WHO DEY AGAIN? Posted February 25, 2004 Report Share Posted February 25, 2004 Just saw this on Foxsports. No details except these are Federal charges. I smell playoffs! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted February 25, 2004 Report Share Posted February 25, 2004 Just saw this on Foxsports. No details except these are Federal charges. I smell playoffs! Well here's the details I got from Ravens Talk.com:** BREAKING NEWS *** NFL star Jamal Lewis indicted on drug conspiracy charges Douglas High grad proclaims innocence By BILL RANKIN <mailto:brankin@ajc.com> The Atlanta Journal-Constitution Published on: 02/25/04 Star NFL running back Jamal Lewis was indicted Wednesday afternoon by a federal grand jury in Atlanta on drug conspiracy charges. Lewis, 24, a graduate of Douglass High School in Atlanta, is accused of conspiring to distribute cocaine from June 23, 2000, until July, 19, 2000. Lewis is innocent of all charges, his attorney said Thursday. "Jamal Lewis denies any involvement in any criminal activity or any activity involving drugs," Atlanta lawyer Ed Garland said Wednesday. Lewis' co-defendant, Angelo Jackson, was to appear in court for his arraignment. Lewis will surrender to authorities and appear in court at a later date, said Garland. This past season, Lewis had the second-best single-season rushing total in league history and also set the single-game rushing mark with 295 yards against Cleveland. With his size, speed and power, Lewis is one of the NFL's premier players. The 23-year-old Baltimore Ravens running back graduated from Douglass in 1997 and played for the University of Tennessee. Before he arrived on campus in Knoxville, Lewis and a 17-year-old woman were charged with shoplifting from a Macy's store in Cumberland Mall. Store security officers said they observed a clerk slip a $109 polo shirt into Lewis' shopping bag without charging him. Lewis, then 18, was sentenced to three years of probation, fined $1,000 and granted first-offender status. That sentence allows first-time offenders' criminal records to be wiped clean if they complete their probationary time without incident. Lewis is the second Baltimore Raven to face serious charges in Atlanta. In 2000, Raven star linebacker Ray Lewis, who is not related to Jamal Lewis, was charged with two other men in the killings of Jacinth Baker and Richard Lollar in a Buckhead street fight after a night of partying after Super Bowl XXXIV. During a sensational trial six months later, Ray Lewis pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of obstruction of justice. In exchange for murder charges being dropped and a one-year probation sentence, he testified against his two co-defendants, who later were acquitted of all charges. Jamal Lewis has turned to Garland and his partner, Don Samuel, the same two lawyers who represented Ray Lewis during the 2000 trial. Jamal Lewis, after graduating from Douglass High, went on to play at Tennessee. He decided to forgo his senior year and was drafted fifth overall by the Baltimore Ravens. After gaining a team-record 1,364 yards during the 2000 season as a rookie for the Super Bowl champion Ravens, he tore a knee ligament during practice in August 2001 and was lost for the season. It was the second time in four years Lewis underwent major knee surgery. During that 2001 season, Lewis was suspended four games after violating the NFL's substance and alcohol-abuse policy. At the time, the league said Lewis would lose four game checks. Last year was Lewis' best as a pro. He fell just 40 yards short of Eric Dickerson's rushing record of 2,105 yards in 1984. Lewis was voted the Associated Press NFL Offensive Player of the Year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkendall Posted February 25, 2004 Report Share Posted February 25, 2004 Hell YEA! Hey Jam31.. nah nah nahhh nahhhh.. hey hey hey.. good bye.. EVERYONE!In all seriousness.. this sucks royally for Ravens fans and it shouldn't be the exception for us to make it in the playoffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted February 25, 2004 Report Share Posted February 25, 2004 MORE FROM THE WIRE... U-S Attorney William Duffey announced the charges in a news conference in Atlanta this afternoon. Lewis is charged with conspiring to possess with the intent to distribute five kilograms of a substance containing cocaine. He's also accused of using a cell phone in the commission of the first count. An F-B-I special agent states in an affidavit that an informant contacted Lewis about the cocaine and recorded the conversation. The affidavit states that the informant told Lewis he or she was willing to sell the cocaine to Lewis' associates for a price that Lewis could mark up for a profit. The affidavit says Lewis responded, "Yeah." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHO DEY AGAIN? Posted February 25, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2004 I've stated many times that the Bengals will make the playoffs next year and it won't be because Jamal Lewis is taking it in the can in federal prison. This does however explain Ray Lewis and his now famous"Dance of the white powder!