- 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
Tulane sports law prof breaks down the Will Wade situation. Answers to common questions
Posted on 3/12/19 at 9:38 pm
Posted on 3/12/19 at 9:38 pm
8
Posted on 3/12/19 at 9:39 pm to magicman0001
Can a brother get some cliffs
Posted on 3/12/19 at 9:44 pm to magicman0001
Q: How would you simply describe Will Wade's situation from a legal standpoint?
A: I think his current situation is vague. Frankly, we don't have enough information to really be able to determine what type of exposure Wade might face at this point.
No shite. Man, they're on the ball at Tulane these days
A: I think his current situation is vague. Frankly, we don't have enough information to really be able to determine what type of exposure Wade might face at this point.
No shite. Man, they're on the ball at Tulane these days
Posted on 3/12/19 at 9:48 pm to magicman0001
Ha ha
Posted on 3/12/19 at 9:50 pm to magicman0001
What a worthless article full of nothing but a guy basically saying he doesn’t know anything
This post was edited on 3/12/19 at 9:51 pm
Posted on 3/12/19 at 9:50 pm to OchoDedos
All that was just blather because we don't know for a fact that rules were broken.
Posted on 3/12/19 at 9:53 pm to magicman0001
Not a great legal summary. He is playing the what if game as opposed to what is likely to happen.
For starters, Wade isn't testifying at the trial in April because (based on what we know) his testimony would be irrelevant. It does not appear that the FBI thought his testimony was relevant enough to call him before the grand jury. Just because the defense attorneys issued a subpoena for him to appear does not make his testimony relevant.
In reality, the fact that the defense is leaking these tapes tells me they know they can't get him on the stand at trial and so they trying to tell a narrative through the media (i.e. It's not bribery because everyone does it voluntarily).
He is definitely in self preservation mode. The biggest threats are an NCAA show cause and being fired with cause ($9MM at stake). The biggest threats to these happening are:
1. The original trial judge ( in October) allowing the NCAA to get access to exhibits not allowed into evidence, including at least one Wade recording. The NCAA filed a motion two weeks ago requesting this information be released. The court has not ruled.
2. Admissible evidence coming out in the April trial that shows him violating NCAA rules (think this very unlikely). Alternatively, inadmissible evidence being identified at the April trial that is ultimately released to the NCAA, including the recent tape. This is more likely and probably the worst case scenario.
Without this evidence, the NCAA has to essentially start from scratch in gathering evidence.
Lastly, there is no indication that Wade is being investigated by the FBI for criminal liability.
For starters, Wade isn't testifying at the trial in April because (based on what we know) his testimony would be irrelevant. It does not appear that the FBI thought his testimony was relevant enough to call him before the grand jury. Just because the defense attorneys issued a subpoena for him to appear does not make his testimony relevant.
In reality, the fact that the defense is leaking these tapes tells me they know they can't get him on the stand at trial and so they trying to tell a narrative through the media (i.e. It's not bribery because everyone does it voluntarily).
He is definitely in self preservation mode. The biggest threats are an NCAA show cause and being fired with cause ($9MM at stake). The biggest threats to these happening are:
1. The original trial judge ( in October) allowing the NCAA to get access to exhibits not allowed into evidence, including at least one Wade recording. The NCAA filed a motion two weeks ago requesting this information be released. The court has not ruled.
2. Admissible evidence coming out in the April trial that shows him violating NCAA rules (think this very unlikely). Alternatively, inadmissible evidence being identified at the April trial that is ultimately released to the NCAA, including the recent tape. This is more likely and probably the worst case scenario.
Without this evidence, the NCAA has to essentially start from scratch in gathering evidence.
Lastly, there is no indication that Wade is being investigated by the FBI for criminal liability.
This post was edited on 3/12/19 at 9:57 pm
Posted on 3/12/19 at 9:59 pm to ellessuuuu
quote:
For starters, Wade isn't testifying at the trial in April because (based on what we know) his testimony would be irrelevant.
It was deemed to be irrelevant in the first trial, but there’s no guarantee it will be deemed irrelevant in this trial. The first trial was for corruption, this ones for bribery.
quote:
It does not appear that the FBI thought his testimony was relevant enough to call him before the grand jury. Just because the defense attorneys issued a subpoena for him to appear does not make his testimony relevant.
And just because the FBI (really, the prosecutor) didn’t present the tapes at the grand jury doesn’t mean they aren’t relevant. There’s no requirement that all relevant evidence be submitted to the grand jury.
quote:
The original trial judge ( in October) allowing the NCAA to get access to exhibits not allowed into evidence, including at least one Wade recording.
The original trial judge has no say in whether the NCAA has access to the evidence. That’s the FBI’s call. I assume the FBI will give the NCAA the tapes once this trial is over. They don’t have a reason not to.
