- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- 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
0
Posted on 5/1/19 at 4:44 pm to tigerpimpbot
No because he denied it so the judge put in place a protective order. That attorney had more to worry about than a violation of that statute had the court been able to prove he/they were the leak. Not that it wasn’t abundantly clear who leaked the information to anyone paying attention
This post was edited on 5/1/19 at 4:46 pm
Posted on 5/1/19 at 4:51 pm to lsufball19
Does Wade have the right to allow the NCAA access to the tapes of his calls?
Is it possible for the NCAA to base their decision on the assumption that the published quotes from the tapes are accurate since Wade could grant them access to prove those quotes are inaccurate?
Posted on 5/1/19 at 4:51 pm to lsufball19
I’m sure he was savvy enough to use a trusted emissary to do his dirty work. 
Posted on 5/1/19 at 4:53 pm to wm72
quote:
Does Wade have the right to allow the NCAA access to the tapes of his calls?
Yes, but he wouldn’t
quote:
Is it possible for the NCAA to base their decision on the assumption that the published quotes from the tapes are accurate since Wade could grant them access to prove those quotes are inaccurate?
If they follow their own bylaws, no
Good part of these tapes is there are multiple people on them which means multiple people have to consent to their release
This post was edited on 5/1/19 at 4:55 pm
Posted on 5/1/19 at 4:58 pm to Tigers eyes
Bingo. No way WW is that dumb and that smart at the same time. Even the verbiage he uses oozes of scripted dialogue.
I think the bigger question is how did Yahoo get it’s hands on the alleged tape and will they not be dealt a blow from publishing this information they know is not for public consumption.
Somewhere/somehow, it appears laws have been broken in allowing the physical tapes to get to yahoo in the 1st place, if that did happen. If they don’t have the physical tapes, then they’re likely looking at exposure from the publication anyhow. I’ll let the the defamation boys grapple with that but Id sure like to know the facts on how and why tapes of only Lsu seemed to make their headlines.
I think the bigger question is how did Yahoo get it’s hands on the alleged tape and will they not be dealt a blow from publishing this information they know is not for public consumption.
Somewhere/somehow, it appears laws have been broken in allowing the physical tapes to get to yahoo in the 1st place, if that did happen. If they don’t have the physical tapes, then they’re likely looking at exposure from the publication anyhow. I’ll let the the defamation boys grapple with that but Id sure like to know the facts on how and why tapes of only Lsu seemed to make their headlines.
This post was edited on 5/1/19 at 5:01 pm
Posted on 5/1/19 at 5:20 pm to Tigers eyes
The ncaa might just wait a year or two before jumping on wade. They are going to watch every basketball player Lsu gets in the next 5 years. That way Wade's recruiting goes to crap.
Posted on 5/1/19 at 5:29 pm to rthomas628k
Based on what yahoo did, I don’t see any possible torts or laws broken on their part. The press has a lot of protection in reporting “news.” Will Wade also would be viewed as a public official, so publishing unflattering opinion pieces on him is generally fine. One of the main burdens that must be proven for defamation is the information was false. Them publishing a transcript portion of a phone call wasn’t false, but rather was possibly misleading without the entirety of the phone call. Not to mention, Wade would have to prove it was false and that opens up a can of discovery he doesn’t want. Granted this is way outside my field, but that’s all I have.
Posted on 5/1/19 at 5:42 pm to rthomas628k
quote:
I think the bigger question is how did Yahoo get it’s hands on the alleged tape and will they not be dealt a blow from publishing this information they know is not for public consumption.
No they will not, the Supreme Court ruled in 1971 on the NY Times vs. U.S. Government "Pentagon Papers" case that a newspaper or other news outlet is free to publish material regardless of how it was obtained.
Posted on 5/1/19 at 5:43 pm to ellessuuuu
You are exactly right about this being misuse and or poor deployment of FBI and other law enforcement resources
Posted on 5/1/19 at 6:09 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Not to mention, Wade would have to prove it was false and that opens up a can of discovery he doesn’t want.
That statement proves that Wade's reputation has been damaged.
Now we will wait until the trial is over and see if the truth implicates Wade in wrong doing.
If it is proven that Wade did nothing wrong, someone should pay for the damage.
Posted on 5/1/19 at 6:21 pm to Gus007
quote:
That statement proves that Wade's reputation has been damaged.
That’s not, in and if itself, a basis to sue. And again, he would have the burden of proving the information was false.
quote:
If it is proven that Wade did nothing wrong, someone should pay for the damage.
It would be in Wade’s best interest to let this die and go away if no NCAA repercussions happen to him
Posted on 5/1/19 at 6:31 pm to Gus007
quote:
hat statement proves that Wade's reputation has been damaged.
Now we will wait until the trial is over and see if the truth implicates Wade in wrong doing.
If it is proven that Wade did nothing wrong, someone should pay for the damage.
Not likely to happen.
"In the context of defamation actions (libel and slander) as well as invasion of privacy, a public figure cannot succeed in a lawsuit on incorrect harmful statements in the United States unless there is proof that the writer or publisher acted with actual malice by knowing the falsity or by reckless disregard for the truth. The legal burden of proof in defamation actions is thus higher in the case of a public figure than in the case of an ordinary person."
Posted on 5/1/19 at 7:04 pm to Tigers eyes
quote:
And this is why I have felt that WW was acting in accordance with FBI instructions
Posted on 5/1/19 at 8:46 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
The word you were looking for is preemptive, idiot.
Originally, yes. But when it auto corrected, i felt it fit just fine with him, and bungholes like you, who like to police boards with a sense of authority..which only makes uou more of a moron
This post was edited on 5/1/19 at 8:47 pm
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News