ICC had offered Aamer to confess and get two years ban: Source

[Savak]

ICC had offered Aamer to confess and get two years ban: Source

PTI | Sep 21, 2011, 09.15PM IST

KARACHI: The ICC had offered Pakistan teenaged pacer Muhammad Aamer a bargain under which if he had confessed to his involvement in spot-fixing he would have escaped with a maximum ban of two years.

A well-informed source in the Pakistan cricket Board said on Wednesday that the offer came across the table even before the anti-corruption tribunal of the ICC held its hearings earlier this year.

"I can confirm the offer came from the ICC at a one to one meeting with Aamer in which his lawyer, Shahid Karim and the chairman of the board, Ijaz Butt were also present," the source said.

He said the ICC offer was clear that if Aamer admitted his mistake and guilt to being part of the spot-fixing racket during Pakistan team's tour to England last year he would have got off with a ban ranging from one to two years.

"Aamer at that time didn't accept this offer and is now regretting it," the source added.

The ICC anti-corruption tribunal in February banned Aamer, Salman Butt and Muhammad Asif for five years for their involvement in spot-fixing and the trio are now also facing criminal charges under the gambling and anti-corruption acts of the Crown Prosecutor's office in a London court.

The source said that Aamer had indeed submitted a written statement with the Southwark court in London admitting that he made a mistake and deliberately bowled no-balls for financial gain during the fourth test against England at Lords.

"Yes he has made a written admittance of his involvement and it appears he has done this to avoid a prison term in the criminal case," the source said.

But the source was clear that the decision by Aamer to confess has come late.

"If he had admitted his guilt and involvement to the ICC he would have escaped a short ban and would have been available to play for Pakistan maximum by 2013," the source said.

The source said the ICC made the offer keeping in mind Aamer's age of 18 and had some sympathy for him because of this factor.

"Even his lawyer had advised Aamer that it would be difficult to fight the case but he didn't listen. Even though the onus is on the prosecutors to prove a crime has taken place.

"In the case of these three the problem now is that Mazhar Majeed has also confessed to being involved in illegal acts during the Lords test," the source noted.

Link: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/cricket/top-stories/ICC-had-offered-Aamer-to-confess-and-get-two-years-ban-Source/articleshow/10068488.cms

[PakPrince]

hey couldnt betray his 'brother'

[Quick Single]

So then why did he not confess???????????

[W63L35]

hey couldnt betray his 'brother'

Pick up any newspaper, you'll find people have killed their bothers and eventheir parents for money.

[talha3]

Pick up any newspaper, you'll find people have killed their bothers and eventheir parents for money.

I think he's talking about Salman Butt.

[talha3]

If only Amir had the brains to do this!!!

He would have been able to play in the next World T20. The only thing he would have missed is one world cup.

[PakPrince]

Pick up any newspaper, you'll find people have killed their bothers and eventheir parents for money.

it was a reference to his interview ehre he calls Salman But his borther

dunno where parents and murder came in the coversation :facepalm:

[Sir_Afridi]

This is rubbish article. Even if ICC offered Aamir the deal , it was only a trap becasue the judge who handed out bans admitted that he wanted to give lesser ban to Aamir but ICC rule allowed minimum 5 year and requested ICC to change this rule.

[Markhor]

How ? Wasn't the minimum punishment as per the ICC Code 5 years ?

[ShaunMarshRules]

This is rubbish article. Even if ICC offered Aamir the deal , it was only a trap becasue the judge who handed out bans admitted that he wanted to give lesser ban to Aamir but ICC rule allowed minimum 5 year and requested ICC to change this rule.

AsI recall the legalities, if the judges felt the ICC sentencing guidelines were harsh to the point of being unjust/illegal, they could have overruled them. They chose not to do so, especially in light of the players refusal to admit guilt. A confession by Aamir and a plea of being compelled by Salman Butt might have convinced them otherwise.

Anyone who read the 102 page report, the evidence against the trio was overwhelming - even from a self-preservation, logical viewpoint they would have been better to plead guilty.

[ExLegend]

ha ha no need for this loser as much as i loved him i hate him Fixers should never be allowed in the team

[Saj]

My understanding was that the minimum sentence was a 5 year ban. Even the judges at the tribunal said that the ICC need to look at their minimum punishment in future, as they felt 5 years was harsh for at least one of the players.

