FBI Hoops Trial starting

Cusefan0307

Here for the Cold Takes
Joined
Dec 21, 2011
Messages
17,734
Likes
31,506
Why? Getting verdicts overturned is very difficult.
I should have said I won't be surprised if it is.

There's going to be an appeal.

If they allowed the recordings I don't see how these guys were convicted. I'm not sure what evidence proved the schools were the victims. I'm not even sure what the jury was looking at tbh.
 

AZOrange

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
12,356
Likes
13,916
I should have said I won't be surprised if it is.

There's going to be an appeal.

If they allowed the recordings I don't see how these guys were convicted. I'm not sure what evidence proved the schools were the victims. I'm not even sure what the jury was looking at tbh.
Grounds to appeal federal jury verdict are pretty limited. Basically have to show judge made a judicial misstep so meaningful that jury would have concluded differently. I’d bet less than 10% of jury verdicts get overturned. Fed guilty verdicts are so high because nearly everyone takes a plea (except for these dummies). I’d expect you see few pleas from the remaining defendants here in the next few weeks
 

kirbivore

All American
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
7,246
Likes
5,817
Yeah all these Adidas people just paid recruits without the school wanting them.
People are just blind to their team if they can’t see how this worked.
Self wanted recruit X and called Adidas to help and Adidas did all the payoffs and Self gets them.
It’s Blue Chips I mean cmon.
Gotta admit when I say Williams' demands list my first though was Ricky Roe. Only in real life Pete Bell (Coach K) doesn't throw him out immediately, but cuts the check on the spot. At Duke Coach K has used the friends of the program for years.
 

Hoo's That

All American
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
6,531
Likes
8,560
I should have said I won't be surprised if it is.

There's going to be an appeal.

If they allowed the recordings I don't see how these guys were convicted. I'm not sure what evidence proved the schools were the victims. I'm not even sure what the jury was looking at tbh.
This was about fraud against the schools, basically the academic side of the house, not against the coaches or athletic departments. If the coaches and athletic departments were complicit, they’re potential defendants, too, since they were part of the conspiracy (a Fed favorite crime). I also think we’re looking at this totally in the wrong way. The crime was committing a fraud against an institution receiving Federal money. While Louisville and Kansas weren’t victims, the other schools recruiting the players who took money were victimized.
 

jgeorge322

All American
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
5,742
Likes
7,774
This was about fraud against the schools, basically the academic side of the house, not against the coaches or athletic departments. If the coaches and athletic departments were complicit, they’re potential defendants, too, since they were part of the conspiracy (a Fed favorite crime). I also think we’re looking at this totally in the wrong way. The crime was committing a fraud against an institution receiving Federal money. While Louisville and Kansas weren’t victims, the other schools recruiting the players who took money were victimized.
If the fact that the coaches knew was dispositive then an employee who embezzles money from an employer is not guilty of fraud if his manager was aware of the scheme.

The harm to the schools is not the academics, its because it caused the schools to play ineligible players which exposes them to NCAA sanctions and subsequent financial harm.

The defense attorneys were really implicitly asking for a jury nullification.

I still dont get the intent to defraud element though. The defendants essentially bribed the players. That certainly was done intentionally. But was the purpose to defraud the schools?
 
Last edited:

Hoo's That

All American
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
6,531
Likes
8,560
If the fact that the coaches knew was dispositive then an employee who embezzles money from an employer is not guilty of fraud if his manager was aware of the scheme.

The harm to the schools is not the academics, its because it caused the schools to play ineligible players which exposes them to NCAA sanctions and subsequent financial harm.

The defense attorneys were really implicitly asking for a jury nullification.

