re: Huge difference between an FBI Target Letter and a Subpoena

quote:

---

and if we actually had anything to worry about we'd be the headline not Will Wade and Miller

---

Like I previously stated. They are the first of many...hang on boys!

Yea, subpoenas totally aren’t a big deal or anything. No, not at all.

I dunno man, I’ve never been subpoenad. Doesn’t seem like a normal thing to me at all.

Let’s do a quick poll.

If you’ve never been subpoenad downvote Terrific Tales. Upvote if you have.

quote:

---

I’ve never been subpoenad. Doesn’t seem like a normal thing to me at all.

---

Well that settles that then

quote:

---

if he pleads the fifth his career is over. The member institutions put a lot of emphasis on cooperation.

---

Right, because as we all know the esteemed NCAA member institutions have a ZERO tolerance for basketball coaches, even really good ones, that break the NCAA rules and regulations right?

Can anyone name any BBall coaches that have broken the rules, got caught and are still coaching at the collegiate level? On second thought its probably easier to name the coaches that haven't been caught cheating.

quote:

---

It is LSU fans saying he is safe by claiming the 5th

---

First of all, it's "pleading the 5th."

And I only have mentioned that in a scenario where the FBI asks him a question that could cause him to self incriminate. I never stated he would undoubtedly plead the 5th. Only that he can.

You clearly have a lack of understanding on this topic.

quote:

---

It just means he has to answer questions under oath in court concerning an on-going investigation where he is not the target.

---

here is the thing........

quote:

---

The NCAA has yet to levy punishment against any program involved in the FBI trial. Under its new rules, the NCAA no longer has to do its own investigations into rule breakers to hand out a punishment. That means everything that comes out in these trials is fair game.

The FBI investigation has had programs sweating since he was announced. Arizona and LSU will be the latest schools under the crosshairs come April.

---

LINK

you sound like an Ole Miss fan.

Are you also aware that the only questions that will be admissible in a court of law are those that are relevant to the case? That's the same reason the tapes weren't allowed into evidence in the last trial...a relevance objection was sustained by the judge. Can you provide any insight as to why you believe this trial will be any different? Will Wade was called as a defense witness based upon someone else having been charged with a crime and the defense attorney believing somehow Wade can provide testimony beneficial to his client. This isn't a situation where Wade is on trial and any and all questions are fair game. The only relevant questions are those that are relevant to the actual underlying case and the defendant's involved. If you want to discuss this rationally (doubtful), then one would could realistically expect the same relevance objection to be made this time around. Think about it, if the same information was deemed irrelevant in the first trial in federal court, what makes you think it will be relevant in this trial with the same defendants?

Defense counsel is obviously hoping this judge rules differently. Anyone can be issued a subpoena. In fact, many times, subpoenas are issued to those that never end up testifying in cases such as these. Not saying Wade won't testify but subpoena, in and of itself, doesn't mean a whole lot. (I would also expect someone to file a Motion to Quash the subpoena on Wade's behalf)

There's also this

quote:

---

Defense attorneys have not yet decided whether they will subpoena other coaches, including Creighton's Greg McDermott, sources told ESPN.

---

This is where they're going to find themselves in a pickle. They are basically trying to introduce Wade and other coaches' alleged malfeasance as evidence to draw attention away from their own clients. Problem being, other people having done things has nothing to do with whether their clients are guilty of the crimes they are charged with, which is why the wiretaps on Wade were deemed irrelevant. It really makes little sense for the defense to subpoena wade and not the feds. That alone, should tell you how much the feds value what Wade could have to say.

quote:

---

Casey Donnelly, one of Gatto's attorneys, tried to introduce a wiretap recording of a call between Wade and Dawkins during the October trial. She did not provide a date of the call. According to the transcript that Donnelly read without the jury present, Dawkins called Wade and inquired about LSU's interest in Balsa Koprivica, a 7-foot center from Montverde, Florida.

---

So do you not find it very telling that the tape were not admitted into evidence nor was the reading of the transcript from the same phone calls done in front of a jury? The judge in the first trial did not think the tapes were relevant to the case. This entire trial is based upon charges that Dawkins and Merl Code bribed three coaches. Will Wade has little to do with any of the underlying charges on those three people, and his limited contact with Dawkins has nothing to do with what they are charged with doing. It's pretty simple if anyone cared to actually read up on the case. Sean Miller has a lot more to do with it because his former assistant coach is one of the coaches who plead guilty to have taken bribes.

Defense counsel wants to create a show of this and take everyone down with them. Problem being, federal court isn't the place to do this, and the rules of evidence are still going to be a big hurdle for defense counsel.

I don't believe Wade is clean in all of this, but neither are the other 23 teams involved in the FBI probe. If they want to blow the lid off of it, more than LSU have things to worry about. That's when Mark Emmert is going to have to make the decision whether the juice is worth the squeeze. Does he really want a bunch of blueblood programs (no, LSU is not included in those) to be under investigation? We all know the NCAA cares about their bottom line above all. Opening up pandora's box on street agents is probably not worth it. But, one thing I do know is that none of the players involved in this probe went to LSU.

But, at the end of the day, we know how these things usually turn out for the rant. There is a lot of overreaction from other fanbases and baseless assumptions made. Then, once the dust settles, it's rarely as bad as everyone wanted it to be. If Wade had much to worry about, he would have been indicted by the FBI along with the rest of the coaches that already were.