Yes, is the answer to that popular question.  Here's why justice was served...

1.  Michael Vick broke the law, plain and simple.

2.  Michael Vick was given the opportunity, initially, to confess his guilt.  He declined..and instead pleaded innocent to all charges.

3.  Michael Vick agreed to take a lie detector test.  He failed.

4.  Michael Vick, only after failing the lie detector test, confessed that he was indeed guilty of running the dog fighting ring and guilty of torturing and killing dogs that didn't perform up to "standard".

5.  As part of the plea agreement, Michael Vick was required to stay clean of drugs.  He failed a drug test after the plea.

There are those who say he was unfairly sentenced.  Some believe there are those who commit far worse crimes who are set free or who have to spend less time in prison.  One example is Mary Winkler (the preacher's wife) who murdered her husband.  She will spend less than a year behind bars.

My question is...where is your "real" beef?  Is it with the judge who sentenced Mikey V to 23 months (less than 40% of what he could have gotten)...or is it with those judges who don't serve justice by wussing out on sentences and allowing criminals to walk free...which leads me to number 6 in my reasons why justice was served.

6.  Henry Hudson was known for his harsh sentences.  This was no surprise. 

My advise to those who have problems with Mikey V's sentence is to take it up with the judges you actually have the issues with...the one's who wouldn't know justice if it were to bite them in the toosh!! 

It seems that we have those who can't make up their minds.  They complain about the O.J. trial being an injustice...and that he should have spent the rest of his life in prison.  But those very same people also complain when justice is actually served, as in the case of Mikey V....that it was too harsh.  So which way is it folks? 

You decide.

(Thanks to btroup1 who helped inspire this blog)