Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="nolacuse44, post: 1038101, member: 566"]
In this and your other posts, you're trumpeting some assumptions about the law that are incorrect.

First, I believe that disputes arising under the NBA's governing document (bylaws or constitution) are subject to arbitration, where, generally speaking, rues of evidence are relaxed. Normally, it's up to the arbitrator (who might not even be a lawyer).

Second, even if this dispute were played out in court (or subject to formal rules of evidence in arbitration), the assumption that an illegally-obtained recording would not be admissible is probably inaccurate.  The Exclusionary Rule that you and many others are referring to is a Constitutional rule applicable in the criminal law context.  I'm no expert on evidence, but I did some quick double-checking and the common law rule that illegally obtained evidence is admissible in civil cases is, in general, still good law (there are exceptions).

Third, even if the tape were somehow excluded, apparently there are two witnesses (besides Sterling) to the conversation.  Under any scenario they could testify to what was said.  That is, the recording is not necessary to establish that Sterling said what Silver based the NBA's action on.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?