A tale of two convictions (Black and Vick)
By Michael J.W. Stickings
'Twas quite a day yesterday for Justice:
1) Conrad Black:
Alas, less than the 20+ years (and $32 million) sought by prosecutors, but still a significant and justifiable sentence. For more on his guilty conviction, see my previous post here. For more on Black -- he ought to be stripped of his lordship as eagerly as he renounced his Canadian citizenship (not that we want him back) -- see here.
Some additional details: As a non-American, Black is not eligible for a minimum-security prison and so will likely be sent to a low-security facility. Moreover: "Foreigners are also prohibited from some prison programs and they are not eligible for release to a half-way house during the final six months of their sentence. Typically, inmates must serve 85 per cent of their term before they are eligible for parole. At the end of their sentences, Lord Black and the others will likely be sent to an immigration detention centre to await deportation."
Good riddance. To both Black and his loathsome wife, Barbara Amiel. May you both be deported to oblivion.
**********
2) Michael Vick:
I've posted previously on Vick here and here. There isn't much more to say, except this:
Vick's former team, the Atlanta Falcons, played (and got trounced by) the New Orleans Saints last night on Monday Night Football. The game was played in Atlanta. The camera picked up numerous people in the stands wearing Vick jerseys and holding pro-Vick signs. Some of his former teammates sported his number (7) on their uniforms -- presumably in a show of friendship and support? -- and at least one player had it on the black anti-reflection strips under his eyes. At one point, the owner of the Falcons, Home Depot co-founder Arthur Blank, joined the ESPN announcers in the booth. He was asked about the Vick situation and, to be fair, said the right things -- for the most part (e.g., redemption, second chances, etc.). And yet he minimized Vick's crimes by stating repeatedly that Vick had simply made some poor choices.
Poor choices?
This is a callous and egotistical young man who tortured and executed dogs for his own (and his friends') amusement. That's what this is all about. It's not a story about how a good kid turned bad or fell in the wrong crowd or was lured into temptation or whatever. Rather, it's a story about premeditated animal abuse and the rich celebrity-athlete who not only enabled the abuse but committed much of it himself.
This is what Atlanta showed us last night: One of the wealthiest and most powerful men in America downplayed what Vick did -- Vick, his former money-maker. Meanwhile, all around him, some of Vick's former teammates and many Falcons fans expressed what looked like their unconditional love and support for a brutal animal abuser, a criminal who, one suspects, doesn't quite get how what he did was so bad.
Nice job, Atlanta. Are you always this repellently ugly?
**********
Both Black and Vick should have been sentenced to longer prison terms -- Vick especially.
Nonetheless, these were two high-profile criminal cases that went the right way -- and in each case the criminal was subjected duly subjected to public condemnation and sentenced to prison time.
Yes, a very good day for Justice.
'Twas quite a day yesterday for Justice:
1) Conrad Black:
Conrad Black was sentenced to 6 1/2 years in prison on Monday.
Judge Amy St. Eve had said she was considering a sentence of between 78 and 97 months for the media mogul. She ultimately decided on a 78 month sentence and a $125,000 (U.S.) fine.
He must also forfeit $6.1-million with no right to restitution.
"You have committed a serious offence, a very serious offence," Judge St. Eve told Lord Black.
Alas, less than the 20+ years (and $32 million) sought by prosecutors, but still a significant and justifiable sentence. For more on his guilty conviction, see my previous post here. For more on Black -- he ought to be stripped of his lordship as eagerly as he renounced his Canadian citizenship (not that we want him back) -- see here.
Some additional details: As a non-American, Black is not eligible for a minimum-security prison and so will likely be sent to a low-security facility. Moreover: "Foreigners are also prohibited from some prison programs and they are not eligible for release to a half-way house during the final six months of their sentence. Typically, inmates must serve 85 per cent of their term before they are eligible for parole. At the end of their sentences, Lord Black and the others will likely be sent to an immigration detention centre to await deportation."
Good riddance. To both Black and his loathsome wife, Barbara Amiel. May you both be deported to oblivion.
