Don’t you love it when new evidence is discovered that casts new light old historical controversies, or better yet, show that the popular version of history is dead wrong?
A long-buried trial transcript that has been withheld from public consumption for almost a century has finally been published. The case was Joe Jackson v. Chicago American League Baseball Club, a two week trial held in Milwaukee in early 1924. “Joe Jackson, Plaintiff, vs. Chicago American League Baseball Club, Defendant—Never-Before-Seen Trial Transcript” thoroughly disproves the popular image of Shoeless Joe Jackson, the greatest player among the eight Chicago White Sox players who were banned from the game for life after accepting money from gamblers to throw the 1919 World Series.
According to “Field of Dreams” (which also has the .400 batting left-handed hitter hitting right-handed) Joe is wise, passionate, and dedicated to the game. “Eight Men Out” the 1988 film about the scandal, based on author Eliot Asinof’s 1963 book, shows Jackson as an illiterate scapegoat who was not involved in the planning of the scheme and who only agreed to participate after the fix was in, The movie shows a conflicted Jackson telling “Black Sox” manager Kid Gleason that he does not want to play in the first game of the Series. Gleason orders Joe onto the field.
The transcript is of the civil case in which Jackson sued the White Sox for $16,000 in salary remaining under his contract after his baseball commissioner, Kenesaw Mountain Landis threw him out of baseball for life.
On the stand, Jackson’s was confronted by his September 1920 grand jury testimony where he acknowledged his participation in the scheme. In 1924, however, he just denied, more than 100 times, that he ever made the statements contained in his prior testimony:
George Hudnall [lawyer for the White Sox]: “Were you asked this question [before the grand jury] and did you make this answer: Q: “Did anybody pay you any money to help throw that Series in favor of Cincinnati?” A. “They did.”
Jackson: “I didn’t understand the question, sir.”
Hudnall: “The question was “Did anybody pay you any money to help throw that Series in favor of Cincinnati?” [You answered]“They did.”“Were you asked that question and did you make that answer before the Grand Jury?”
Jackson: “I don’t remember that question at all.”
Jackson then denied that he had told the grand jury under oath that he had been promised $20,000 to throw the series but was paid only $5,000, even after his contradictory grand jury testimony was read back to him. While the jury was out deliberating, Judge John Gregory bound Jackson over on a perjury charge. “Jackson stands self-convicted, self-accused,” the judge stated. “[H]is testimony as given here in court has been impeached and shown to be false by the testimony he gave before the grand jury. It makes no difference to me what the jury does.”
After the jury returned its $16,711.04 verdict for Jackson, the judge announced the perjury charge. He then rejected the verdict, and reprimanded the jurors for “fail[ing] in the discharge of [their] duty,” adding “how you gentlemen could answer some of those questions [on the verdict form] in the face of that testimony, the court cannot understand.”
I don’t think what I’ve seen of the transcript decisively proves That Jackson was just an illiterate yokel caught up in something he didn’t understand. It definitely shows a man capable of lying and cheating, despite his popular image.
Ethics Alarms 
And now Major League Baseball (and the networks) is (are) completely in the thrall of the cell phone gambling industry. It’s disgusting. Next, they’ll be giving little leaguers seminars on how to play parlays, for the good of the game. The owners just couldn’t let the mob and Vegas get the vigorish and have the owners not get something for providing the games for people to bet on. I hope they’re happy.
And of course, MLB and the FBI will make sure no games are fixed. Right.
I wish I hadn’t read this.
I loved Sayles’ ending of “Eight Men Out” where Joe is beating the shit out of the other team under some fake name. Playing just for the love of the game.
Dang.
And great point by Old Bill – You can’t pump gas these days without seeing a commercial for sports betting/gambling. They are no better than pushers.
“And gambling is FUN!” And “chicks dig guys who gamble!”
I guess the history books in my school were just old and too cheap to be trendy. In my schoolbooks Shoeless Joe was guilty as were the Rosenbergs.
Joe started being rehabilitated when the stat-heads made a big deal out of Joe’s batting average during the Series, so the argument was, yeah, he took the money, and yeah, he didn’t blow a whistle, but still, he tried to win. Then other stat-heads showed that he made mistakes and errors at key points, and never seemed to get the big hits when they were needed
You have to admit, though, Jack:
The legend is better.
No?
-Jut
No question. “Print the legend.” The old newspaper editor in “Liberty Valence” jast as easily could have said, “This is baseball, sir” in stead of “This is the West…”
So I just blissfully went through life thinking he was guilty this whole time. I mean, I knew people tried to say the Rosenbergs were innocent and the book was wrong, but they were mostly Communist apologists (teachers) and I didn’t take them seriously. I never heard about the similar whitewashing of Jackson.
Geez!
Jack, I didn’t see this before I sent my now debunked stat argument. Please forgive me, I was not doubling down.
I was not aware of his [on purpose] boneheaded plays in the field and on the base paths. Along with not coming through in the clutch.
And now I know, “the rest of the story.”
Joe Jackson’s stats for the 1919 World Series lead every player [on both teams] in many categories.
So I don’t know how you are participating in throwing a Series by being the most proficient hitter on either team.
He led all starters on both teams in batting average [.375], slugging percentage [.563], OPS .956], WPA [.58], cWPA [12.54%] and least errors [0].
In 8 games he went 12 for 32.
He knocked in 6 runs and scored 5. Both highs for his Club. [I assume he would’ve had more RBIs and scored more runs, had his teammates not taken a dive while at the plate.]
Maybe he wasn’t a dummy. Maybe he was smart enough to take the $5k and still play better than anyone on either side.
Is it unethical to take $ from fixers and not help the fix cause?
He wasn’t exactly spying for the Soviets.
His sin was knowing the fix was in, but not telling anyone of authority.
Johnny L
Apologist for SJJ
Is it unethical to take $ from fixers and not help the fix cause?
Sure. Is it unethical to take money to do a mob hit and let someone else do the killing? Same thing: Joe had an obligation to blow the whistle. That’s also what Judge Landis said in banning all 8 Black Sox players. He was culpable.
As for the stats: a paper was published some time ago showing that despite Joe’s rbis and average, he missed cut-offs, threw to the wrong base, got thrown out stretching hits, sometimes didn’t hustle and didn’t get his hits with the games on the line. Baseball provides a lot of ways to lose. Observers of the Series started whispering that it was fixed before it ended: the Sox players looked…different.
We know SJJ took money from the gamblers and lied about it. We know he was aware of the fix and did nothing to stop it. That’s plenty.
I don’t know why I want to like that guy so darn much. A tragic figure, for sure.
.350+ career BA and not in HOF. Sad.