Not sure where this 1 or 2 year story has come from.

[ShahidAfridi_rulez]

ha ha no need for this loser as much as i loved him i hate him Fixers should never be allowed in the team
Why shouldn't he be allowed in the team?

People make mistakes.

[Sherlock]

My understanding was that the minimum sentence was a 5 year ban. Even the judges at the tribunal said that the ICC need to look at their minimum punishment in future, as they felt 5 years was harsh for at least one of the players.

Not sure where this 1 or 2 year story has come from.

I know. Don't know what to make of this story.

[Mujahid27]

Pagal ka bacha hai yeh banda, totally no brainnnnnnnnnnnnn

[Masterji]

The offer was probably genuine. The ICC would have found some obsecure clause(technicality) to allow him to play after 2 yrs but as we have seen this lad is about as bright as a dark jacket in a pot hole.

[Strike!]

They would have given him 2 years for good behavior.

[spiron]

This is rubbish article. Even if ICC offered Aamir the deal , it was only a trap becasue the judge who handed out bans admitted that he wanted to give lesser ban to Aamir but ICC rule allowed minimum 5 year and requested ICC to change this rule.


Your recent posts generally point you to being an impulsive poster.


When Aamer was charged, his status was that of a Criminal/Offender. No riders attached.
The minimum possible punishment followed.

Had he confessed and turned approver/facilitator, his status wouldnt have been same as your regular offender.
leniency is shown in such cases and the offer/article holds enough merit.

[Saj]

ok time to write to the ICC and find out if this is true or not.

[farsiddiqui]

The offer was probably genuine. The ICC would have found some obsecure clause(technicality) to allow him to play after 2 yrs but as we have seen this lad is about as bright as a dark jacket in a pot hole.

Yeah, like a double-secret-probation after two years. :)

[talha3]

I know people are saying that the minimum ban was 5 years, and I don't know much about law. But surely pleading guilty lowers the sentence. That's the whole point of pleading guilty. If he was going to get 5 years anyway, what's the incentive of pleading guilty?!

[abc_to_xyz]

They can reduce his punishment now :D

[cricmylife]

If only Amir had the brains to do this!!!

He would have been able to play in the next World T20. The only thing he would have missed is one world cup.

If only he had brains to not do this crap in the first place!

[Sheikh_Ji]

Perhaps ICC would have instead charged him under a different offense that carried a lighter punishment.....I would not be too surprised if this turned out to be true!

I think the main reason why Aamir did not confess earlier was that admitting at an ICC tribunal could have implicated him in the criminal proceedings. Back then the UK Crown Prosecutors had not confirmed whether they were going to press charges. There was no way ICC could have offered him any kind of immunity from criminal proceedings.

And now its possible the crown office has offered him a deal so that he can implicate the other two....or his conscience finally got to him....

[WithLoveFromCanada]

who made ICC code of conduct and penalties associated with misconduct /unfair play? ICC themselves right ? so they could have changed it if they wanted. If Amir had accepted the offer, who knows they might have modified their codes imo.

[spiron]

^^ Dont we have enough 'Ifs' and 'But(t)s' already ??

[freelance_cricketer]

Great news then, i too wish he comes back soon. Asif and Butt however just don't deserve to ever come close to a Cricket stadium :facepalm:
Give the kid a break though

[abdulhafeez306]

What many people have alluded to is called 'Plea Bargaining' and I see this as an option ICC might have wanted to take.

[kingusama92]

Highly doubt this deal was offered.

Nowhere in their laws is there something based on reduced sentencing for a confession. They are explicit when they state, 'the minimum sentence is 5 years for any form of spot-fixing'.

[iHammad]

Times of India, masala news.

[kingusama92]

I know people are saying that the minimum ban was 5 years, and I don't know much about law. But surely pleading guilty lowers the sentence. That's the whole point of pleading guilty. If he was going to get 5 years anyway, what's the incentive of pleading guilty?!

The logic behind it would be simple. Even though, I don't think such an offer was ever made to him.

At that point in time, he didn't know what type of sentence he was going to get.

Maybe, he thought he would get a 10 year ban? He had no way of knowing what type of conclusion the tribunal would reach. Thus, he could have willed himself into accepting guilt.

[kingusama92]

What many people have alluded to is called 'Plea Bargaining' and I see this as an option ICC might have wanted to take.

