re: Re: Javonte Smart Suspension, Question to all the Legal Experts (NCAA)

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1051216/download


I'm talking about the Dawkins case that Wade, Miller et al may be called to testify in. . .

What I summarized in my first post is explained in paragraph 3 of the federal indictment linked above. The logic by which prosecution argues NCAA rules make this a fraud against the Universities involved is a bit further down.


It is crystal clear and pretty much the exact opposite of what you are saying.



Again, the defense seems to want to prove that the coaches (Wade, Miller, et al) were fully knowledgeable and willing participants as representatives of their universities.

Whether the judge will allow that line of argumentation from the defense is not clear. I assume this why some people say there's some chance Wade, Miller etc never testify.


None of this is what "I think". It's simply what I read in the actual justice department press release.

quote:

---

It's an interesting opinion, but I'm not sure anyone has been charged with fraud in this case.

---

It is specifically the fraud against the universities charge --that is the only charge in the indictment I linked above -- that has prompted Dawkins' legal team to attempt to call these coaches as witnesses.

I'm certainly not claiming to be an expert --if you read that indictment you'll know everything I do -- but this is the precise part that is of pretty grave concern to Wade and all the other coaches that may be possibly called.

If the judge allows it, the defense will try to establish that these coaches were fully knowledgeable of and participants in the system of payments to players that made them ineligible.

I haven't looked at the present suit to compare it to any adjudicated suit. I don't know the similarities or the differences. It doesn't interest me enough. I still disagree with a law school professor over the Asahi Metal case in law school.

I can disagree with my doctor or contractor, though they have much more experience than my hour of internet research. I practiced mass tort defense for 37 years, and it still doesn't bother me if someone disagrees with me. Law isn't science. Nothing is a guarantee.

The leak sounds pretty damning from an NCAA rules and possibly a federal point of view. I believe rules should be followed or should be changed. However, if what Wade says is true, and he is cleared, I will be overjoyed because it paves the way for LSU to finally become Elite again.

quote:

---

Wade refused to meet with HIS bosses about something that was very important about his job... Until he does he will stay OUT............... Sorry that's the way it is..................

---

that is the "official Stance" but the off the record stance is, by not meeting, both sides have "plausible deniability" and neither side has to adopt a narrative at his stage of the game

quote:

---

I don't know the similarities or the differences. It doesn't interest me enough

---

Can you stop posting if this doesn’t interest you enough. Good lord, you are on here spitting out your legal BS you claim to know, yet can’t take 10 minutes to go read up on the actual case. This doesn’t interest you enough, yet here you are spending your time discussing it over and over. Just STFU so people are not mislead with your lazy BS input.