The latest on the Vick/dog fighting story:
WVEC (via Fanhouse) reports that the U.S.D.A. Inspector General applied for a warrant to look into the Vick property (to look for the bones of dead dogs). A state magistrate approved the warrant.
The Surry County Sheriff's Office and Attorney Gerald Poindexter rejected the warrant.
What the crap is going on?
All WVEC says is that "Poindexter says he and the sheriff 'did not like the language' of the search warrant."
I have to know more. Why are the people responsible for investigating and prosecuting any wrongdoing in this case rejecting the opportunity to discover more evidence? Do I watch too much Law and Order and The X Files if I think these are local rural officials doing things their own way, resentful of federal interference? Do I have unfounded biases if I don't really trust local rural officials to handle this case?
I want to know more. I want to know what language in the search warrant Poindexter "did not like." I want to know what justified rejecting the opportunity to verify the claim of a tip and to search for more evidence of wrongdoing. I want to know if investigators will be doing anything else to attempt to verify the informant's claim that dogs were killed and buried on the property. Because this just doesn't make sense.
Addendum: George Dohrmann's "The House on Moonlight Road" in SI is a very good--and relatively objective--summary of the Vick/dog fighting story, as well as a solid background piece on dog fighting in America.
Post a Comment