Every morning I watch Morning Joe on MSNBC be’cuz Joe & Mika let shit rip and their guests are intriguing and provide insight. So, this morning Joe mentions Michael Vick gets released today. “ABOUT DAMN TIME!” was exactly what I said. And then Joe goes on to discuss how society values animals over lil’ boys and girls by stating that a child rapist serves less time than Michael Vick. say what Joe?
So, then I have to wonder what is wrong with our judicial system? Now, Bellini has studied constitutional law and is a history maven and I know enough about law to know that no two courts operate the same, so subjectivity runs high in courtrooms. I’m trying to figure out what did the DA’s (district attorney) office bring to the table that his defense couldn’t counter? Was the presiding judge in a position to throw out the case and didn’t – it takes gumption to do that. And even if the charge had to stick, meaning the judge did not have the license to close the case, didn’t he have the license to invoke a reduced sentence (i.e. community service)?
Folks, let me know if I’m missing something. I didn’t really pay attention to the whole Michael Vick thing. I just know I was stunned when he got jail time. And was a lil’ perturbed ok more than a lil’ that he was essentially broke; however, he didn’t deserve jail time. I hope he is able to pick the pieces up of where his life left off and be selective about the picking. Levy intense scrutiny over the pieces of your life and identify and select only those pieces worth maintaining your sanity, happiness, and health. All other pieces, please lay to the side. And Vick, it’s about damn time!
cheers,
Bellini
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
This doesn't answer any of the questions you asked in your post. But check it. One day I was in the car w/ my mom and this Hispanic woman was tryin to cross the street and the white man driving was really bout to hit her. And my mom was like, "Oh no. That's crazy!" And then a squirrel crossed the street and he slowed down and my mama was all, "but he braked for a squirrel!" LMAO! So yeah not to make sweeping generalizations but I think that's a clear indication of their love for all things animals.
And no one ever believes me, but I saw previews for this show on Animal Planet, where the voiceover guy had this deep sorrowful voice and said, "You know what happen to Michael Vick. But what happen to his dogs?" And then it was images of the "poor" dogs and the show was on the folk/shelter that rescued them. HILAROUS!
Anyway. Check this interesting discussion on Vick and his possible return to the NFL on the Wash Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2009/05/20/DI2009052001760.html?hpid=topnews
Come on now... Rum Punch you wasn't a little sad when you saw the dog pictures?
Don't get me wrong, I would never favor a dog over a human.
But when I hear the arguement that you get less time for one crime over another... that only makes me question the judicial system not necessarily the sentence. Unless, I am missing something when laws are passed for a crime to do they take into consideration other crimes which are worst and have lesser sentences or do they just write it?
I don't know, you tell me?
I believe that PETA had a lot to do with getting Vick into jail. Being an animal lover (excluding cats), I understand their cause and passion. However, their relentless pursuit against Vick was crazy. They protested day night and added to the hell he was already experiencing. These are the same group of folks that threw paint on people in the 70's-80's for wearing fur coats. They are a scary bunch of folks and greatly influnced the court system in the Vick case.
I heard Vick agreed to a "reality show" documenting the time of his release until his return to the NFL. I guarantee PETA will be there making his life hell once again.
I hope Vick returns to the NFL and does well. He's paid his dues. I hope people let him be.
The next time I overfeed my goldfish, I hope PETA doesnt come after me.
@ Courvoisier - I feel like the politically correct thing to say here is, yes. When in reality my mind is saying, "uh ok, sure. If you say so. I was a 'lil sad.'" No for real I think it was a terrible thing that happened, but it didn't tear at my heart strings like seeing little orphan South African children singing their hearts out, solely to get a better orphanage...
@ Mudslide - LOL @ the goldfish! You'se a fool. I totally agree w/ you - PETA was off the chook w/ this case. And I know that's obviously their cause, etc., but I think their added pressure and presence had an impact on Vick's sentence...
@ rummy: yeah, i skimmed it, hypocrisy is alive and well; @ times i wonder about the American psyche
@courvoisier: we can defer to minty since she's the legal mind in the group, but it is my understanding that the judge is trained to be focused on the specifics of the case -- sidenote mini history lesson-- you've had justices (Chief Justice Warren on Supreme Court) that have factored in contempareous conditions when issuing their court ruling, but justices don't have to that
@mudslide -- i concur with rummy's comments (LOL)
Well hello Mudslide... How you been?
Poor goldfish...lol
Word on the street according to www.theybf.com, Vick's people reached out to the Humane Society.
i think that the punishment for a particular crime should be in some way reflective of what value we as a society place on the wrong. that's why the most heinous crimes often carry the death penalty. but often times things become unequal/sticky b/c only the people who write the laws (re: ruling monied white folks) values are reflected in that. hence mike vick gets jail time for abusuing some dogs while the molestation or rape of a young girl doesn't recieve as severe a punishment. while crack rocks used to (and in some places) still get you more time than powder cocaine. that's when i think punishments should be made comparative and everyone's values should be factored in. so i could vote probation on the dog abuse, f' jail time!
Post a Comment