Posted on 3/12/19 at 10:05 pm to UpToPar
Please explain how Wade's testimony is relevant to the charges that these individuals bribed college coaches at Ok St, Kansas, NC State, TCU and Creighton to get kids to these schools and then steeer them towards Adidas? The defense is everbody does it, the problem is that is not a recognized defense as to whether the defendant's actions meets the elements of the crime. Because of that his testimony is not relevant. Again, from what I've seen, his testimony is not relevant.
You are wrong on the Court controlling access to documents. See the motion in the article below.
LINK
You are correct in that there is no requirement that the US Attorney's office put him before the grand jury (thank goodness for that by the way).
You are wrong on the Court controlling access to documents. See the motion in the article below.
LINK
You are correct in that there is no requirement that the US Attorney's office put him before the grand jury (thank goodness for that by the way).
This post was edited on 3/12/19 at 10:12 pm
Posted on 3/12/19 at 10:11 pm to UpToPar
quote:
The original trial judge has no say in whether the NCAA has access to the evidence. That’s the FBI’s call. I assume the FBI will give the NCAA the tapes once this trial is over. They don’t have a reason not to.
As I stated in another thread, the FBI released the evidence admitted in the first trial. Evidence ruled inadmissable was not given to the NCAA.
The NCAA has filed a motion with the court to get their hands on the rest of it. No ruling as of yet.
Posted on 3/12/19 at 10:13 pm to JustSmokin
Exactly. The recordings of Wade were not admissible, which means they are not part of the public record. The only way the NCAA gets them is if the court allows access.
It appears that the only way the NCAA gets their hands on the recordings is if the second court deems them admissible or if either court gives NCAA access to inadmissible evidence.
Without those things occuring, don't know how the NCAA gets the information.
It appears that the only way the NCAA gets their hands on the recordings is if the second court deems them admissible or if either court gives NCAA access to inadmissible evidence.
Without those things occuring, don't know how the NCAA gets the information.
This post was edited on 3/12/19 at 10:16 pm
Posted on 3/12/19 at 10:20 pm to ellessuuuu
quote:
Please explain how Wade's testimony is relevant to the charges that these individuals bribed college coaches at Ok St, Kansas, NC State, TCU and Creighton to get kids to these schools and then steeer them towards Adidas?
I never said it was relevant, just that the rulings in the first trial and the fact that it wasn’t presented before the grand jury doesn’t automatically mean it’s irrelevant. I think Dawkins is attempting to use it to show a symbiotic relationship between the programs and Adidas.
quote:
You are wrong on the Court controlling access to documents. See the motion in the article below.
On what grounds is the NCAA entitled to evidence collected by the FBI?
This post was edited on 3/12/19 at 10:22 pm
Posted on 3/12/19 at 10:22 pm to ellessuuuu
Either LSU is aware of all this, and still tried to make him come in and give a statement in an effort to set him up for termination with cause or they are completely oblivious (not counting that out with our administration). Either way, there is no reason that Wade should not be coaching until either LSU or the NCAA has some evidence, other than a newspaper article, that Wade actually committed in NCAA violation.
Posted on 3/12/19 at 10:22 pm to UpToPar
Nice 60k/year education there
Posted on 3/12/19 at 10:25 pm to UpToPar
I don't disagree with you on the NCAA's right to inadmissible information collected by the FBI. Read the NCAA's brief on that issue, its inbeded in the article I linked above. Problem is whether the DOJ will oppose the NCAA motion. Without opposition, it is easier for the judge to give access.
Posted on 3/12/19 at 10:27 pm to lsufball19
quote:
What a worthless article full of nothing but a guy basically saying he doesn’t know anything
The point is that this is why people are pissed that Wade is suspended.
You can't vacate a championship you don't win. And there's absolutely no guarantee this would ever come remotely close to vacating wins.
Posted on 3/12/19 at 10:28 pm to ellessuuuu
quote:
Without those things occuring, don't know how the NCAA gets the information.
The FBI can give it to them. I don’t see any legal grounds on which the NCAA can get them. They can file motions until they’re blue in the face.
Posted on 3/12/19 at 10:29 pm to magicman0001
Two thoughts that I always keep coming back to.... with all of these coaches being accused of bribery, racketeering, and conspiracy, Wade hasn't, and this tapped conversation happened months ago.... second, I just have a suspicion that Dawkins was using Wade for recruiting info on Smart, to pass on to another coach. Asside from bribing coaches, Dawkins was a conduit for Adidas. That's why it doesn't make sense, LSU is a Nike school.
Posted on 3/12/19 at 10:30 pm to OchoDedos
quote:
OchoDedos
You're more intelligent than most.
Posted on 3/12/19 at 10:37 pm to UpToPar
I don't do criminal law, but what grounds does the FBI have to give a non-party copies of inadmissible wiretaps?
Seems that wiretaps of third-parties are generally subject to a FOIA exception (maybe 7C or 7D).
Seems that wiretaps of third-parties are generally subject to a FOIA exception (maybe 7C or 7D).
This post was edited on 3/12/19 at 10:50 pm
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News