I still dont get the intent to defraud element though. The defendants essentially bribed the players. That certainly was done intentionally. But was the purpose to defraud the schools?
I think you’re looking at the wrong schools. You’re looking at it from the NC State, Louisville, and Kansas points of view. Weren’t the non-Adidas schools who were recruiting those players the ones who were unambiguously defrauded? UVa was recruiting one of those players. It turns out we weren’t even remotely in the mix because of the money fueling the fraud rather than for basketball (PT, style of play, etc.) or school reasons.
 

jgeorge322

All American
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
5,742
Likes
7,774
I think you’re looking at the wrong schools. You’re looking at it from the NC State, Louisville, and Kansas points of view. Weren’t the non-Adidas schools who were recruiting those players the ones who were unambiguously defrauded? UVa was recruiting one of those players. It turns out we weren’t even remotely in the mix because of the money fueling the fraud rather than for basketball (PT, style of play, etc.) or school reasons.
No youre wrong. The fraud was against the schools the players planned on attending. The fraud was the schools couldnt award scholarships to other eligible players as a result, but rewarded them to ineligible players instead.
 

Cusefan0307

Here for the Cold Takes
Joined
Dec 21, 2011
Messages
17,734
Likes
31,506
Grounds to appeal federal jury verdict are pretty limited. Basically have to show judge made a judicial misstep so meaningful that jury would have concluded differently. I’d bet less than 10% of jury verdicts get overturned. Fed guilty verdicts are so high because nearly everyone takes a plea (except for these dummies). I’d expect you see few pleas from the remaining defendants here in the next few weeks
You may be right. I just don’t get how these jurors were so stupid.
 

jgeorge322

All American
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
5,742
Likes
7,774
Grounds to appeal federal jury verdict are pretty limited. Basically have to show judge made a judicial misstep so meaningful that jury would have concluded differently. I’d bet less than 10% of jury verdicts get overturned. Fed guilty verdicts are so high because nearly everyone takes a plea (except for these dummies). I’d expect you see few pleas from the remaining defendants here in the next few weeks
1. The grounds for appeal are limited in federal court? No more limited than other courts
2. Guilty verdicts are high because people take pleas? That is not why and doesnt make a lot of sense. A guilty verdict means there is no plea. Pleas are not considered guilty verdicts. Plus, if guilty verdicts were high because of pleas, that would mean that the feds wouldnt negotiate because if it were reversed, then it was the defendants not negotiating, which would mean they feel comfortable about their case, leading you to believe a guilty verdict is less likely.

In reality, feds conviction rates are high because the feds do proactive investigations. They build cases with wire taps, confidential informants, grand jury subpoenas, etc. This results in a strong case to present to the jury.

On the other hand, state cases are more reactive investigations. Someone gets killed and the cops try to find out who done it.

3. Convictions typically arent overturned often but it happens for a lot of reasons. That said, trial judges are given a ton of discretion as to what evidence comes in so as long as the judge followed the right analysis to come to conclusion, evidentiary reasons typically arent why a case is tossed out. Federal judges are typically the smartest of the smart so its not likely they messed some evidentiary standard up but certaintly possible.

4. Agree i could see some of the other defendants plea out
 

AZOrange

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
12,356
Likes
13,916
1. The grounds for appeal are limited in federal court? No more limited than other courts
2. Guilty verdicts are high because people take pleas? That is not why and doesnt make a lot of sense. A guilty verdict means there is no plea. Pleas are not considered guilty verdicts. Plus, if guilty verdicts were high because of pleas, that would mean that the feds wouldnt negotiate because if it were reversed, then it was the defendants not negotiating, which would mean they feel comfortable about their case, leading you to believe a guilty verdict is less likely.

In reality, feds conviction rates are high because the feds do proactive investigations. They build cases with wire taps, confidential informants, grand jury subpoenas, etc. This results in a strong case to present to the jury.

On the other hand, state cases are more reactive investigations. Someone gets killed and the cops try to find out who done it.

3. Convictions typically arent overturned often but it happens for a lot of reasons. That said, trial judges are given a ton of discretion as to what evidence comes in so as long as the judge followed the right analysis to come to conclusion, evidentiary reasons typically arent why a case is tossed out. Federal judges are typically the smartest of the smart so its not likely they messed some evidentiary standard up but certaintly possible.

