Sean - I'm not sure what you mean by fundamentally legal - but proof probems don't negate the validity of a law.
And they're not being charged under any new laws - the main charge is conspiracy to violate the Wire Act which dates back to 1961. It's survived multiple constitutional challenges.
I want [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Lefebvre and Lawrence[/FONT] to kick ass, but only because it's a huge diss to Bush's DoJ - not because I think it will radically change the current state of affairs.
And they're not being charged under any new laws - the main charge is conspiracy to violate the Wire Act which dates back to 1961. It's survived multiple constitutional challenges.
I want [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Lefebvre and Lawrence[/FONT] to kick ass, but only because it's a huge diss to Bush's DoJ - not because I think it will radically change the current state of affairs.
They are not being charged with violating the wire act. They took no bets.
They are being charged with money laundering. If they are found not guilty, it is a big step in showing that payment processors and banks are not guilty if people use them to gamble.
Who's next? Google? people prob found gambling amoung childporn and other things there...
Sean
They are being charged with money laundering. If they are found not guilty, it is a big step in showing that payment processors and banks are not guilty if people use them to gamble.
Who's next? Google? people prob found gambling amoung childporn and other things there...
Sean
I think there is about a 5% chance they will actually fight the charges...why would they?
These guys have enough money to live a luxurious life even after paying whatever fines they get in a plea bargain. Why would they risk doing serious jail time?
The feds will be more than happy to let them walk as long as they agree to keep out of the US market for moving money to gambling sites. They win HUGE just by getting that accomplished.
A plea bargain is the ideal situation for both sides.
These guys have enough money to live a luxurious life even after paying whatever fines they get in a plea bargain. Why would they risk doing serious jail time?
The feds will be more than happy to let them walk as long as they agree to keep out of the US market for moving money to gambling sites. They win HUGE just by getting that accomplished.
A plea bargain is the ideal situation for both sides.
Clip Joint said:
That's basically the scenario in most Federal indictments and the "5% chance" pretty accurately reflects the number that go to trial as it is. I'd love to see them fight it but as the poster notes they've got millions of reasons *not* to. And of course the Feds don't want this to go to trial--it would set a *very* bad precedent (at least from the Feds view) should they lose.
They can always act like they're going to trial and use that as leverage to get a better plea deal. Personally, were I in their shoes I'd take a deal in a second....
Very unlikely to go to trial, but from what I have read about him, he may just take it there.
It is going to be near impossible to find a jury of 12 to convict these guys in NY.
Sounds as if DC is going to trial. He has thrown up the WTO decision as his defense. NOw a federal court is going to either have to toss the case or state the US does not follow WTO decisions. Or I guess the prosecutor could drop it or make the settlement so weak that DC can't not take it...(Time served and agreement to not do it again...)
Sean
It is going to be near impossible to find a jury of 12 to convict these guys in NY.
Sounds as if DC is going to trial. He has thrown up the WTO decision as his defense. NOw a federal court is going to either have to toss the case or state the US does not follow WTO decisions. Or I guess the prosecutor could drop it or make the settlement so weak that DC can't not take it...(Time served and agreement to not do it again...)
Sean
