Originally Posted by tony hipchest
excellent and informative explaination.
initial OJ and ray ray cynicizm (throw in jacko), had me thinking this would another simple case where the high profile celebrity just wins over the jury and judge and walks. however, like you said, this is dealing with the feds and actual eyewitnesses.
i never even gave a second thought to the public perception of all the GA locals being so loyal to the "bulldogs". it may seem trivial on the surface, but then i think of tj douchbag wiping his shoe with the terrible towel and what type of emotions that stirred up.
in the case of the feds vs vick, is there protocol to where that trial would be held? would it be in the nearest federal court to where the crime was committed, or would it be wherever the govt wanted to have it?
The indictment was returned by a grand jury sitting in the Eastern District of Virginia, Richmond Division - there are 94 federal judicial districts, often more than one in a state, and sometime divisions within a district - the districts' breakdown is by state and, then for districts & divisions within a state, by county . For example, Pittsburgh is in the Western District of Pennsylvania (link to map here - http://www.fedstats.gov/mapstats/fjd/
When conduct occurs in multiple jurisdictions prosecutors have lot of leeway where to seek an indictment. For example, it appears the property owned by Vick was in Smithfield VA, which is Isle of Wight County in the Eastern District Of Virginia, Norfolk Division. My bet is the federal prosecutors preferred a Richmond Division jury pool to a Norfolk Division jury pool so they presented the indictment to a Richmond Division grand jury.
Court proceedings and any trial will be in Richmond VA. Vick will make his initial appearance in Richmond before whichever magistrate judge has duty that day. A magistrate judge sitting in Richmond will be randomly assigned to handle pretrial proceedings and a U.S. District Judge sitting in Richmond will be randomly assigned as trial judge. Pretrial rulings by the magistrate judge on such issues as motions to suppress evidence can be appealed to the trial judge prior to trial.