Tweet
August 16, 2001
Citing Erroneous and Inconsistent Legal Judgment Jay Cohen Continues Fight to Overturn Guilty Conviction
Why is it an unfortunate fact of life that Freedom Fighters who take on the forces of darkness are always playing catchup? With that in mind, here is the latest chapter in the government’s unseemly and crude attempt to use its Right Is Might doctrine to bend the law into a self-serving tool.
Vigorously contesting a series of shocking oversights by the three-judge panel that heard Jay Cohen’s appeal of his conviction on illegal bookmaking charges, the defendant's legal team, Brafman & Ross P.C., New York, NY, has filed a petition asking that the Court should rehear the matter en banc.
In a scathing denunciation of the judges' decision to uphold Cohen’s conviction, the petition cites the incongruity of this ruling, while "an entire offshore gaming industry, as well as numerous state-sanctioned off-track betting enterprises, flourish with hundreds of companies and Internet websites operating unencumbered by United States Government interference"
The brisk, pointed petition puts the entire issue in context when it reveals the government's concession that, "There was never any allegation of fraud or wrongdoing in the operation of World Sports Exchange," which was "wholly located licensed and regulated in the sovereign nation of Antigua."
In addition to oversights and breakdowns in interpretation and application of federal law, Cohen's attorneys said bluntly, "The Panel's analysis is strikingly insufficient and places this court squarely in conflict with other United States Courts of Appeals ..."
Consequently, the petition requests that, "The full Court should convene and rehear Defendant's appeal."
The variances between the legal applications made by the judges and the counterpoints raised by Brafman & Ross are weighted logically in favor of the defense, according to several experienced local jurists who provided their own legal analysis.
Here is a summary of the key issues raised in the petition for a rehearing, according to our Las Vegas legal sources:
(1) The court's ruling that Jay Cohen did not need to have a "corrupt motive" to be found guilty of conspiring to transmit wagering information overlooked cases from the United States Supreme Court, the Second Circuit, and other United States Courts of Appeals that support Jay Cohen's position to the contrary.
(2) The court's conclusion that betting is not "legal" in New York despite the undisputed fact that it is not a crime conflicts with a decision by another federal appeals court and also with the intention of Congress when it enacted the Wire Act.
(3) The court's unprecedented ruling that wagering instructions from an out-of-state bettor to a facility where the bettor has a wagering account constitute the "bet" itself effectively criminalizes the operations of all off-track betting organizations that accept interstate wagers by telephone and Internet. Such a ruling not only offends the right of each state to regulate gaming, but also conflicts with a ruling of another United States Court of Appeals and the intentions of Congress.
(4) The court's ruling that Jay Cohen did not need to know that he was transmitting a "bet" conflicts with the longstanding rule, stated by the Supreme Court, that the mental state required for a criminal offense applies to every element of the offense.
To an admittedly biased observer, it would seem that there are enough substantive points in the petition to ensure Cohen’s appeal is heard by the full panel of 12 judges.
Is Jay tilting at windmills? Maybe.
Is this simply a lost cause? Perhaps, but aren’t those the wars that most need to be fought?
We know Jay is not looking to be a martyr, and he would not be comfortable in that role. After years of dealing with treachery and trickery perpetrated on him by our revered law enforcement establishment, Jay is realistically optimistic, and prepared for any eventuality.
But in his heart of hearts, he keeps on fighting, driven by the belief that he will ultimately emerge victorious.
It Ain’t Unanimous! While most of us might think that the entire offshore industry is rooting for Jay Cohen, that would be so much poppycock and wishful thinking.
If the government successfully prosecutes Cohen, it will be one more nail in the coffin of American free enterprise. Uncle Sammy will effectively delete the economic activity known as offshore gaming by prohibiting any U.S. citizen from participating as a principal, and consign it to the unfettered ambitions of non-Americans.
How thoughtful of our politicians to surgically remove an otherwise viable growth industry from its own citizens, while it is being exploited in jurisdictions throughout the world.
