- 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 9:45 am to WaWaWeeWa
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
2
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 10:05 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.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News