Vick the Convict, Dogfighting rings, and Elastic American Principles
by Benjamin Roberts, 2007

It is horrendous watching the athlete Michael Vick being hauled in and put through the meat grinder of our judicial system. It is horrendous to watch the TV news videotape of the pit bull dogs being viciously maimed and killed as they are made to fight with each other. It is horrendous to see how chronically elastic American principles and morals are, as it applies to our judicial system, public sentiment, and media portrayal. On watching this spectacle I have four words for America. "Give it a rest!" Yes. That's what I said. "Give it a rest." We like to tell ourselves that, as opposed to other countries, we in America are well informed and fair in our application of justice for violation of the rules of our society. What a delusional lot we are. When I see the smartly dressed excellent athlete, Vick, making his appointment with our justice system, complete with an angry mob, to answer charges of cruelty and violence against animals I see something else. I see a black man being made an example of, and a mob wanting to be satiated with the spectacle of his demise, whether or not he is guilty or innocent. An all too common picture in this nation's history. Consider this:

Pit bulls were brought over here by Europeans and were used specifically for fighting. The owners usually garnered handsome money purses for their dog's performance. For my own edification I recently picked up a book from my local pet store about pit bulls. In recounting the history of the animal, the book highlighted an Irishman, whose name escapes me at this point. He, or more accurately his pit bull dog, was one of the longest running champions of the dog fighting circuit, garnering him lucrative purses. So when CNN Nancy Grace gets on her show, as she did yesterday, and tells us, with enough drama to rival a Shakespeare production and a horrified face to match, that she can't imagine how someone can watch dogs fight to the death, it is clear that Nancy Grace needs to read more and stop listening to the sound of her own voice. It was disconcerting to watch this woman doing her CNN special on the Vick dogfighting affair. At the best of times it is difficult to determine whether Grace is trying to inform or be as shocking and self serving as she possibly can. Most times it seems clear that it is the latter. It was rather disconcerting and disturbing in her report how she almost contemptuously described Vick as a multimillionaire with various houses, rolled a tape of LA Lakers Kobe Bryant denying rape charges as a comparison to Vick's situation, and took one of her African American guests to task for implying that dogfighting was worse than raping a woman. To top this off she brought on a guest whom she introduced as psychologist Dr. Lillian Class. This woman, a Caucasian, was asked to address an earlier comment by an African American guest of the show who had done various interviews with Vick, knew him well, and had commented that Vick was by nature an introvert and not much of a wild party animal type. This woman could hardly be contained in her rush to define Vick. With a smile on her face she launched into her diagnosis of Vick. She stated that he was consumed with "inner rage," was "sociopathic," and "antisocial" because he had given his fans the finger, and very sadistic for treating the dogs in such a manner. What a load of crap! This woman has never met Vick but can tell us that he is such a malcontent and threat to our society based on yet to be proven indictments and his showing his fans the finger. I guess all those drivers who show each other the finger on our highways day in and day out are sociopathic and antisocial. So is Vice President Dick Cheyenne who told an elected official in our government to "go f---k yourself.." The association that oversees psychologists should bar this woman from practice for making quack diagnosis, and Vick and his lawyer should sue her, CNN, and Nancy Grace for character assassination and accusation of criminal activity without evidence. To add to this, the news headlines that saturated us over and over with the sickening tape of the dogfighting showed no faces of the human participants but their arms and legs could be clearly seen. They were all black. The brainwashing message is clear. "The participants in this sickening practice are black and since Vick is black he is guilty without a doubt. Case closed!" It is clear that the media is attempting to make Vick a social leper and a heinous criminal convict in the eyes of the public and the judicial system.

It is quite interesting that some years ago when Geoffrey Dahmer committed the heinous crimes of murder and torture on young men, a psychologist and expert witness in the case, summed up to the court that Dahmer was not such a bad guy, and that he had exaggerated a lot to make himself seem worse than he really was. My, my. What an elastic system of principles, morality, and justice we apply in this country. What hypocrisy! Vick and his lawyers need to not only fight in the law courts. They also need to forcefully push back against the media, because it is unloading broadside after broadside on them, ensuring that they lose the case even before they get to the court steps. Take a walk in your neighborhood. You will see many whites and blacks who own pit bulls. Now can you believe that no whites and no white player in the NFL is engaged in pit bull fighting when white Europeans actually introduced the practice from across the Atlantic, and that it is the sole domain of black America. The black arms and legs in the pit bull fighting tape wants you to believe just that. Give me a break!

