Jay Cohen off the hook?????????

[Checkers]

Jay Cohen's biggest mistake---other than getting arrested, of course---is basing his defense on the premise that he followed the model of OTB so therefore if that's legal he is legal

in fact, this will once again be his defense, when and if his case is heard by the us supreme court

BIG MISTAKE!!!

if cohen wants to win before the us supreme court, he needs to argue that the federal govt has no right to decide who gets arrested for gambling and no right to arrest such people

why not?

simple

the us constitution states than any powers not specifically granted to the federal govt by the constitution shall go to the individual states

since gambling is not mentioned in the constitution, the right to control gambling and gambling laws has hisorically gone to the states...that is why some states have casinos or lotteries or whatever and some don't...if federal govt controlled this you could have these things anywhere in the us

so all cohen needs to do is argue that the feds overstepped their boundaries by busting him, and that it's up to state governments to decide whether or not gambling is legal in a particular state...states have the right to control gambling, not the federal govt, and if only cohen's attorneys could figure this out cohen would be off the hook

especially with a conservative supreme court, argue states' rights were violated and you are home free

no charge for this advice, and i want to thank my law firm mason, berlutti, kluzak and ciquestein

[Blowfish]

Checkers you are right on the money. The US Attorney in the Southern district of NY argued that those indicted were in violation of the 1961 wire act--which does specifically address gambling. However, the businesses and individuals (Cohen being the only one to fight the charges) indicted had moved their businesses entirely out of the jurisdication of the United States.

Other companies move their businesses outside the U.S. for similar reasons--to avoid labor unions, wage laws, manufacturing restrictions, etc.

If the government wants to crack down on Internet gambling in any effective manner, they had better start by raiding the bars on football Sunday and scooping up the pool money, then go to each office each week and confiscate the pool money there, etc. etc. And what right do they have to single out Internet gambling? The states dictate riverboat gambling, indian gambling, bingos, lotteries, keno, video poker, etc., etc., and yet they want to limit an individual's right to play with their money on the Internet?

How is any offshore gambling operation worse than Enron or Arthur Anderson. More people's lives were hurt and affected by that than are hurt by Internet gambling. There are scumbags in any business. This is like prohibition---it is impossible to make an activity as old as humankind illegal.

[Dragon]

Unfortunately the precedent has already been set, particularly in a recent case involving money seized from Bowmans. True, totally different circumstances, but still a precedent in my opinon.

[Checkers]

dragon--what happened in the bowmans case????

[Blowfish]

Bowman's is involved in the lawsuit in New Jersey where funds were confiscated for banking issues, etc.

Although if it is truly deemed a state by state issue, then that may be overlooked as a precedent. Several similar cases are being used in Cohen's favor as precedents.

The federal law does prohibit the transference of betting information ACROSS state lines. This is what they are arguing, although the information wasn't transmitted from one state to another, it was transmitted from one country to another and if anything, they'd have to go after those who placed the bets from within the country--not those who legally moved outside the country to operate their business.

The this IS the US Governmnet and they usually find a way to get what they want.

[man oh man]

jay can only present the same defence at the appeal that he presented at the first trial.

good luck

[Checkers]

man---r u an atty or do u just play 1 on the net like wacko the doc does?

[Blowfish]

Checkers,

Are you asking me that or man oh man?

If you are asking me, I don't even play one on the net, they are just issues that interest me. No thank you to becoming a lawyer, real or imagined.

That's like saying Judge Judy is the actual Judge Judy posting on here.......

[Checkers]

THE QUESTION WAS ADDRESSED TO MAN, CAN'T YOU SEE THAT?

IS HELER KELLER YOUR MAMA?

[man oh man]

checkhead

you could say that and you would not be wrong.

[Blowfish]

Checkers......come on MAN, don't dissapoint. HeleN Keller.

At least my mom ain't no BITCH......(the dog thing--for those that aren't following)

[Checkers]

bitch? no, yo mama's a black ho...i just gave here two bucks for around the world

[Blowfish]

If my mama's Hellen Keller, then she can't be a black ho...........and are you saying you'd take advantage of the disabled?

How bout we find someone else than the Weitz to be obsessed with. At the rate you're going, He's gonna get paranoid and start fingering you for a stalker or a homocidal maniac.

[Checkers]

he doesn't have to get paranoid---he's already been diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic, and receives disability from the us govt for his mentall illnesses


riddle:

what is weitzner's idea of a dilemma?

free ham!