THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, April 14, 1996 TAG: 9604140184
SECTION: SPORTS PAGE: C1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY DAVE ADDIS AND STEVE CARLSON, STAFF WRITERS
LENGTH: Long : 101 lines
Investigators in some of the nation's most highly publicized cases of basketball point-shaving found that game fixing is difficult, if not impossible, to prove.
Norfolk police have been investigating allegations that gamblers tried to influence the outcome of high school basketball games in Norfolk. But without the full cooperation of players or gamblers who were involved, experts say, the crime is tough to prosecute.
``Without a cooperating witness you can't prove anything,'' said FBI agent Edmundo Guevara, who investigated the Boston College basketball point-shaving scandal in the early 1980s. There have been several sports-fixing investigations in recent years, Guevara said, that ``didn't amount to much because you don't have that person to say, `Yeah, I did that.' ''
Guevara, now based in Miami, has testified before the President's Commission on Organized Crime.
The Boston College case broke when New York gangster Henry Hill was arrested in the $6.8 million Lufthansa heist at John F. Kennedy International Airport. Among the things Hill confessed to, Guevara said, was ``this scheme to influence the outcome of Boston College games in the 1978-79 season.''
Henry Hill's exploits were detailed in the book ``Wiseguy,'' which was the basis for the popular mob movie ``Goodfellas.''
Prosecutors in 1981 got guilty verdicts against one Boston College player and four gambling figures. A second player testified for the prosecution and was granted immunity.
``We proved the conspiracy,'' Guevara said. ``We had the meetings, the money, calls before and after games between the conspirators, we put the puzzle together.''
But even with confessions and testimony from participants, supported by a raft of technical evidence, one player went free.
``He admitted taking money but he said he didn't know what it was for,'' Guevara said. ``He was acquitted.''
With anything less than that level of evidence, Guevara said, proving a point-shaving fix can be next to impossible.
``You have to have someone tell you it's a conspiracy,'' he said. ``Unless you have that sort of documentation or evidence, you're not going to have a case. It's not gonna be there.''
Simply watching videotapes of a game that is under suspicion is of little value, Guevara said.
``We went through the tapes,'' he said. ``We even had bookmakers analyze the tapes.
``I don't care what you say looking at tapes. You can say, `That ball shouldn't have gone that way.' You need to go into their mind, have him say, `Yeah, I threw that ball away.' You can have suspicions about certain things, but you can't prove it.
``It's very hard. If you watch enough sports, you can say, `How could that guy miss that shot?' or `How could he miss catching that ball?' But you just don't know. People have bad days. Players just have bad days.
``Look,'' he said, ``I have a kid, he's 8 years old. He's like a perfect tennis player, he's ranked something like 10th right now in the state. But some tournaments, I'd swear to you he's tanking. He loses to kids he could beat with his left hand.''
A 1985 game-fixing scandal at Tulane University in New Orleans drove home the difficulty of prosecuting such cases. Player John ``Hot Rod'' Williams was indicted on charges of conspiracy and bribery. Three teammates and three Tulane students were given immunity or reduced sentences to testify. It wasn't enough.
Williams, who had confessed to taking $10,000 as an incentive to attend Tulane, was granted a mistrial, then acquitted by a jury in his second trial in 1986. Williams went on to an NBA career with the Cleveland Cavaliers.
The Tulane players never admitted to shaving points, but said they had accepted money and drugs from fraternity members who, according to investigators, bet on Tulane games via gambling connections in Las Vegas. The university dropped its basketball program for several years.
``The cases are extremely difficult to prove, absent of someone cooperating with you and telling you they fixed the game,'' said Eric Dubelier, a former assistant district attorney of Orleans Parish who led the Tulane investigation. ``It's really, really difficult to look at the tape of the basketball game and determine it's being fixed.''
Tim McElroy, the assistant district attorney who prosecuted the Tulane case, said: ``It's a difficult task in that you have to show gambling and the intent to affect the outcome of the game. . . . In any conspiracy, it's going to take a conspirator. You're going to have to have someone inside to show an agreement to alter an outcome.''
Guevara, the FBI agent, and other investigators expressed dismay that allegations of sports bribery had filtered down to the high school level in Norfolk.
``A high school game? That's disappointing as hell,'' said Dirk Tait, head of the gambling task force for the NCAA. But Tait said he was not surprised. Gambling, he said, ``is a problem in our society across the board.''
``You don't have to drive very far now to find a legal casino,'' he said. ``You've got a general feeling now in society that gambling is OK.
``Gambling through illegal sports books is a victimless crime. It's not fun and games. Organized crime uses money skimmed from illegal sports gambling to fund loan-sharking, narcotics sales and a host of other illegal activities.
``It amplifies the problems.'' MEMO: Sidebar to this story on page C9.
by CNB