...is that they likely wouldn't have $70,000 in cash to give to anyone.
If they do, they would report anything over $10,000. So, there would be a record.
was for gambling and that he didn’t have other cash on hand? I don’t think the $1,500 means anything as far as this story goes.
The reports were that he lost $70,000 prior to this incident. $70,000 should be easy to track if he withdrew any money from the bank. $1500 does not even come close to that amount of money.
The lawyers are saying as far as transactions go, that 1500 is the only thing that shows on his withdrawals from the bank. Unless you think he has been carrying around $69000 in cash for a long time, then it means something as far as impugning the statements given by the victims.
I don't think anything other than withdrawing money at that bank
shouldn't be the reason to disqualify him from being able to have $70k in cash. He could have had it since he was drafted and that first check cleared.
Is that far fetched? Maybe. But its possible. And I haven't read up on it enough to know if all of his banking has been looked into or just this one bank.
I want nothing more for Baker to be absolved and start a clean slate with the new staff. But the cash discussion seems incomplete to me.
shouldn't be the reason to disqualify him from being able to have $70k in cash. He could have had it since he was drafted and that first check cleared.
Is that far fetched? Maybe. But its possible. And I haven't read up on it enough to know if all of his banking has been looked into or just this one bank.
I want nothing more for Baker to be absolved and start a clean slate with the new staff. But the cash discussion seems incomplete to me.
But again, even cashing a check last year and taking $70,000 would show on his bank statements. It's not like he has been in the NFL for 10 years and a long history. He has been in the NFL getting paid significantly for a year. I think it would be rather easy to dig through his financials to see where money went. 70k is a lot of money
shouldn't be the reason to disqualify him from being able to have $70k in cash. He could have had it since he was drafted and that first check cleared.
Is that far fetched? Maybe. But its possible. And I haven't read up on it enough to know if all of his banking has been looked into or just this one bank.
I want nothing more for Baker to be absolved and start a clean slate with the new staff. But the cash discussion seems incomplete to me.
But again, even cashing a check last year and taking $70,000 would show on his bank statements. It's not like he has been in the NFL for 10 years and a long history. He has been in the NFL getting paid significantly for a year. I think it would be rather easy to dig through his financials to see where money went. 70k is a lot of money
I understand that which was part of my question - does he have multiple banks and if so were all cross-referenced?
He wouldn't be the first person to have a ton of cash that isn't traceable.
the Initial reports were that both players lost 70k
Didn’t drop this right away and let the NJ guy deliver this?
Ron, not sure when you say 'drop this', you mean letting Patel run with Baker's version of events, or what. Clearly, Cohen, on site (his practice based in So FL), was needed for the bail hearing. But to me, Patel sounds as daft as this entire series of allegations and counter allegations, a loose cannon. It might not serve Baker well unless the lawyer begins to come up with corroboration, of a practical and concrete sort.
It seems like for high profile cases like this, we frequently see a lot of information/mis-information distributed from all sides; most likely to try to influence potential jury members should it ever get that far. Personally, I don't know who or what to believe at this point. As a Giants fan, I think the team should hope for the best, but prepare for the worst; which they are probably doing.
shouldn't be the reason to disqualify him from being able to have $70k in cash. He could have had it since he was drafted and that first check cleared.
Is that far fetched? Maybe. But its possible. And I haven't read up on it enough to know if all of his banking has been looked into or just this one bank.
I want nothing more for Baker to be absolved and start a clean slate with the new staff. But the cash discussion seems incomplete to me.
But again, even cashing a check last year and taking $70,000 would show on his bank statements. It's not like he has been in the NFL for 10 years and a long history. He has been in the NFL getting paid significantly for a year. I think it would be rather easy to dig through his financials to see where money went. 70k is a lot of money
Assuming it was ever in the bank. Maybe he plays dice regularly and is a winner more often than not and has piled up some cash along the way.
Maybe he has taken out a little bit of cash at a time (less than $10k at a time anyway) over a period of weeks or months because maybe he likes to have plenty of cash on hand just in case.
Maybe he just sold one of his cars recently and the buyer paid cash.
There are a lot of ways that you can come to possess a fairly large sum of cash in a limited period of time. Withdrawing $70k in one transaction is only one of them, and it's the only one Baker's lawyer mentioned. He didn't explicitly say that there was no way that Baker could have been in possession of $70k, just that his most recent bank transaction was for much less.
That said, it all adds up to more confusion and conflicting info in the case, which I suppose is in Baker's favor.
Grieco publishes a text in which Dunbar is invited to engage in illegal gambling activity, and that carries a clear presumption that Dunbar is familiar with such activity.
If Dunbar wasn't at a particular gambling event earlier in the week, and you want to prove that, there are probably ways of doing so without relying on a text that goes a long way to making another point you don't want to concede.
As for Patel, he seems obsessed with whether Baker is in the photo accompanying the text and wants to sue Grieco for libel on that point.
But the text doesn't say Baker is in the photo. It does say that Baker was at the earlier gambling event.
2 hours after he left, with video proof. Come on man, read between the lines, they conjured a story to get a payoff/settlement out of court.
How exactly would that work? A completely innocent Baker is going to start cutting checks even though there should be dozens of whitnesses that should be able to prove his innocence.
Seems far fetched to me.
Quote:
Says bank records show he took out $1500 two days before. So, that should debunk the lost $70,000
You can not just go to a bank and take out 70k, the bank wont allow it..
of course you can
Quote:
Says bank records show he took out $1500 two days before. So, that should debunk the lost $70,000
You can not just go to a bank and take out 70k, the bank wont allow it..
Do you even have a rudimentary understanding of banks? The bank will report the withdrawal, but will still allow it
If they do, they would report anything over $10,000. So, there would be a record.
The reports were that he lost $70,000 prior to this incident. $70,000 should be easy to track if he withdrew any money from the bank. $1500 does not even come close to that amount of money.
The lawyers are saying as far as transactions go, that 1500 is the only thing that shows on his withdrawals from the bank. Unless you think he has been carrying around $69000 in cash for a long time, then it means something as far as impugning the statements given by the victims.
Is that far fetched? Maybe. But its possible. And I haven't read up on it enough to know if all of his banking has been looked into or just this one bank.
I want nothing more for Baker to be absolved and start a clean slate with the new staff. But the cash discussion seems incomplete to me.
Is that far fetched? Maybe. But its possible. And I haven't read up on it enough to know if all of his banking has been looked into or just this one bank.
I want nothing more for Baker to be absolved and start a clean slate with the new staff. But the cash discussion seems incomplete to me.
But again, even cashing a check last year and taking $70,000 would show on his bank statements. It's not like he has been in the NFL for 10 years and a long history. He has been in the NFL getting paid significantly for a year. I think it would be rather easy to dig through his financials to see where money went. 70k is a lot of money
Mara: "Shut up!"
Baker: "Ok, sir."
Quote:
shouldn't be the reason to disqualify him from being able to have $70k in cash. He could have had it since he was drafted and that first check cleared.
Is that far fetched? Maybe. But its possible. And I haven't read up on it enough to know if all of his banking has been looked into or just this one bank.
I want nothing more for Baker to be absolved and start a clean slate with the new staff. But the cash discussion seems incomplete to me.
But again, even cashing a check last year and taking $70,000 would show on his bank statements. It's not like he has been in the NFL for 10 years and a long history. He has been in the NFL getting paid significantly for a year. I think it would be rather easy to dig through his financials to see where money went. 70k is a lot of money
I understand that which was part of my question - does he have multiple banks and if so were all cross-referenced?
He wouldn't be the first person to have a ton of cash that isn't traceable.
And it’s not any of us are going crack the case open anyway.
Nothing to see here~
Doesn’t make a ton of sense to me but I’m not a defense attorney
No, no, no, I was in Anchorage, Alaska.
No, I was in Casper, Wyoming, in the lobby of a Howard Johnson's and I was wearing a pink carnation.
Jack's got the Duke!!
Quote:
shouldn't be the reason to disqualify him from being able to have $70k in cash. He could have had it since he was drafted and that first check cleared.
Is that far fetched? Maybe. But its possible. And I haven't read up on it enough to know if all of his banking has been looked into or just this one bank.
I want nothing more for Baker to be absolved and start a clean slate with the new staff. But the cash discussion seems incomplete to me.
But again, even cashing a check last year and taking $70,000 would show on his bank statements. It's not like he has been in the NFL for 10 years and a long history. He has been in the NFL getting paid significantly for a year. I think it would be rather easy to dig through his financials to see where money went. 70k is a lot of money
Assuming it was ever in the bank. Maybe he plays dice regularly and is a winner more often than not and has piled up some cash along the way.
Maybe he has taken out a little bit of cash at a time (less than $10k at a time anyway) over a period of weeks or months because maybe he likes to have plenty of cash on hand just in case.
Maybe he just sold one of his cars recently and the buyer paid cash.
There are a lot of ways that you can come to possess a fairly large sum of cash in a limited period of time. Withdrawing $70k in one transaction is only one of them, and it's the only one Baker's lawyer mentioned. He didn't explicitly say that there was no way that Baker could have been in possession of $70k, just that his most recent bank transaction was for much less.
That said, it all adds up to more confusion and conflicting info in the case, which I suppose is in Baker's favor.
Why couldn't Baker simply connect his PlayStation to the network and play with his buddies online? While observing social distancing?
Quote:
In comment 14907204 cjac said:
Quote:
I was in Boise, Idaho.
No, no, no, I was in Anchorage, Alaska.
No, I was in Casper, Wyoming, in the lobby of a Howard Johnson's and I was wearing a pink carnation.
Is this moron #1? Put moron #2 on the phone.
nine-tee-seven-bot-tles-of-beer-onnn-tttthhhhe-wallll
Why are you unpopular with the Chicago Police Department?
Nothing here seems helpful to either client.
Grieco publishes a text in which Dunbar is invited to engage in illegal gambling activity, and that carries a clear presumption that Dunbar is familiar with such activity.
If Dunbar wasn't at a particular gambling event earlier in the week, and you want to prove that, there are probably ways of doing so without relying on a text that goes a long way to making another point you don't want to concede.
As for Patel, he seems obsessed with whether Baker is in the photo accompanying the text and wants to sue Grieco for libel on that point.
But the text doesn't say Baker is in the photo. It does say that Baker was at the earlier gambling event.
Nothing in the text about playing Madden.
will counsel please STFU - ( New Window )
2 hours after he left, with video proof. Come on man, read between the lines, they conjured a story to get a payoff/settlement out of court.
Quote:
And completely make up a story for .....reasons?
2 hours after he left, with video proof. Come on man, read between the lines, they conjured a story to get a payoff/settlement out of court.
How exactly would that work? A completely innocent Baker is going to start cutting checks even though there should be dozens of whitnesses that should be able to prove his innocence.
Seems far fetched to me.