Would make sense, but the ICC doesn't have any other "lesser" sentence to charge him with.

Like I said, they are explicit with their spot-fixing ban. It's not like they could pop a random law out of thin air and charge him with that. It can't happen like that.

I might be missing something, though. Who knows?! :))

[sakss]

seems like a trap to get all the info out of him and make him confess..

dunno whther the 2 year ban thing is true tho..coz its suposed to be a minimum of 5 years...dodgy stuff

[Genghis]

Perhaps ICC would have instead charged him under a different offense that carried a lighter punishment.....I would not be too surprised if this turned out to be true!

I think the main reason why Aamir did not confess earlier was that admitting at an ICC tribunal could have implicated him in the criminal proceedings. Back then the UK Crown Prosecutors had not confirmed whether they were going to press charges. There was no way ICC could have offered him any kind of immunity from criminal proceedings.

And now its possible the crown office has offered him a deal so that he can implicate the other two....or his conscience finally got to him....
This post sounds pretty beleivable to me.

ICC makes the rules and there is no reason why they could not have changed the minimum sentence for exceptional circumstances such as these. I'm sure we're going to hear a lot more about what happened.

[ahamedirshad123]

very old news!!

[IAJ]

He can still be back in two years time when his case goes to CAS. If he admits his mistake there he might get away with 2 years.

[ORTONAFRDIFAN100]

feel bad for this guy waste of talent thats why our players need an eduction then make big in internatianl cricket waste of time guys who cares if he connfed or no hes the past and a disgarce FORGET HIM

[dinakar]

If he admits and reveal more details, who knows, his life would have been in danger.

[PerfectionPersonified]

seems fake news , why icc hasn't made any comments then?

[Cover Drive]

Even if its true well Amir, you know what? 'You snooze, you lose' :))

[shahrukh619]

teenaged pacer Muhammad Aamer

Yeah right :)) I think most people do know he's above the age of 20

Doesn't really matter if he admits it.

Everybody knows he was involved. Evidence was just too good.

[FreePalestine]

Highly doubt this deal was offered.

Nowhere in their laws is there something based on reduced sentencing for a confession. They are explicit when they state, 'the minimum sentence is 5 years for any form of spot-fixing'.

I would be interested to know for sure if PP write to the ICC and confirm this news. I personally heard it from a reliable source that his sentence would've been reduced to two years if he had played ball, so I believe it.

There are provisions in the criminal code for age, so maybe that's how they would've twisted it.

[Hash]

Perhaps ICC would have instead charged him under a different offense that carried a lighter punishment.....I would not be too surprised if this turned out to be true!

I think the main reason why Aamir did not confess earlier was that admitting at an ICC tribunal could have implicated him in the criminal proceedings. Back then the UK Crown Prosecutors had not confirmed whether they were going to press charges. There was no way ICC could have offered him any kind of immunity from criminal proceedings.

And now its possible the crown office has offered him a deal so that he can implicate the other two....or his conscience finally got to him....


Precisely.

Spot fixing has a minimum punishment of 5 years....though even then I believe there are exceptional circumstances to such things. But the likelihood is that, if this is indeed true, he would have been charged with a lesser offence...perhaps under 'betting' instead of 'corruption'.

The spot fixing charge falls under 'corruption' and is as follows...

Fixing or contriving in any way or otherwise influencing improperly,
or being a party to any effort to fix or contrive in any way or
otherwise influence improperly, the result, progress, conduct or any
other aspect of any International Match or ICC Event.

Seeking, accepting, offering or agreeing to accept any bribe or
other Reward to fix or to contrive in any way or otherwise to
influence improperly the result, progress, conduct or any other
aspect of any International Match or ICC Event.

Failing, for Reward, to perform to one’s abilities in an
International Match

Wheras a lesser offence under comes under 'betting' and is as follows...

Ensuring the occurrence of a particular incident in an International
Match or ICC Event, which occurrence is to the Player or Player
Support Personnel’s knowledge the subject of a Bet and for which
he/she expects to receive or has received any Reward.

I think they could have charged him under the lesser offence of betting. Though, of course, he didn't want to go to jail and now wishes he had done things differently.

[shehzi]

wait what is the souce ? "times of INDIA" :p

[Sultan Yusuf]

It could have been a 5 year ban with 3 years suspended.