**********
2) Michael Vick:
Michael Vick was sentenced to prison Monday for running a dogfighting operation and will stay there longer than two co-defendants, up to 23 months, because he lied about his involvement when he was supposed to be coming clean to the judge who would decide his fate.
The disgraced NFL star received a harsher sentence than the others in the federal conspiracy case because of "less than truthful" statements about killing pit bulls.
Vick said he accepted responsibility for his actions, but U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson said he wasn't so sure.
"I'm not convinced you've fully accepted responsibility," Hudson told Vick, who arrived in court wearing the black-and-white striped prison uniform he was issued when he voluntarily surrendered Nov. 19 to begin serving his sentence early.
I've posted previously on Vick here and here. There isn't much more to say, except this:
Vick's former team, the Atlanta Falcons, played (and got trounced by) the New Orleans Saints last night on Monday Night Football. The game was played in Atlanta. The camera picked up numerous people in the stands wearing Vick jerseys and holding pro-Vick signs. Some of his former teammates sported his number (7) on their uniforms -- presumably in a show of friendship and support? -- and at least one player had it on the black anti-reflection strips under his eyes. At one point, the owner of the Falcons, Home Depot co-founder Arthur Blank, joined the ESPN announcers in the booth. He was asked about the Vick situation and, to be fair, said the right things -- for the most part (e.g., redemption, second chances, etc.). And yet he minimized Vick's crimes by stating repeatedly that Vick had simply made some poor choices.
Poor choices?
This is a callous and egotistical young man who tortured and executed dogs for his own (and his friends') amusement. That's what this is all about. It's not a story about how a good kid turned bad or fell in the wrong crowd or was lured into temptation or whatever. Rather, it's a story about premeditated animal abuse and the rich celebrity-athlete who not only enabled the abuse but committed much of it himself.
This is what Atlanta showed us last night: One of the wealthiest and most powerful men in America downplayed what Vick did -- Vick, his former money-maker. Meanwhile, all around him, some of Vick's former teammates and many Falcons fans expressed what looked like their unconditional love and support for a brutal animal abuser, a criminal who, one suspects, doesn't quite get how what he did was so bad.
Nice job, Atlanta. Are you always this repellently ugly?
**********
Both Black and Vick should have been sentenced to longer prison terms -- Vick especially.
Nonetheless, these were two high-profile criminal cases that went the right way -- and in each case the criminal was subjected duly subjected to public condemnation and sentenced to prison time.
Yes, a very good day for Justice.
Labels: business, crime, Football, justice, law, media, sports
posted by Michael J.W. Stickings at
12:21 AM
2 Comments:
Michael,
Maybe it's the different perspective from up north...after all, you guys actually prosecute hockey goons...but Vick's sentence was seen here as a bit too harsh, believe it or not.
I agree that Vick should have known better. He wasn't some stranger in a strange land, and maybe was indulging in a culture that was acceptable where he came from.
He fought dogs. He killed dogs.
The only comfort I can take from the Vick story is the sentence probably ends his effective playing career, as well as any possible endorsement income he might have earned.
By
Carl, at 4:34 PM
I disagree. Michael Vick is not blameless, but the punishment should still fit the crime. Taking away a man’s freedom for an activity that remains legitimate entertainment in many parts of this country and the world seems the wrong remedy. In a society where we slaughter animals for sport, food, and goods, I fail to see the justness or proportionality of locking a person up for two years for conducting dog fights. Here, the Judge the departed from what the prosecutors were asking for and imposed a more harsh sentence, which is unusual.
What makes one form of cruelty to animals more morally reprehensible than others? Vick is not a danger to our society, has expressed sincere remorse, and has paid for his crime—already spending three weeks behind bars, losing $100 million in income, and even more so in public standing.
In the meantime, our justice system has failed to impose meaningful penalties on the masterminds behind the current meltdown of our housing markets, the resulting round of mass layoffs, the post-Enron vaporization of retirement nest eggs for thousands, let alone the torture and unjust incarceration of actual people at the hands of our government.
Where is our moral outrage over cruelty to humans?
Angelica K. Jongco
San Francisco, CA
By
Anonymous, at 1:36 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home