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkendall Posted February 25, 2004 Report Share Posted February 25, 2004 I've stated many times that the Bengals will make the playoffs next year and it won't be because Jamal Lewis is taking it in the can in federal prison. This does however explain Ray Lewis and his now famous"Dance of the white powder!" I'm still not covinced the Bengals will be better than 8-8. Too many questions and no answers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richmond_mat Posted February 25, 2004 Report Share Posted February 25, 2004 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution Published on: 02/25/04 Star NFL running back Jamal Lewis was indicted Wednesday afternoon by a federal grand jury in Atlanta on drug conspiracy charges. Lewis, 24, a graduate of Douglass High School in Atlanta, is accused of conspiring to distribute cocaine from June 23, 2000, until July, 19, 2000. Lewis is innocent of all charges, his attorney said Thursday.I wonder whom Jamal Pissed off? This is from 2000? WTF This all has a stench to it. If the FBI could have gotten him with a few kilos now then why didn't they? I predict exoneration after the attourneys clean up$$$$$ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted February 25, 2004 Report Share Posted February 25, 2004 I'm still not covinced the Bengals will be better than 8-8. Too many questions and no answers. Time for another poll? Okey-Dokey! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boobie Clark Posted February 26, 2004 Report Share Posted February 26, 2004 February 25, 2004RAVENS’ STATEMENT ON JAMAL LEWIS General manager Ozzie Newsome’s statement on Jamal Lewis“We are aware of the situation and we’re trying to learn more. These allegations go back to 2000, prior to Jamal’s first training camp and contract. We’ve talked with Jamal, and he’s returning to Atlanta to meet with authorities. We believe in due process, and Jamal will have his day in court. There are two sides to every story. From what we know of the charges, these seem out of character for the Jamal we know.” >>>>>>>>>>>Right, this isn't the same guy who was suspended for four games after violating the NFL's substance and alcohol abuse policy. I don't care whether or not the Bengals benefit. Any bad day for a Ravens' fan is fun watching. Notice how Newsome tries to distance the team from Lewis - "These allegations go back to 2000, prior to Jamal’s first training camp and contract." Is that a statement of support or CYA spin? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted February 26, 2004 Report Share Posted February 26, 2004 Right, this isn't the same guy who was suspended for four games after violating the NFL's substance and alcohol abuse policy.Notice how Newsome tries to distance the team from Lewis - "These allegations go back to 2000, prior to Jamal’s first training camp and contract." Is that a statement of support or CYA spin? Both of these do not bode well for aquittal. Also what looks bad for Jamal is the fact that after all this time, they've finally filed charges. That only means that someone, or something has finally turned this case in the Feds favor, meaning they feel that they can now get a conviction with the evidence they possess.It sucks to be Jamal right now, and so soon after he was so revered as the offensive player of the year! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkendall Posted February 26, 2004 Report Share Posted February 26, 2004 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution Published on: 02/25/04 Star NFL running back Jamal Lewis was indicted Wednesday afternoon by a federal grand jury in Atlanta on drug conspiracy charges. Lewis, 24, a graduate of Douglass High School in Atlanta, is accused of conspiring to distribute cocaine from June 23, 2000, until July, 19, 2000. Lewis is innocent of all charges, his attorney said Thursday.I wonder whom Jamal Pissed off? This is from 2000? WTF This all has a stench to it. If the FBI could have gotten him with a few kilos now then why didn't they? I predict exoneration after the attourneys clean up$$$$$ I don't know Rich, these are federal charges and IF the NFL claims Jamal in violation again, he WILL be suspended for a whole season. Side note - maybe baseball should follow the NFLs drug policy, eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted February 26, 2004 Report Share Posted February 26, 2004 I don't know Rich, these are federal charges and IF the NFL claims Jamal in violation again, he WILL be suspended for a whole season.Which brings up a whole new possibility nobody has even touched on yet...If the Ravens feel they are going to lose Jamal Lewis next year, they may take a whole new look at Corey Dillon. He's be a perfect "Plug and Play" back for their offense.The only drawback is that we'd have to face it twice a year, but is it any worse than what we already look at bi-yearly?I see a "Win-Win" situation here! It would benefit both teams! What do you guy's think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xjjeep90 Posted February 26, 2004 Report Share Posted February 26, 2004 Don't drop the soap, Jamal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted February 26, 2004 Report Share Posted February 26, 2004 Okay, don't forget he has the same attorney that represented Ray Lewis in his troubles in Atlanta. If you remember the evidence against Ray, this case against Jamal seems like a cake walk, seeing how no drugs were actually purchased. I think it's kind of an Atlanta law enforcement agencies versus Baltimore Ravens vendetta! They're pissed they looked so lame in the Ray Lewis case, they're trying to make up for it now. Typical cop behavior. The ol' "I can't stand to be wrong, so I'll do this to make it right" story. Makes me want Jamal to break these charges off in their ass! