|
|
http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/7125090
What Donaghy's deal means
NBA referee Tim Donaghy pleaded guilty Wednesday to two felony charges in a betting scandal that rocked the league. FOXSports.com legal analyst Rob Becker sat down with us to discuss the details of Donaghy's plea deal and what it means for both the former official and the government's ongoing investigation.
Based on the specific charges Donaghy pled guilty to today, what conclusions can we draw about his specific actions? How does today's news shine a light on Donaghy's criminal behavior?
Donaghy pled guilty to a document called an "Information" and waived his right to be formally indicted by a grand jury. In pleading guilty to the Information, he was essentially confirming the details in that document.
The Information never quite says that Donaghy made calls to affect the final outcome or scores of games, but it says that he suggested to his co-conspirators which teams they should bet on in specific games, including games he officiated.
(The affidavit used to apprehend his two co-conspirators said that the picks that he provided included "many" games that Donaghy officiated.)
The Information also states:
"Donaghy also compromised his objectivity as a referee because of his personal financial interest in the outcome of NBA games."
Since Donaghy has admitted to a lack of objectivity, this is as close to admitting that you changed the outcome or course of a game as you can get without actually saying it.
The Information also said he passed on inside details concerning which refs would be handling which games and specific relationships between referees and players.
We've also learned from the affidavit that was filed for the purpose of obtaining an arrest warrant for his two co-conspirators that starting in December of last year, Donaghy would receive $5,000 if one of his picks covered the spread and was paid nothing if his pick failed to cover.
Donaghy was officially charged with one count of conspiring to commit wire fraud and a separate count of conspiring to transmit wagering information across state lines. He was not, however, charged with sports bribery. Can you talk about why the government didn't bring this charge?
The key element of the sports bribery statute is that the government must show not merely that he was gambling on games, but that he was involved in a scheme to influence the course of those games.
That would be a very difficult charge to prove if you didn't have a tape of him saying he'd intentionally made a bad call or a document in which he admitted changing the outcome or score of a game — and it's unlikely the government would have such evidence.
Without such evidence, it would be virtually impossible for the government to prove that Donaghy had been making calls to influence the outcome of games for the purpose of making money.
That's why the strongest statement in the Information is that his objectivity was compromised because of his financial interest.
Donaghy has agreed to cooperate with the government as part of his plea bargain; what, if anything, can you say now about the nature of his cooperation?
The Donaghy investigation came to light on July 20. It's clear from the arrest warrant affidavit that during the past three weeks, the FBI has been "debriefing" Donaghy and that he has been helping them with their case against his two co-conspirators, who are involved in gambling.
The arrest warrant affidavit contains many details about how the betting operation worked that were almost certainly supplied by Donaghy, who is referred to in that document as "CS1" — a confidential source of information.
David Stern has long insisted this was a rogue ref acting alone and not a widespread problem involving multiple officials. Does Donaghy's plea appear to support this assertion? Is it still possible that Donaghy could come forward with revelations of other referees being involved?
Although anything is possible, there is absolutely nothing in the Information or the arrest warrant affidavit that indicates that any other referee is involved, and the description of the gambling operation is entirely consistent with the very thing that Stern has claimed — that Donaghy is a "rogue" referee.
advertisement
STORY TOOLS:
print
send
blog
RSS LIKE THIS STORY?
In light of Donaghy's decision to plead guilty and cooperate with the FBI's ongoing investigation, what sort of punishment can he reasonably expect to receive?
I think it's probable under his deal with the prosecutors that he's going to end up getting between six and 12 months in prison under the federal sentencing guidelines.
By pleading guilty, he has probably "accepted responsibility" for his actions and thereby saved himself four months in prison that he would have received otherwise.
The federal sentencing guidelines are not mandatory and a judge could certainly depart from them. It may well be that the judge will not sentence Donaghy until she's had a chance to see how much he cooperates with the authorities against his co-conspirators.
He will also have to pay a $500,000 fine and at least $30,000 in restitution. |
|
发表于 2007-8-16 05:49
