong as the indictment makes it appear to be, then that will certainly increase the chances that there will be a plea bargain.
Realistically what interest would the government have in accepting a plea bargain from Vick?
When it comes to plea bargaining, Vick has a problem. Based on the indictment, he appears to have bankrolled the entire dogfighting operation, which began after he became a wealthy professional athlete.
It may well be accurate to say he was the leader of the operation. Thus, it's not as if he can offer up to the government a criminal who's further up the chain than he is.
This is unlike the situation facing NBA ref Tim Donaghy, who may well be able to offer up mob-connected bookies whom the government may be more interested in convicting.
Nevertheless, the two reasons why Vick may still be able to make a deal are: First, there would be a value to both sides if Vick is the first defendant to try and do a deal — the government would be more likely to accept such a deal than if he were the last defendant to seek a deal. Second, the government knows that if it has to actually try Vick, it will be going up against a high-powered defense team, including prominent D.C. attorney Billy Martin, whereas, if they do a deal with Vick and take the other three defendants to trial, they will not be facing anywhere near as well-financed a legal defense.
How would a plea bargain actually work? What could Vick plea down to in this case?
If he were convicted of everything in the indictment, he could get a maximum of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine (plus restitution), as opposed to the six years and $350,000 that has been widely reported. The reason he can't get more than the five years and $250,000 is because he's been charged with only one count that contains one conspiracy. I have personally confirmed the five-year, $250,000 maximum with the U.S. Attorney's office in Richmond, which is prosecuting the case.
That one conspiracy, according to the indictment, was to violate two different federal statutes. The two statutes he has been charged with conspiring to violate are 1) participating in dogfighting across state lines and 2) traveling across state lines for the purpose of gambling (this is known as violating the "Travel Act"). Oddly enough, he is not charged with actually violating the dogfighting statute or the Travel Act — he is only charged with a conspiracy to violate those two statutes.
If Vick is convicted of conspiring to violate the "Travel Act," then regardless of whether the government proves he also conspired to participate in dogfighting across state lines, the maximum penalty is the five years and $250,000, and under the federal sentencing guidelines, Vick, who has no previous convictions, would probably receive a sentence of between 10 and 16 months.
But if he is only convicted of conspiring to participate in dogfighting across state lines, the maximum he could get is one year in prison and a $100,000 fine. Under the guidelines, he might not get any prison time. However, the government raised the ante today by saying it would bring a superceding indictment in August. I would expect that indictment would include the actual violation of the dogfighting statute and the "Travel Act" that were not included in the original indictment. There is also the possibility that the government could charge him with racketeering, which would put even more pressure on his defense team to come to the table and do a deal.
So if I'm his attorney, what I want to do is move quickly to get the government to agree to let Vick plead guilty only to conspiring to participate in dogfighting across state lines and not to conspiring to violate the "Travel Act," because the maximum he could get would be a year and the reality of it would be he might not go to prison at all. If they wait until August, such a deal may no longer be available.
That would be a reasonable goal for a defense attorney here. Rob Becker is Fox Sports Net's legal analyst, a litigator in New York City, and a regular contributor to FOXSports.com.
__________________
:laugh2: 
