Will Logan Young Be Convicted?

What will be the outcome of the Logan Young trial?

  • He will be found guilty and will serve as an historic example of a booster gone bad.

    Votes: 19 12.9%
  • Young will be tried and found not guilty.

    Votes: 70 47.6%
  • The case will be thrown out for lack of evidence.

    Votes: 45 30.6%
  • The case will be settled out of court.

    Votes: 13 8.8%

  • Total voters
    147
  • Poll closed .
Evidence, not speculation

"It is no secret that the prosecution will use Lang's word against Young, and produce bank records that show two things:

That Young made more than 50 significant cash withdrawals in the span of the indictment against him, many of which were above $9,000, all of which were less than $10,000 to avoid IRS reporting requirements.

In that same timeframe, Lang's balance in his bank account increased dramatically, so much so that the former Alcorn State football player lived a lifestyle not normally accessible to most public school teachers, complete with a loaded SUV and stories of lavish nights out."

Unless the US Attorney's office can show more than this, the case should not go to the jury. Godwin has got to have a "bagman" that can tie LY and Lang together at either end of the transfers, or the case does not rise to the level of evidence necessary to get to a jury. The jury will be instructed not to speculate, but to base their decision on the evidence presented, or lack of it.

Simply because one man spent a lot of money, and another acquired a lot during a given time, does not mean that the second received it from the first. There has to be something tying them to each other. Does Godwin have that evidence? If he doesn't, he's dumber than most US Attorneys I have met. If he doesn't, then he has allowed a "bluff" to push him into trying a case he can't win, and possibly putting his career on the line.

Even with a "bagman" as a witness, is he believeable? I would think that if LY did this he would use someone he could trust not to "roll on him". My personal belief is that there will be break in the chain of custody of the money at some point, and that based on that the jury will acquit.

RTR
 
CapitalTider said:
the Service routinely restructures transactions or combines multiple transactions when there is an intent to avoid application of a provision or evade tax or reporting."

The way that reads you have to be guilty of attempting to "avoid a provision" or "evade a tax or reporting". Assuming LY is square with the IRS it's going to be up to the prosecution to argue that LY "structured" these withdrawals so that a bribe would be less detectable than it would have otherwise.

It's no secret that Young dealt in large amounts of cash for travel, entertainment, gambling, etc. This one will get tricky.
 
You are correct that the prosecution must present evidence that the money Young withdrew went to Lang. It was my guess that Lang would testify that the money came from Young. If Young did not physically hand Lang the money, then the defense can attack that and ask Lang how he knew it came from Young. If no one can testify that the money came from Young, then the defense has created some reasonable doubt and can offer other theories, such as the money really came from say a UT booster and either Lang was misled or is lying. A judge can instruct the jury not to speculate, but everyone knows they will and the defense is hoping they will if they offer an alternate fact pattern. I don't know how this trial will turn out, once some evidence starts getting released we can probably make a better guess. However, if I were a betting man I would not bet the farm on an acquittal.
 
Crimson-Blitz said:
The way that reads you have to be guilty of attempting to "avoid a provision" or "evade a tax or reporting". Assuming LY is square with the IRS it's going to be up to the prosecution to argue that LY "structured" these withdrawals so that a bribe would be less detectable than it would have otherwise.

I don't follow, the avoiding the reporting is a separate offense from the bribe. The 50 withdrawals of more than $9,000 but less than $10,000 are likely the pattern of avoiding the reporting requirements of sec. 6050I. That is the section that requires businesses to report cash deposits or withdrawals of $10,000 or more to the IRS along with the person's name, address, SS#, purpose for money, etc.

Intent is always difficult to prove.
 
Last edited:
Anybody ever see "Absense of Malice" with Paul Newman and Sally Fields?
Remember when he busted the special investigator and showed how illegal they were?
 
bayoutider said:
One question beggs to be answered, how many people in the history of college football have been sent to jail for buying a player. Please, NashvilleTider, DixieDog chime in here and give me some names or numbers.

I don't believe that is a federal crime. I know you've seen the indictment, so that's not the right question. Lots of people have gone to jail for bribery and the schemes that lead up to that.
 
rsbamafan said:
I think the NCAA has been out for bama sence [sic] coach Bryant left.They were scared of him.

Although I maintain that this case doesn't have anything to do with Alabama or the NCAA, I think the NCAA has had an axe to grind with the University, but not dating back to Coach Bryant. I think that ever since Professor Jones sued them and received a large settlement the NCAA has been looking for payback.
 
