gregh  2007-08-15 09:12  crazylawsuits  dogfighting  Law  terrorism  vick   

I've tried to preserve the following verbatim, though the handwriting was tough to make out. Be sure to check out the actual complaint.

[M]oves this honorable court to issue a TRO Temporary Restraining order against MICHAEL VICK from any further contact with Plaintiff. As Plaintiff is claiming that his Federal and State Constitutional Rights are being violated under the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, and 14th amendment of the Constitution. For relief, Plaintiff seeks 63,000,000,000.00 Billion dollars backed by gold and silver delivered via "UPS" United States Parcel Service to the front gates of FCI Williamsburg, Salters S.C., collected from Defendant MICHAEL VICK.
...
On April 20th, 2007 MR. VICK stole two white mixed Pit Bull dogs from my residence in Holiday florida, and used them for dog fighting throughout the Richmond Area. MR. VICK damaged my RFID chips in my dogs collars so I will not be able to track them. these 2 dogs were used for fighting on April 23rd, 24th, and 26th, 2007. On April 28th, MR. VICK sold my dogs on EBAY Auction, and used the proceeds to purchase missles from the Iran Government.
...

• On Feb 10th, 2007 MICHAEL VICK plead Alliengence to Al-qaeda
• MICHAEL VICK subjected me to microwave Testing
• MICHAEL VICK used drugs in school zones
• MICHAEL VICK is in the business of illegal steroids

When it rains it poors. $63,000,000,000.00 billion is a lot. I assume the missiles are for al-Qaeda.

gregh  2007-07-27 20:12  Law  vick   

With all of the hoopla surrounding U.S. v. Vick, I had found myself looking for a piece of information that I had yet to see in the press. Specifically, there had been a great deal of press coverage about Michael Vick's attorneys, but I found it very difficult to find any information on his co-defendants' attorneys. The co-defendants have, it seems, been relatively dependent upon Vick, and so I wondered who would be providing their defense. Additionally, I wondered if it was likely that loyalties would be impacted

I still wonder that, but I now know that they do indeed have separate attorneys. This was largely confirmation of legal theory I've learned; I had a difficult time imagining the U.S. wouldn't file to disqualify any duplicate attorneys, and the judge would likely do so. As a result, I was surprised to read this:

Daniel Ray "Meach" Meachum, an Atlanta attorney, filed paperwork today in U.S. District Court to represent Vick. Meachum is listed to also represent Vick's co-defendants, Quanis Phillips, Purnell Peace and Tony Taylor.

However, I think that may have been an error, which makes sense. In particular, the Pacer entries don't mention it:

07/26/2007 10 MOTION for Daniel Ray Meachum to appear Pro hac vice on behalf of Michael D. Vick. Fee paid, receipt #300001405. (cgar, ) Additional attachment[RECEIPT] added on 7/26/2007 (cgar, ). (Entered: 07/26/2007)
07/26/2007 11 SO ORDER granting 9 10 Motions for Pro hac vice. Appointed William Robert Martin and Daniel Ray Meachum as to Michael Vick (4). Signed by Judge Henry E. Hudson on 7/26/2007. (cgar, ) (Entered: 07/26/2007)

Of course, the interesting news from Pacer has hit the news sites:

Set Hearings as to Tony Taylor: Plea Agreement Hearing set for 7/30/2007 at 9:00 AM before District Judge Henry E. Hudson (rpiz) (Entered: 07/27/2007)

And that possibility is, of course, why distinct counsel is required in most cases.