Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim65
Joe Jackson was charged with perjury after testifying in his civil trial against Comiskey. He was a proven liar who changed his story multiple times.
I think he probably played to win after he realized he was getting screwed out of his payoff money, but if he botched one play in the field or one AB on purpose, hes just as guilty as the rest.
|
Jackson was charged with perjury by his civil suite judge going against and AFTER the jury ruled in favor of Jackson in the case.
And the differing in testimony, if you are arguing for Jackson, between 1920 and 1924 you could say in 1920 he was without council and likely coached by Comiskey's lawyers...
Jackson is the most difficult of the 8 to try to understand his role. He obviously knew about it, was offered money, and kept money given to him debatable if he accepted it at first...testified it was thrown down in his room by Williams and that after the series he went to see Comiskey to ask about what to do with it and then again with Grabiner when he went to resign Jackson for the 1920 season to which Grabiner was indifferent and thus he and his wife kept it. Could he be making up things? Sure but still a lot of gray area around Jackson...Eddie Collins who was adamant about Weaver being guilty always had sympathy for only Jackson which mirrored many other players and managers of the time so there has to be something to that.
In the end this is all kind of moot as Landis had to treat them all the same regardless of levels of guilt, even Joe Gedeon who was banned bc he knew about the fix (and probably bet on it) but obviously didnt throw any games as he was on the Browns.
Jackson's knowledge and accepting money sealed his fate even though he had no idea what would happen and I feel if he did he would have handled things differently. Doesnt matter what he did on the field...honestly I believe his 1920 statements of playing to win which he never waivered on.
It would be interesting to actually hear his testimony in 1920 to get more context and meaning...or know exactly what he said and how he said what he did to Gandil...was he taking Gandil seriously and his reply a serious one or was it taken as a joke and Jackson's response a sarcastic/joking tone? Who knows.
It is worth noting that according to Edd Roush's graddaughter he told her that gamblers tried to bribe the Reds, specifically Hod Eller and he turned them down and when asked in a team meeting if anyone had been approached by gamblers Eller spoke up and told without hesitation...so while bribery and throwing games was a thing that happened honesty and integrity could still be leveled against such things.