Foreign nationals, who are well aware of the ramifications of such restrictions, are rooting for the political bimbos in Washington to continue giving the keys to the kingdom to anyone but a U.S. citizen.
And so it goes …
The Check Is In the Mail. After five weeks of being stalled by his offshore book, Jan P. was told the payment he had requested long ago was being sent.
That was the good news. The bad news is he got paid in Canadian funds, which was about a 35 percent discount off the American money he was expecting.
He received two checks issued by a Canadian bank in Canadian dollars. One for $3,000 was debited $1,066.80 by his bank. The other check for $1,720 came up $611.63 light after the bank debited the difference between U.S. and Canadian currency.
Prior to receiving the funds, the bettor had been given such excuses for not getting paid as, “We’re changing banks”, “It’s a bank holiday”, etc.
Jan did not complain to the book because those checks closed his account, and he was just too disgusted to make an effort which he knew would not pay off.
The book he played with has been around and had a reputation for paying. It also had a reputation of less than terrific customer service, according to some of its players.
If there is a moral to this story, it is the one we have reiterated on many occasions. The offshore industry is well populated with first class sportsbooks that promise good service, prompt payment and fair lines. They do not give away the store to gain new business.
While we understand the interest by many players in seeking multiple outs, we believe it is short-sighted to respond to overly generous signup incentives that show a lack of business sense, or play with a book that has poor customer service, even if the book pays.
We know many bettors who have played offshore since the industry began and have never been stiffed. They take normal precautions and conduct due diligence before opening an account.
No book is perfect. Occasionally good books do bad things. But most disputes can be resolved by explaining your position with clarity and any documentation available.
If the book responds with an arbitrary decision in its favor, there are posting forums where a complaint may be publicized, which can lead to a satisfactory resolution.
Missing In Action. For those wondering where our website is, it will be up by the middle of next week. Getting our annual magazine, Players Guide, to the printer and putting out our weekly newspaper, Players Choice, is occupying all our current resources.
But we appreciate the interest and promise the website will soon be up, with a full menu of content that caters to sports bettors.
Please send questions, comments, etc., to [email protected].
Citing Erroneous and Inconsistent Legal Judgment Jay Cohen Continues Fight to Overturn Guilty Conviction
Why is it an unfortunate fact of life that Freedom Fighters who take on the forces of darkness are always playing catchup? With that in mind, here is the latest chapter in the government’s unseemly and crude attempt to use its Right Is Might doctrine to bend the law into a self-serving tool.
Vigorously contesting a series of shocking oversights by the three-judge panel that heard Jay Cohen’s appeal of his conviction on illegal bookmaking charges, the defendant's legal team, Brafman & Ross P.C., New York, NY, has filed a petition asking that the Court should rehear the matter en banc.
In a scathing denunciation of the judges' decision to uphold Cohen’s conviction, the petition cites the incongruity of this ruling, while "an entire offshore gaming industry, as well as numerous state-sanctioned off-track betting enterprises, flourish with hundreds of companies and Internet websites operating unencumbered by United States Government interference"
The brisk, pointed petition puts the entire issue in context when it reveals the government's concession that, "There was never any allegation of fraud or wrongdoing in the operation of World Sports Exchange," which was "wholly located licensed and regulated in the sovereign nation of Antigua."
In addition to oversights and breakdowns in interpretation and application of federal law, Cohen's attorneys said bluntly, "The Panel's analysis is strikingly insufficient and places this court squarely in conflict with other United States Courts of Appeals ..."
Consequently, the petition requests that, "The full Court should convene and rehear Defendant's appeal."
The variances between the legal applications made by the judges and the counterpoints raised by Brafman & Ross are weighted logically in favor of the defense, according to several experienced local jurists who provided their own legal analysis.
Here is a summary of the key issues raised in the petition for a rehearing, according to our Las Vegas legal sources:
(1) The court's ruling that Jay Cohen did not need to have a "corrupt motive" to be found guilty of conspiring to transmit wagering information overlooked cases from the United States Supreme Court, the Second Circuit, and other United States Courts of Appeals that support Jay Cohen's position to the contrary.
