Tweet
Jay Cohen has a date for Valentine's Day, a date in federal court in Manhattan. His trial, which will be closely watched by the Internet gaming industry, begins Monday.
Cohen was a target of the first federal prosecution in the United States against Internet sports books. Charges were initially filed in the case in March 1998. Eventually there were 23 individual defendants.
Ten of them have reached settlements with the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Six never answered the charges, according to Herb Hadad, a spokesman for U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White, and are considered fugitives. Cohen is the only defendant to go to trial.
Cohen is co-owner of World Sports Exchange, which is licensed in Antigua. He was originally charged with six counts of using wire communication facilities to transmit bets and wagers, or information assisting in the placement of bets and wagers, in interstate or foreign commerce, and one count of conspiracy to use wire facilities to transmit bets. Other counts were added later.
"This is a very important trial,'' Joseph M. Kelly, business law professor at Buffalo State College, State University of New York, told RGT Online. "If the government loses the case, there will be tremendous pressure to pass Kyl. If the government wins, the Department of Justice may say, 'We don't need the Kyl bill.' ''
The "Internet Gambling Prohibition Act,'' sponsored by Arizona Senator John Kyl, unanimously passed the Senate in November. A companion bill, sponsored by Rep. Robert Goodlatte of Virginia, awaits action by the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives.
The Justice Department has expressed "strong reservations'' about the legislation, Kelly said. But that doesn't mean that it won't pass the House and be sent to the President for his signature.
In an article in the William Mitchell Law Review, publication pending, Kelly said that Cohen and the other defendants were all U.S. citizens who owned, operated or managed offshore sports books. The businesses all used toll-free phone numbers.
Federal investigators placed bets by phone from New York, and were paid if they won. There were no allegations of fraud, because bettors were paid if they won.
The defendants were charged with violating the Wire Act. Cohen has argued, Kelly said in his article, that the act does not apply because betting was legal both in New York and in Antigua.
If the government wins this case, Kelly said, it may pursue Internet casinos. Legally, he said, the Wire Act would be more difficult to use against a casino. Bets on casino games may not fit the definition of bets that's included in the Wire Act.
The Wire Act was aimed at traditional bookmakers. It was passed in 1961, long before the Internet existed.
RGT Online was unable to reach Cohen or his lawyer, Benjamin Brafman.
Cohen was a target of the first federal prosecution in the United States against Internet sports books. Charges were initially filed in the case in March 1998. Eventually there were 23 individual defendants.
Ten of them have reached settlements with the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Six never answered the charges, according to Herb Hadad, a spokesman for U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White, and are considered fugitives. Cohen is the only defendant to go to trial.
Cohen is co-owner of World Sports Exchange, which is licensed in Antigua. He was originally charged with six counts of using wire communication facilities to transmit bets and wagers, or information assisting in the placement of bets and wagers, in interstate or foreign commerce, and one count of conspiracy to use wire facilities to transmit bets. Other counts were added later.
"This is a very important trial,'' Joseph M. Kelly, business law professor at Buffalo State College, State University of New York, told RGT Online. "If the government loses the case, there will be tremendous pressure to pass Kyl. If the government wins, the Department of Justice may say, 'We don't need the Kyl bill.' ''
The "Internet Gambling Prohibition Act,'' sponsored by Arizona Senator John Kyl, unanimously passed the Senate in November. A companion bill, sponsored by Rep. Robert Goodlatte of Virginia, awaits action by the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives.
The Justice Department has expressed "strong reservations'' about the legislation, Kelly said. But that doesn't mean that it won't pass the House and be sent to the President for his signature.
In an article in the William Mitchell Law Review, publication pending, Kelly said that Cohen and the other defendants were all U.S. citizens who owned, operated or managed offshore sports books. The businesses all used toll-free phone numbers.
Federal investigators placed bets by phone from New York, and were paid if they won. There were no allegations of fraud, because bettors were paid if they won.
The defendants were charged with violating the Wire Act. Cohen has argued, Kelly said in his article, that the act does not apply because betting was legal both in New York and in Antigua.
If the government wins this case, Kelly said, it may pursue Internet casinos. Legally, he said, the Wire Act would be more difficult to use against a casino. Bets on casino games may not fit the definition of bets that's included in the Wire Act.
The Wire Act was aimed at traditional bookmakers. It was passed in 1961, long before the Internet existed.
RGT Online was unable to reach Cohen or his lawyer, Benjamin Brafman.
Comment