re: Per Scott McKay Facebook post, LSU compliance department scuttles reinstatement of Wade...

quote:

---

And FWIW, I did see some of your earlier comments and found them quite informative.

---

I may come off as a contrarian sometimes, but I try to take emotion out of things like this, read up on the story, and see both sides before taking a position one way or another. I think a lot of emotional reactions occur on here right after a news story breaks and assumptions get made, not necessarily intentionally, but that are just unwarranted when all the facts aren't understood or available yet. I still stand by my position that Wade made a boo boo in talking to Dawkins in the first place. But, in fairness, I don't think it would ever be a reasonable expectation that dude's phone was wire-tapped either. That's not exactly the status quo of reasonable expectations when dealing with street agents

However, as far as the legal stuff, I've always thought the subpoena was not going to be as spectacular as the masses wanted or feared it would be. There's just nothing there that I see as being, in any way, relevant to the proceedings. So, if the NCAA hopes to get their evidence on a silver platter to hammer Wade and/or LSU, it isn't going to be in Court.

One question I do have, however, as it's outside my field, is whether the FBI can legally release phone conversations obtained through a wire-tap of an non-consenting third party (Wade) through an FOIA request if said conversations are deemed inadmissible and not made part of the official record. I just don't know how that would jive with privacy rights.

In any other arena, one party has to consent to the conversation for it not to be an invasion of privacy, in most states that is. I don't believe there are any states that require no consenting parties but there are states that require both parties to consent. I'm also not sure what state's laws would govern (calls, I assume, were between parties in two different states).

But my question really is...are these laws effectively rendered void for Wade if the feds had a warrant to effectively waive Dawkins' rights to have his phone calls wire-tapped? I just don't know the answer to that and honestly don't have the time to go down a westlaw rabbiot hole to figure it out. If the NCAA can't get recordings of those calls due to privacy rights Wade has, I think they're going to be left holding their dicks as long as our compliance department doesn't go on a power trip.