Here's how justice works in America. It is the 80's and the city is Tampa, Florida. An imposing strapping black man named Willie Darden is tried in the courts and sentenced to death for brutally shooting to death and murdering the white owner of a mom and pop store. Darden vigorously and passionately maintains that he never had anything to do with the death of the victim. I can still hear his voice saying in a final interview "I swear on my mother"s grave that I did not kill anyone." A white man who ran a faith ministry in the prisons spent a lot of time with Darden concluded that he was innocent of the crime and worked tirelessly for his release. He interviewed the widow of the slain shopkeeper and up to the last tried to get her to examine herself and her conviction that she witnessed Darden gun down her husband. The woman said that all blacks looked the same and that she was sticking by her story. The police more than once combed some bushes that Darden was supposed to have disposed of the murder weapon. They found no weapon each time. Then, Eureka! A gun was suddenly "found." A white resident of the city said that Darden could not have committed the crime because at the time of the murder his car was broken down on the street right outside her house, and he had the hood up trying to fix the problem. This counted for nothing. The state prosecutor told Darden in court that he was a vile animal and should be chained up like a dog and taken outside and shot. Is it not interesting that now we are here talking about maltreatment of dogs by a black man while Darden's case is that of a black man being told by a state official in an arena of justice that he should be treated like a dog and disposed of.

Notwithstanding the lack of evidence and conflicting evidence in the case, Darden was sent to his death while stridently insisting that he was not guilty of the crime. Now fast forward to today and the Duke University lacrosse players charged with raping a black woman. The prosecutor Nifeong was behaving almost exactly like his counterpart in the Darden case, lacking evidence and omitting facts. He was wrong, and the young men were innocent. The difference is that Nifeong, a white man, decided to take on well off middle class white boys and their families. Bad move. They were able to bring potent resources to bear. Nifeong career has been shot down in flames. He has had to apologize and is fighting to stay out of jail as the judge is considering prison for him. What a stark difference to Darden's case where securing a sentence of sending an innocent black man to his death most definitely turned out to be a feather in the prosecutor's cap, and allowed him to go on to bigger and better things. That is equal and fair American justice for you. I would humbly ask that the young men and their families in the Duke case, as they grapple with returning to normalcy, to consider how many black women in this country have lost their sons to prison and death row because of the many Nifeongs they have come up against time and time again in our justice system. For the young men here, this circumstance caused them to experience an unfair and harrowing disaster, but for many that same circumstance regularly turns out to be tragic and deadly.

Now onto the topic of cruelty to animals. About two weeks ago CNN carried a piece about how animals are violently killed in sport hunting and safaris in east Africa. Wealthy white men and white owned companies have the animals on huge tracts of land in east Africa, and for a price game hunters can come and engage in a "hunt." Before setting up the piece the news woman said something like "This is very graphic and violent so you might want to think twice before watching it." She was right. One moment the majestic lion was sitting on its haunches relaxing, and the next dust flew from his body as bullets from a high powered rifle tore into his body, knocking him over into a lifeless heap. No stalking by the "hunter,' or evasion of any kind by the animal. It was violently shot where it was standing. Very brutal and sickening. The story died right after that. No outrage. No media explosion. No angry mob. No PETA. (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). In fact the news person in the field interviewed the white owner of the operation and threw him some softball question which he answered, beaming with delight. End of story. Why the difference?

I have never met a black man who engages in this violent and brutal exercise of safari game hunting. It is almost exclusively a sport for well off white men.. Back home they display the animal in their mansions and, as a conversation piece, tell their guests that with great skill, patience, and threat to life and limb, they stalked and hunted said beast before outwitting and shooting it. What a hoax. In fact some of those very characters probably sat in exclusive box seats at NFL games watching Vick work his athletic magic on the field. These are blue chip citizens. What hypocrisy. Shame on the NFL. Shame on Commissioner Goodell. Shame on PETA, who incidentally had a promo on that CNN Nancy Grace Michael Vick special, where they are asking that you send your contributions to them so that they can stamp out animal cruelty. They had no such promo on the game hunting special. What a sell out. Send my money? Not a chance. This Vick incident is a sham dressed up as justice and morality, where a black man is having to carry the burden of all our unpleasant behavior. What's new.

Wake up America! Is someone playing us for fools? Less then three weeks ago investigators into Vick's case said they were folding up their tents and closing down the investigation because there was no existing evidence of his guilt. This was carried on major news channels. The suddenly an indictment is handed down. Come on now. Did someone high in the halls of power, such as in the Justice Department which oversees federal investigations, decide that in no way shape or form should this investigation stop, and that Vick's case must, at all cost, overload the media and the American consciousness? And why would someone in Justice decide on such a plan of action, you ask? Because it would redirect America's eyes and wrath away from George Bush's arrogant and odious commuting of Scooter Libby's prison sentence for threatening this nation's security by publicly exposing one of our intelligence assets. Secondly, it would redirect us away from the hot water Justice Department head, Albert Gonzalez, is in as he tries to fight charges that he tampered with our justice system by being involved in the firing of judges so as to ensure a favorable political outcome in a case. Do you really think it is beyond Bush and his Administration to charge ahead with the Vick case and turn it into a media circus simply to make their own troubles disappear?