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrishcovga Posted February 26, 2004 Report Share Posted February 26, 2004 The use of the cell phone and other third party conversations, violate his right to privacy.The Feds will have to show that they had prior knowledge to what the conversations were going to be about to give them the right to "wire " his conversations and monitor his phone calls.The fact that the only thing that they can pin him to is being at the restaurant at the time of an "alleged" sale or conspiracy to sell drugs , means that the Feds don't have a case against him , and will use his involvement (however little it may have been ) as a plea agreement to force his testimony on his friend.Third party conversations are still subject to the "right of conceived privacy" simply because there were no previous signs of criminal conspiracy. Whatever statements Lewis may have made probably won't be admitted into evidence .Blacks' Law Dictionary ------ everyone should have a copy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkendall Posted February 26, 2004 Report Share Posted February 26, 2004 The use of the cell phone and other third party conversations, violate his right to privacy.Unless they got a judges order to do it, then its legal.The fact that the only thing that they can pin him to is being at the restaurant at the time of an "alleged" sale or conspiracy to sell drugs , means that the Feds don't have a case against himThen why would they indict him? Plus we don't have all of the facts so our pre and unqualified assumptions mean nothing until this gets brought out a little more."The indictment came out of a drug investigation that has led to 30 convictions and helped dismantle a cocaine-trafficking ring in the city" -- right here proves that all involved whether or not activated in illegal activities should be investigated. Just ask any family member of the mafia. Also, the tap may not have been on Jamal's phone. If it was on the other side of one that was convicted, then Jamal lost all rights to privacy mingling into a full fledged federal investigation. Thus he will be investigated and the feds feel they have a case against him. Do they? I'm not sure, I have as much fact as the AP wishes to release. The bigger issue is that the NFL could charge that Jamal is in violation of the drug policy thus suspending him for a whole season. This is his second offense because in 2001, he failed a drug test and was suspended for 4 games but didn't have to serve because he was injuried the entire season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrishcovga Posted February 26, 2004 Report Share Posted February 26, 2004 OK ... look at it like this... .the tap is on the other guys' phone.. Lewis borrows it to make a call.... does that make him part of the conspiracy..? That's where 3rd party right to privacy would come in, and i'm sure is what His lawyer will argue in his defense... Now trial speaking.... They hinted because it's a Federal trial, it could go on during the season,and Lewis would miss games because of that..Even though he's a low down no good "Raven' in the grass... , I still gotta fight for the Innocent until proven Guilty.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkendall Posted February 26, 2004 Report Share Posted February 26, 2004 I don't want to make assertions that he's guilty or innocent, personally I don't give a damn. But I believe once he does something like this, it puts him into the ring as well. I'm sure they wouldn't have indicted him if they've gone through all the legalities in this circumstance and seen anything wrong with the whole scenario; they’ve had four years to talk about it.Anyway, he's an athlete and a celebrity; he could get away with murder if he wanted to. I think the whole thing reeks with hypocrisy anyway. "You can't break the law, but if you have tons of money and celebrity status then well, it's cool then". [note: I'm not referring to Jamal on the last statement, just all related items with high profile people still in the middle of their prime regarding entertainment purposes.] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted February 26, 2004 Report Share Posted February 26, 2004 This post is from the Ravens Talk website:This is just to give a legal perspective on the Jamal Lewis charges. I am currently an attorney and have worked in a US Attorney's office. First, it is worth noting that Jamal Lewis was indicted on a conspiracy to acquire with intent to distribute. The intent to distribute can most likely be legally presumed by the amount of drugs that were being discussed - and so the prosecutors would not have to prove this element of the charge. But conspiracy would have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. A conspiracy charge is not a difficult charge to prove. It is one of the three inchoate (or incomplete) crimes - along with solicitation and attempt - in the common law. Where you have to take a substantial step towards the completion of a crime in attempt, conspiracy contains no such requirement. All that is needed to prove conspiracy is to prove agreement to commit a crime. And once you are in a conspiracy, your later inaction will not get you out of it. Once you are in, you are in. That's the bad news for Jamal. But the good news for Jamal is that the prosecutors are going to have to prove agreement. It isn't enough for Jamal to say "Yeah" or for him to ask questions about getting drugs. He has to have affirmatively said, "I agree to buy these drugs" - maybe not in so many words but his