- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Couple of questions regarding the FBI/taps
Posted on 3/9/19 at 7:13 am
Posted on 3/9/19 at 7:13 am
I searched but couldn’t find any answers.
1. The defense team sent the subpoena for Wade, correct? Not the FBI
2. I am assuming these tapes were gathered by the FBI, but it sounds like the defense team wants to submit the tapes as evidence and the FBI is trying to block it. How does the defense team have access to the FBI’s wire taps?
1. The defense team sent the subpoena for Wade, correct? Not the FBI
2. I am assuming these tapes were gathered by the FBI, but it sounds like the defense team wants to submit the tapes as evidence and the FBI is trying to block it. How does the defense team have access to the FBI’s wire taps?
Posted on 3/9/19 at 7:51 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
Dawkins is known to be on FBI wiretaps during the late spring and summer of 2017. ESPN, citing court records, previously reported that Dawkins had “at least three calls with a cellphone number belonging to LSU coach Will Wade, each of which occurred between June 19, 2017, and June 30, 2017.” Smart announced his commitment to LSU via Twitter on June 30, 2017.
The tapes are already court record/evidence, hence how it was accessible and leaked.
Posted on 3/9/19 at 7:58 am to Brian Wilson
So the FBI submitted it as evidence that Dawkins was doing deals and now his lawyers are trying to leak it to create a media circus?
Posted on 3/9/19 at 9:01 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
Criminal discovery, on the other hand, is more restricted. The Constitution affords criminal defendants several protections. Discovery-related procedural protections include the right against self-incrimination and the right to confront witnesses(WILL WADE) . Because of these constitutional guarantees, criminal discovery tends to be rather unbalanced. For example, under the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions in Brady v. Maryland and Giglio v. United States, the prosecution must turn over to the defendant all exculpatory and impeachment evidence in the government’s possession. A criminal defendant has no equivalent duty because of the right against self-incrimination. Additionally, in jurisdictions that require limited forms of pretrial disclosures or court-ordered depositions, requesting evidence in possession of a defendant may be useless; any evidence in the defendant’s possession that tends to support a finding of guilt is protected by the constitutional right against self-incrimination. Therefore, while the prosecution is frequently ignorant of the defense’s evidence, the defense should be well-versed in the prosecution’s evidence(WILL WADE WIRETAPS) .
In the process of gathering evidence during their investigation the FBI recorded 4000 wiretaps. The defense has access to these wiretaps and can subpoena any party to them.
The burning question is, why did they only subpoena Will Wade? With something like 20 universities named and 4000 wiretaps, you would think there would be juicier conversations in there somewhere.
This is where the conspiracy theories start popping up. And they're not that far-fetched. Either someone(s) in the media or competing coaches in college basketball wanted the Will Wade wiretap leaked for their own personal gain because of the threat that Wade poses to their power structure or because of a personal vendetta... OR... the defense leaked them. The reason that's not that believable is because you would have to believe that that's the most damning evidence out of 4000 wiretaps over 20 different universities. That's kind of a stretch.
This post was edited on 3/9/19 at 9:14 am
Posted on 3/9/19 at 9:45 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
How does the defense team have access to the FBI’s wire taps?
Wiretaps, in addition to containing incriminating evidence may also contain exculpatory evidence so they would typically be wanted in their entirety by the defense and I assume a judge will typically award such. They are certainly entitled to any that will be used as evidence in court.
Leaking the tapes is likely a violation of the law, however, and may end up costing someone, though I doubt it.
quote:
1. The defense team sent the subpoena for Wade, correct? Not the FBI
I wonder if the defense was counting on Wade to say no deals were ever struck and maybe the FBI leaked the tapes as a preemptive strike?
Though it does seem more likely that Adidas is just trying to drag Nike and Under Armour in this mess and say that they were not trying to bribe people to gain an advantage but simply playing by the unwritten rules set by the other, more prominent, companies. I don't think that defense would fly from a legal standpoint but could possibly convince a jury
Posted on 3/9/19 at 9:56 am to mdomingue
A party (or its attorney) to the lawsuit who leaked the tapes could be held in contempt if there was a protective order in place prohibiting disclosure of discovery material (such as the wiretaps) exchanged between the parties. Many civil cases and some criminal cases do not have protective orders.
Assuming there was a protective order here, one side would need to file a motion for contempt accusing the other of the unlawful disclosure. Or the court could call a hearing or order the parties to file briefs on the disclosure. The journalists involved won't disclose sources. So typically you need one side to accuse the other in order to put contempt in play.
Assuming there was a protective order here, one side would need to file a motion for contempt accusing the other of the unlawful disclosure. Or the court could call a hearing or order the parties to file briefs on the disclosure. The journalists involved won't disclose sources. So typically you need one side to accuse the other in order to put contempt in play.
Posted on 3/9/19 at 10:03 am to nola000
quote:
The burning question is, why did they only subpoena Will Wade?
That's easy.
Wade coaches at a Nike school.
The Addidas people don't want to take out their own.
This post was edited on 3/9/19 at 10:04 am
Posted on 3/9/19 at 10:05 am to mdomingue
quote:
Leaking the tapes is likely a violation of the law, however, and may end up costing someone, though I doubt it.
Likely won't because everyone will keep their mouth shut and admit to nothing making it extremely difficult to prove who leaked it.
Clueless Joe should take notes.
Posted on 3/9/19 at 10:09 am to nola000
quote:
The burning question is, why did they only subpoena Will Wade?
They also subpoenaed Sean Miller of Arizona. There may be other subpoenas, they are not necessarily made public until right before trial. Arizona and LSU acknowledged the subpoenas. Most likely, Dawkins lawyers have met with Miller and Wade's lawyers and possibly with Miller and Wade.
Posted on 3/9/19 at 10:10 am to ATLTiger24
Good info. For law enforcement wiretaps, is there any expectation that information is kept at least somewhat private? Particularly things that impact people not part of the legal action? Just curious.
Posted on 3/9/19 at 10:11 am to ATLTiger24
LOL dude it’s the legal profession, no attorneys are ever held accountable for anything, they’d literally have to murder someone and get convicted before incurring any sort of penalty or possible disbarment
Posted on 3/9/19 at 10:16 am to mdomingue
quote:
For law enforcement wiretaps, is there any expectation that information is kept at least somewhat private? Particularly things that impact people not part of the legal action? Just curious.
Asking for a friend?
Posted on 3/9/19 at 10:19 am to Chasin Tail
quote:
Asking for a friend?
Crap, forgot to put that
Posted on 3/9/19 at 10:23 am to nola000
The constitution affords defendants some protections, and police, prosecutors, and judges ignore it whenever they feel like it.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News