Former Los Angeles Dodgers outfielder Yasiel Puig's defense attorney told jurors Wednesday that federal obstruction charges against her client are built on nothing more than government assumptions and speculation rather than concrete evidence. Defense lawyer Keri Axel delivered her closing argument as the case went to the jury, attacking the prosecution's theory that Puig willfully lied to federal investigators about his involvement with an illegal sports betting operation.
Puig, 35, faces charges that he lied to federal agents during a Jan. 27, 2022 video-conference interview about bets he placed with an unlicensed bookmaker in Southern California. The government alleges Puig obstructed an investigation into Wayne Nix's illegal sports betting business by providing false information during the voluntary interview with investigators from the Internal Revenue Service and Homeland Security.
Axel argued that federal agents made unfounded assumptions when they concluded Puig was lying during the 2022 interview. She told the jury that investigators speculated Puig would remember detailed interactions with Nix from 2019 — more than two years earlier — when they confronted him with specifics about sports bets he had placed through a middleman.
"Assumptions and speculation are not evidence, and you shouldn't rely on it," Axel told jurors in downtown Los Angeles. She contended that Puig simply needed more time to accurately recollect details of his gambling activities, rather than intentionally deceiving federal agents.
The prosecution's case centers on allegations that Puig lied when he told investigators he hadn't discussed sports betting with Donny Kadokawa, a private baseball coach who had befriended Puig in early 2019. Kadokawa testified for the government that he served as Puig's middleman and placed bets for the former outfielder with Nix's organization for several months in 2019.
Prosecutors with the U.S. attorney's office in Los Angeles also accuse Puig of lying when he allegedly told investigators during the same interview that he had lost $200,000 betting on an "unknown" website in 2019. The government further alleges Puig falsely claimed an "unknown" person directed him to purchase $200,000 in cashier's checks made out to another client of Nix's to settle his outstanding gambling debt.
The defense attorney pushed back against these allegations, pointing out that Puig actually did tell investigators during the same interview that he had placed bets through Kadokawa on basketball games in May 2019 — once his memory was refreshed. Axel emphasized that Puig also offered to look for additional information to help the investigation.
However, according to the defense, investigators had already concluded Puig was lying and showed no interest in his offers to provide more details. Axel suggested this demonstrated the government's predetermined view of her client's credibility.
The defense also challenged the prosecution's claims about what Puig actually said regarding the $200,000 in losses. Axel noted there is no evidence in the investigators' notes from the interview that Puig falsely told them he lost the money betting with an "unknown" person on an "unknown" website. The interview was not recorded at the request of one of Puig's attorneys at the time, leaving only the agents' notes as documentation of what was said.
This detail highlights a key challenge in the case — determining exactly what was said during the interview without an audio or video record. The lack of recording means the case largely depends on the investigators' recollections and notes versus Puig's account of events.
The obstruction charges against Puig stem from a broader federal investigation into illegal sports betting operations in Southern California. Nix's organization allegedly took bets from various clients, including professional athletes, creating potential violations of federal gambling laws.
Puig's case represents part of ongoing federal efforts to crack down on illegal sports betting operations that target professional athletes. Such cases often involve questions about whether athletes' statements to investigators constitute intentional obstruction or simply reflect the difficulty of recalling detailed gambling transactions that occurred years earlier.
The former MLB star played for the Dodgers from 2013 to 2018 and was known for his powerful hitting and colorful personality. He also played for the Cincinnati Reds and Cleveland Indians before his major league career ended.
As the jury begins deliberations, they must determine whether the government has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Puig willfully lied to federal agents with intent to obstruct the investigation. The defense has argued that any inconsistencies in Puig's statements reflect honest memory lapses rather than criminal deception.
The case highlights the challenges prosecutors face in proving intent to lie in cases involving events that occurred years before questioning. It also underscores the importance of detailed documentation and, when possible, recorded interviews in federal investigations involving complex financial transactions and gambling activities.