agreement must be clear. If the prosecutors just show that his friend was seriously interested in drugs and Jamal asked a few questions or used his cell phone to call the informant, that is not going to be enough. This is not criminal facilitation, it is conspiracy. And the prosecutors have to prove that Jamal affirmatively agreed to the criminal conspiracy. Second, there is a further benefit to Jamal in that the charges did come so late and seem to rest on the cooperation of an informant. Many times informants are trying to get sweetheart deals for themselves and to get out of long prison sentences. Needless to say, informants are not the most credible witnesses. Furthermore, even though the prosecutors have him on tape, if they can't prove agreement from those tapes, they are going to have a hard time proving conspiracy on the word of an admitted informant. Ed Garland will be able to ask what kind of deal the informant got in exchange for his cooperation. (There is a catch to this. Oftentimes, prosecutors don't give explicit deals to informants. This allows the informants to say that they aren't being given anything for their help. Once the trial is over, the informants are then given leniency. This could complicate the impeachment of the informant.) The bottom line is that we have to wait for all of the evidence to come out before we can know how much trouble Jamal is in. But, on the plus side, simply saying "Yeah" and attending a dinner where people discussed a drug transaction - even if you asked questions about the transaction - is not conspiracy. They need to prove agreement. If they can't do that, they have no case. On the evidence that is out now, I don't think Jamal can be convicted. But we just can't tell what the prosecutors have that they haven't told us about - and we don't exactly know what is on those tapes. This was monumentally stupid of anybody to do. Whether it's criminal conspiracy or not is the question, however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobcat Bengal Posted February 26, 2004 Report Share Posted February 26, 2004 At least we dont have to worry about him in our conference, that run defense weve been preaching will be spared.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkendall Posted February 26, 2004 Report Share Posted February 26, 2004 Good stuff Billy.. thx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalszoneBilly Posted February 26, 2004 Report Share Posted February 26, 2004 At least we dont have to worry about him in our conference, that run defense weve been preaching will be spared.... Hey...I wouldn't speak so fast. You never know what's going to be the outcome of a case with so much we don't know about presently. Law Enforcement Agencies are well known for botching investigations. Example, the little girl in Colorado who's parents were suspects, but never charged. I forget their names. They can be real "Barney Fifes" with great regularity, and defense attorneys are well aware of this! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkendall Posted February 26, 2004 Report Share Posted February 26, 2004 At least we dont have to worry about him in our conference, that run defense weve been preaching will be spared....Hey...I wouldn't speak so fast. You never know what's going to be the outcome of a case with so much we don't know about presently. Law Enforcement Agencies are well known for botching investigations. Example, the little girl in Colorado who's parents were suspects, but never charged. I forget their names. They can be real "Barney Fifes" with great regularity, and defense attorneys are well aware of this! Don't forget about the NFL though. If they find him in violation of their drug policy, then Lewis is gone for the whole season; now what rule he could violate in the drug policy, I'm not sure... but keep it in mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrishcovga Posted February 26, 2004 Report Share Posted February 26, 2004 Wait a minute Kirk..... Let's say he's found guilty.... But his crime was committed before he became a player. THe NFLPA couldn't allow a prior act to affect his play time now..?Or could they..? I've never heard of that situation before.. matter of fact only 2 players i can think of that had Federal Drug charges against was that L.A.Rams cornerback from the 80's that got like 20 years because he was doing some "scarface" type distribution.and of course the guy from the Cowboys.. but he's not active anymore... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevnz Posted February 26, 2004 Report Share Posted February 26, 2004 Oh, I found this at si.cnn.com while many of the specifics of the NFL's substance-abuse program and its members are confidential, this much is known: Having been clean for two years, since serving a four-game suspension for a second-strike violation in November 2001, Lewis is no longer enrolled in the league's drug program. He has officially been out of it since the conclusion of this month's Pro Bowl.So even if Lewis was convicted of the drug charges in 2005, or plea-bargained a lesser sentence of some sort earlier than that, he would not be in line for one-year suspension by the league as a third-strike offender under the NFL's drug policy. He would instead be confidentially re-enrolled in the program as a first-timer, which carries no penalty and requires mandatory treatment and testing.Plus it also mentions that the case probably wouldn't be heard until 2005. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.