re: FBI investigation, NCAA, and Wade

quote:

---

Maybe, but the prosecutor would have to prove he made the statement to Alleva and sans a recording device, difficult to do, especially if Wade denies.

---

Not exactly, the case then would come down to credibility. WHo do you, as the jury, believe is telling the truth.

Think of an eye witness in a murder case, the prosecutor doesn't have to prove they saw the murder and who perpetrated it, the jury has to decide if they believe the eye witness.

quote:

---

good defense attorney should be able to discredit or stir up doubt at least.

---

Absolutely.

I still believe that a one on one meeting with just Alleva, or publicly requesting one, has low legal risk for Wade while optimizing the public’s perception that he is not hiding anything, simply protecting himself and LSU from unwanted legal and compliance exposure.

quote:

---

On 4., I’d like to know what compliance has access to with regard to the players, ie financial, academic, etc in order to ensure compliance.

---

Players aren't employees; a recent court case just reinforced that once again. So their access to "private" infomation is limited. Doesn't mean a player can't reliquish those rights. But for the most part you can't get into a players financial records. A good example is piss tests. A player voluntarily consented with his FA agreement to abide by NCAA & school policies. So they gave up the right to refuse urine samples. Many other things they did not give up a right too are untouchable by the NCAA and LSU. The way the NCAA does it is request it. If they want to look at your bank accounts they will request it. Remember, they do not have the burden of proof to penalize. You refuse, they assume it's an indication of guilt and penalize you.

Coaches are a whole other matter. They are employees. Just like an employer has a right to search your locker or desk on their property, you gave up certain amount of privacy by being an employee with all sorts of duty, responsibility, and good faith commitments in that contract

quote:

---

On # 2, nobody has access to the tapes or the transcripts except the FBI and the parties to the criminal case (US attorney and defendants). If those tapes are not admitted at the second trial (and I do not think they will be), the NCAA will likely never have access to the tapes. The only reason it came is because the defense attorneys leaked parts of the tapes to Yahoo.

---

One of the recordings of a Wade and Dawkins call was read by Dawkins lawyer to the court, but not admitted as evidence, that makes it public record that anyone can get.

LINK

"This follows the bombshell last October where a transcript of Wade and Dawkins was read aloud in the federal trial."

Okay. The only thing available is this lawyer's cherry picked portions of a recording. The recording is not available.

quote:

---

The less Wade says the better position he’s in to defend himself if litigation heads his way following his April testimony.

---

What litigation could be headed WW's way based on what he might say to JA & the NCAA?

quote:

---

A meeting with your boss is fine, but when your boss invites the NCAA in, it becomes less of a meeting with your boss and more of a Kangaroo Court where you’re on trial for your job with no defense attorney or jury.

---

WW has no "say-so" concerning who his employer invites to a meeting. WW signed a contract that requires him to cooperate with any investigation by LSU, NCAA or the SEC.

quote:

---

it’s the athletic department for being too aggressive with how they’re handling the situation

---

Too aggressive???? They are trying to lessen the NCAA sanctions that are coming our way by demonstrating "institutional control."

quote:

---

The only parts of the tapes anyone has access to were leaked by the defense attorney

---

You don't know this for certain.

quote:

---

LSU has no real reason to start a heavy handed investigation

---

(see above on institutional control)

quote:

---

Nobody has any obligation to investigate based on purely media reports.

---

Incorrect. The NCAA has an obligation to investigate if the information (from media, phone call, etc) indicates a violation and seems credible.

quote:

---

The compliance department can’t necessarily investigate things they don’t know about.

---

Not a valid "excuse" anymore concerning NCAA violations. This used to be everyone's excuse but the NCAA has developed the term "lack of institutional control" in an effort to crack down on cheating.