(2) The court's conclusion that betting is not "legal" in New York despite the undisputed fact that it is not a crime conflicts with a decision by another federal appeals court and also with the intention of Congress when it enacted the Wire Act.
(3) The court's unprecedented ruling that wagering instructions from an out-of-state bettor to a facility where the bettor has a wagering account constitute the "bet" itself effectively criminalizes the operations of all off-track betting organizations that accept interstate wagers by telephone and Internet. Such a ruling not only offends the right of each state to regulate gaming, but also conflicts with a ruling of another United States Court of Appeals and the intentions of Congress.
(4) The court's ruling that Jay Cohen did not need to know that he was transmitting a "bet" conflicts with the longstanding rule, stated by the Supreme Court, that the mental state required for a criminal offense applies to every element of the offense.
To an admittedly biased observer, it would seem that there are enough substantive points in the petition to ensure Cohen’s appeal is heard by the full panel of 12 judges.
Is Jay tilting at windmills? Maybe.
Is this simply a lost cause? Perhaps, but aren’t those the wars that most need to be fought?
We know Jay is not looking to be a martyr, and he would not be comfortable in that role. After years of dealing with treachery and trickery perpetrated on him by our revered law enforcement establishment, Jay is realistically optimistic, and prepared for any eventuality.
But in his heart of hearts, he keeps on fighting, driven by the belief that he will ultimately emerge victorious.
It Ain’t Unanimous! While most of us might think that the entire offshore industry is rooting for Jay Cohen, that would be so much poppycock and wishful thinking.
If the government successfully prosecutes Cohen, it will be one more nail in the coffin of American free enterprise. Uncle Sammy will effectively delete the economic activity known as offshore gaming by prohibiting any U.S. citizen from participating as a principal, and consign it to the unfettered ambitions of non-Americans.
How thoughtful of our politicians to surgically remove an otherwise viable growth industry from its own citizens, while it is being exploited in jurisdictions throughout the world.
Foreign nationals, who are well aware of the ramifications of such restrictions, are rooting for the political bimbos in Washington to continue giving the keys to the kingdom to anyone but a U.S. citizen.
And so it goes …
The Check Is In the Mail. After five weeks of being stalled by his offshore book, Jan P. was told the payment he had requested long ago was being sent.
That was the good news. The bad news is he got paid in Canadian funds, which was about a 35 percent discount off the American money he was expecting.
He received two checks issued by a Canadian bank in Canadian dollars. One for $3,000 was debited $1,066.80 by his bank. The other check for $1,720 came up $611.63 light after the bank debited the difference between U.S. and Canadian currency.
Prior to receiving the funds, the bettor had been given such excuses for not getting paid as, “We’re changing banks”, “It’s a bank holiday”, etc.
Jan did not complain to the book because those checks closed his account, and he was just too disgusted to make an effort which he knew would not pay off.
The book he played with has been around and had a reputation for paying. It also had a reputation of less than terrific customer service, according to some of its players.
If there is a moral to this story, it is the one we have reiterated on many occasions. The offshore industry is well populated with first class sportsbooks that promise good service, prompt payment and fair lines. They do not give away the store to gain new business.
While we understand the interest by many players in seeking multiple outs, we believe it is short-sighted to respond to overly generous signup incentives that show a lack of business sense, or play with a book that has poor customer service, even if the book pays.
We know many bettors who have played offshore since the industry began and have never been stiffed. They take normal precautions and conduct due diligence before opening an account.
No book is perfect. Occasionally good books do bad things. But most disputes can be resolved by explaining your position with clarity and any documentation available.
If the book responds with an arbitrary decision in its favor, there are posting forums where a complaint may be publicized, which can lead to a satisfactory resolution.
Missing In Action. For those wondering where our website is, it will be up by the middle of next week. Getting our annual magazine, Players Guide, to the printer and putting out our weekly newspaper, Players Choice, is occupying all our current resources.
But we appreciate the interest and promise the website will soon be up, with a full menu of content that caters to sports bettors.
Please send questions, comments, etc., to [email protected].