This isn’t something that’ s going to go away. What’s more, the prosecutors who brought the charges are known for moving trials ahead quickly; a trial could start before the NFL season is more than a week or two old. The odds of conviction are very high.

This comes to me courtesy of my friend Michael Gilberti, a former assistant U.S. District Attorney who is now a defense attorney in Red Bank, N.J.

With some edits for length, here’s the e-mail he sent me this morning:

"If you have not seen the text of the indictment, you can see it at thesmokinggun.com. As a former prosecutor and present defense attorney, I can safely say that Michael Vick a/k/a "Ookie" has real legal problems. It appears from the text of the indictment that there are at least two cooperating witnesses ("scumbag cooperators") who had direct dealings with him. At least one of them is a person whose dogs fought Vick’s dogs, and my guess is that it is someone who has "flipped" and, in defense parlance, is "singing for his supper." While defense lawyers love to yell about that, if the government has any corroboration for the person’s story (e.g., photos, receipts, consensual body wires or phone taps), the defense can yell all it wants, but a jury will most likely believe the scumbag cooperator. If there are two cooperators who corroborate each other, the chances of being acquitted go down dramatically, especially if there is similar corroboration for the second cooperator.

"Several other points: The Eastern District of Virginia is known as "the Rocket Docket" because . . . it moves cases quickly. Initially, at arraignment, the Court will set a trial date within 70 days of the arraignment date . . .

"While it has been correctly said that you can indict a ham sandwich . . .

in most jurisdictions (and unlike the Duke lacrosse case), the U.S. Attorney will not indict a case unless the government has evidence sufficient to convict the defendant. The vast majority of federal cases end in conviction.

. . Also you have to consider that the government has the advantage of conducting, and the resources to conduct, as much investigation as is necessary to get the evidence to support a conviction and can control the timing (within the five-year statute of limitation). This is especially true in a high visibility case, like this one, in a tough District like the Eastern District of Virginia. In short: the government holds most, if not all, of the cards.

"Assuming that the government has the evidence to prove most of the facts stated in the indictment, I believe that Vick has serious problems. And it is entirely possible that, if he does not negotiate a guilty plea, he will be found guilty (barring jury nullification)."

Just thought you should know.