SirCrimson said:
Who was Professor Jones?

Professor Tom Jones from the law school was the NCAA faculty representative before Professor Gene Marsh. The NCAA letter from the 1993 violations said Jones had lied and was unethical or something to that effect. He filed suit for libel and slander, the NCAA settled out of court I believe for an undisclosed sum.

I'm not sure but the NCAA may never have lost a case or been forced to settle prior to that, maybe Tarkenian got something out of them. I'm pretty sure that when we had some sanctions reduced on that appeal, it was the first time the Enforcement Committee had ever had their sanctions reduced on appeal.
 
Last edited:
I Withdraw money for business quite often?

If that is what convicts Young then approximately 3.5 million Americans are going to jail. Last year the the Federal Reserve reported three and half million people made huge withdraws on a daily basis. The government has it's hands full in trying this case. But what the Government has on its side is a young jury without any clue as to how business is conducted in this country. I can see Young maybe being convicted due to ignorance on their part. If the Defense does it's job in showing people who withdraw money in order to make money as did three and half million people did last year, then Young will not be convicted regardless of his guilt or innocence.
 
Yesterday on the radio, Cecil Hurt said the DA in Memphis will drag Alabama's name through the mud in this trial, and that that was one of the main motives for the trial.

http://www.al.com/sports/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/sports/1106648406196790.xml

"Godwin pointed out that Young, the former owner of the USFL's Memphis Showboats, has a long association with the Alabama football program."

"The government concluded the day's proceedings with a motion to include additional evidence. The government wants to admit the testimony of Duke Clement, a Young friend, who claims the defendant boasted that he was involved in sending another Memphis prospect, Kindal Moorehead, to Alabama. The defense disputed the testimony as two inebriated friends trying to top each other during a night on the town.

Judge J. Daniel Breen is expected to rule on the motion this morning."

I wonder how this ut law school grad will rule on this. Is there any doubt?
 
Chukker Veteran said:
I wonder how this ut law school grad will rule on this. Is there any doubt?
Judge Breen did not attend UT as an undergrad. He went to Spring Hill College. Law school is too intense (especially for those who go on to become federal judges) to develop a true fanship fopr a school. (I know this has already been pointed out but it bears repeating because you seem determined to incessantly drag the credibility of this Bush appointed, conservative judge through the mud) Don't you think that if the judge was truly as biased against LY as you want to paint him that LY's lawyers would have been successful in having him recused from the case? You are conveniently setting up a method whereby you can shrug off any "bad" result in the case as being simply "bias" by the judge.

Also, because you seem to insinuate that there is something sinister in the fact that Judge Breen went to UT law school, and therefore LY is not getting a fair trial, will you call for Judge Wilson to recuse himself in the Cottrell lawsuit? After all, Judge Wilson attended the University of Alabama as an undergrad in the heyday of Coach Bryant.

It is one thing to hope for the best for LY, but it is wholly another to needlessly question the integrity of a man simply based on where he attended law school.
 
Bamalaw92 said:
It is one thing to hope for the best for LY, but it is wholly another to needlessly question the integrity of a man simply based on where he attended law school.

It seems like some in the Alabama media are trying to play this angle to. Of the three articles linked on here from the Tuscaloosa News all three point out that Breen is a UT graduate, without even pointing out that he graduated from UT's law school and undergrad went to Spring Hill College in Alabama.
 
CapitalTider said:
It seems like some in the Alabama media are trying to play this angle to. Of the three articles linked on here from the Tuscaloosa News all three point out that Breen is a UT graduate, without even pointing out that he graduated from UT's law school and undergrad went to Spring Hill College in Alabama.

Hopefully Mr. Breen will be able to conduct a fair trial.
 
Chukker Veteran said:
Hopefully Mr. Breen will be able to conduct a fair trial.
Have you had ANY indication thus far that he is unable to do so? Do you trust LY has competent lawyers to protect his interests regarding any unfairness or impartiality of the judge?
 
Bamalaw92 said:
Have you had ANY indication thus far that he is unable to do so? Do you trust LY has competent lawyers to protect his interests regarding any unfairness or impartiality of the judge?

That's what I was thinking, too. If you don't think Breen can insure a fair trial, then you're accusing the defendant's counsel of incompetence.

No one here has said that Jim Neal is incompetent.
 
Wasn't Godwin the "honorable" attorney who threatened Ivy Williams with jail time if he didn't spill his guts to the NCAA? Didn't he act very rudely on the phone to Gallion?
 
Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads