Super Betting, Illinois Style!

Super Betting, Illinois Style!

Super Bowl time is upon us, and over the next day we will all experience the joys and trappings of our newest American tradition: watching and judging pricey commercials; negotiating our way around awesome, but usually unhealthy displays of food, and, of course, the betting.

Super Bowl betting takes many forms: most of us who attend parties or work in an office environment pay $5.00 to acquire a square. If the second digit in each team’s score at the end of each quarter match the numbers tied to your square, you win money. Such betting assures that nearly everyone remains interested in the game, even if it is a huge blow out, unless, of course, you have passed out from too many beers and Italian beef sandwiches.

Of course, bets are made over many things: the final score, plus or minus the spread; whether the combined points scored is over or under a certain total, or whether the coin that the referee flips at the beginning of the game to decide who kicks off will end up being heads or tails. (The famous “Super Bowl Coin Toss Bet,” with heads leading tails 22 - 21 since the inception of the game.)

Those of us who follow Illinois news ought to come up with some new betting lines of our own. If there were a line of bookies who could lawfully arrange Illinois bets, consider what side you would take on the following issues.

1) Blagojevich trial: The Feds recently added a few new counts onto the indictment, in case the Supreme Court rules that “theft of honest service” is no longer a valid offense. Few of us think highly of our former governor, nor believe that he ought to get away with anything, but an interesting question raised by my nephew the other day: “So he might have discussed offering the Senate seat in exchange for political contributions, but if there is no indication of money being exchanged, did he break the law?

My bet: Too much is riding on this case. The Feds will figure this out. He will be guilty.

2) Drew Peterson hearing regarding admissibility of hearsay evidence: Hearsay evidence - or, incriminating statements made by someone who is unavailable at trial to be questioned about his or her use of those words - is usually inadmissible at trial, save a few well known exceptions such as dying declarations. This poses a problem for Will County prosecutors since much of their evidence against Drew consists of hearsay statements - for instance, a statement made by third wife Kathleen Savio complaining to a co-worker about Drew once strangling her is normally inadmissible because Kathleen is not available to be cross examined, and explain precisely what she meant when she said that. Yet, Illinois passed a new law that would allow admission of certain types of hearsay evidence, covering statements such as what the prosecutors need to convict Drew. In some circles, this newfound exception to the hearsay law is actually known as “The Drew Peterson Exception to the Hearsay Rule.”

Its been a while since I attended law school and practiced criminal law and, as a prosecutor, actually dealt with hearsay issues, but I must admit that despite how ridiculously guilty someone might be, something isn’t lawful about creating new laws to fit a crime allegedly committed before passage of that law.

My prediction: The jury will acquit Drew Peterson, or, if they find him guilty, the the courts will overturn the conviction on appeal.

And within a week of his release, someone will assassinate the bastard.

Finally, the most recent and, in my opinion, the most fun and the most pathetic:

3.) Scott Lee Cohen. You all know the details: our new candidate for Lieutenant Governor accused of doing a whole bunch of bad and immoral things, including allegedly being over $50,000 in arrears in child support though he was able to pour millions into his primary race. On Chicago Tonight Thursday night, Mr. Cohen defiantly proclaimed that he is not going to withdraw from this race. A good friend of mine who knows Cohen and his entire family insists that Cohen is stubborn and he won’t withdraw. I bet my friend lunch that Cohen is out of the race on or before Monday, February 18th, and this morning I upped the ante, suggesting that the victor also chooses the lunch location.

Prediction: I eat lunch for free on Monday, 2/18/10, at a great new local lunch spot I just found.

In time, I suggest our legislatures close our budget gap by creating a lawful book on our State’s highly entertaining, if not embarrassing array of news developments.

And, oh yeah: Saints by 3 ... and the coin will come up “Tails.”

Post a Comment