4. Agree i could see some of the other defendants plea out
1. I didn’t say that.
2. Yes, I did say that but not for the reason you espoused. Part of the reason feds have a 90% kill rate is because they plead out weakest cases. Allows them to funnel resources and time to most high profile stuff. It’s a self fulfilling prophecy though because it causes more people to take deals. If no one plead guilty verdicts would go way down.
Don’t disagree on 3 or 4 but appeals sucess
Is like between 5-7% or was when I was in school
 

jgeorge322

All American
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
5,742
Likes
7,774
1. I didn’t say that.
2. Yes, I did say that but not for the reason you espoused. Part of the reason feds have a 90% kill rate is because they plead out weakest cases. Allows them to funnel resources and time to most high profile stuff. It’s a self fulfilling prophecy though because it causes more people to take deals. If no one plead guilty verdicts would go way down.
Don’t disagree on 3 or 4 but appeals sucess
Is like between 5-7% or was when I was in school
Feds dont bring too many weak cases. Pleas happen for a lot of reasons. What happened to Brian bowen sr being one of them (cooperating). I think the major reason though is because the feds cases are strong and the time is real, so defendants see the writing on the wall and cut a deal.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
1,858
Likes
2,598
Alright we proved that college basketball is corrupt and kids are getting paid, and though I guess the jury didn't hear the tapes, we now know some coaches are not all as clean and pure as K and Roy. After this ground breaking finding I heard the Feds are next going after the conspiracy that is Santa Claus.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
284
Likes
238
So Zion Williamson wanted big cash and benefits to go to a number of schools...but he went to Duke strictly for its greatness. What a fine program.
Maybe it has happened and I have not seen it, but if I was a sports journalist (as opposed to a sports commentator populating ESPN and the like), I would look to see where Williamson's dad worked before and after the Duke recruitment as well as see if the family moved. If it is "no" to both questions, it would certainly lessen the inference that he sold his kid to Duke. If it "yes to both questions . . .
 

STEVEHOLT

There are FIVE letter in the name BLAIN.
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
6,283
Likes
7,629
Alright we proved that college basketball is corrupt and kids are getting paid, and though I guess the jury didn't hear the tapes, we now know some coaches are not all as clean and pure as K and Roy. After this ground breaking finding I heard the Feds are next going after the conspiracy that is Santa Claus.
Actually we found that the kids’ handlers get paid
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
172
Likes
210
Feds dont bring too many weak cases. Pleas happen for a lot of reasons. What happened to Brian bowen sr being one of them (cooperating). I think the major reason though is because the feds cases are strong and the time is real, so defendants see the writing on the wall and cut a deal.
Also, in my opinion defendants cut a deal (regardless of the quality of their potential defense) because they simply don't have the financial resources to pay the hundreds of thousands of dollars in pretrial and trial fees to a team of top tier lawyers, leaving their families destitute. More so if their assets have been seized or frozen. One of the reasons given for, at one time multi millionaire Paul Manafort accepting a cooperation agreement was, he was broke. If you are crooked and get caught by the Feds, it helps to be very rich when it comes to defending yourself in court. If not you plead out. Unfortunately a two tiered system of justice; one for the rich and one for the poor.
 

Capt. Tuttle

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 22, 2011
Messages
14,765
Likes
15,376
You are correct Capt. I had just finished a conversation with my Ohio State neighbor who still thinks Urban walks on water and I let that fog my mind.
He might be a win at all costs, optics be damned guy, but that is the choice of the school to keep him or not. At OSU, losing to Purdue will have more to do with his job status than keeping a guy who committed DV.
 

Consigliere

All Conference
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
2,372
Likes
5,754
So NCAA won't even start their investigation until the FBI legal actions are complete? No clearer incident of egregious violations that I can recall and any sanctions won't be levied likely for years. And the fact that most of the accused institutions are state supported screams lawsuits questioning standing if sanctions are imposed as I would think any coaches found guilty of collusion or players who took bags won't be around any longer.
 


Top Bottom