- 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
re: Couple of questions regarding the FBI/taps
Posted on 3/9/19 at 9:01 am to WaWaWeeWa
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 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 10:09 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 10:23 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