- 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
re: Will Wade and What we really know:
Posted on 4/30/19 at 4:06 pm to nitwit
Posted on 4/30/19 at 4:06 pm to nitwit
The NCAA was there because JA allowed them to be there. You do know Bruce Pearl said he wasn't talking to the NCAA, and there isn't anything they can do about it. The AU AD didn't suspend him for not speaking to the NCAA regarding his ex asst being charged and pleading guilty. Wade doesn't have to speak with them either, and wouldn't have if JA hadn't allowed their attendance at the meeting.
2
Posted on 4/30/19 at 4:06 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
What you don’t seem to understand is that because there may not have been any evidence on one date doesn’t mean that there could never be evidence
Would you agree that the new transcript that came out in the trial this week is weaker evidence against WW than a wire tap that actually has WW talking on it?
Posted on 4/30/19 at 4:10 pm to H-Town Tiger
I would agree with you here. Until there is evidence Wade has committed any NCAA violations then he should be supported fully by LSU and fans. No one knows what may happen in the future. So are the statements by Bill Self, and Coach K's involvement in a player whose Uncle was wanting 100K for him to sign with KU. He went to Duke so investigate the DUKE program and see if 100k was paid.
This post was edited on 4/30/19 at 4:11 pm
Posted on 4/30/19 at 4:21 pm to LSUgrad1998
quote:
would agree with you here. Until there is evidence Wade has committed any NCAA violations then he should be supported fully by LSU and fans
I don’t think he should be fired but “supporting” doesn’t mean burying your head up arse.
quote:.
So are the statements by Bill Self, and Coach K's involvement in a player whose Uncle was wanting 100K for him to sign with KU. He went to Duke so investigate the DUKE program and see if 100k was paid.
Coach K isn’t on tape and there are no statements I’m aware of where someone under oath claims he discussed making 100K payments, of there is ample evidence to support an investigation then they should investigate, that has nothing to do with Will Wade and you are just trying to deflect
Posted on 4/30/19 at 4:25 pm to H-Town Tiger
Posted on 4/30/19 at 4:32 pm to lsufball19
This is the correct analysis of the hearsay rule in the current trial. The statement by Richardson is not being offered for the "truth of the matter asserted."
Posted on 4/30/19 at 4:45 pm to LSUgrad1998
quote:
You saying he should be fired and terminated? Again there is no evidence of any payments.
What I was saying is that the testimony was not hearsay. Thought that was pretty clear.
But since you asked, when is oral testimony not evidence?
Posted on 4/30/19 at 4:59 pm to LSUgrad1998
quote:
He supposedly is on a tape saying he made a strong arse offer to a player.
Not to a player, to a middleman. An offer that was refused by the middleman (according to what Wade was reported to say on the tape, middleman was not named)
quote:
says that Wade told him he made a $300k deal for Naz Reid.
The witness said Wade said he had 300 grand for Naz, not that it was offered to Naz, and the witness was supposedly offered a job with LSU.
But yea, I see what you are getting at, in reality there is nothing indicating WW has done anything wrong, unless you speculate and assume.
Posted on 4/30/19 at 5:08 pm to LSUgrad1998
Boy, I really hope you are not actually an LSU Grad.
Posted on 4/30/19 at 5:12 pm to kftiger1
quote:
No. Just no on your hearsay analysis. A statement against interest must be a statement by that person. So someone else saying that Wade said something against his interest doesn't count. If Wade were on tape saying that, then that tape would be admissible despite the fact that it is a statement made outside of the courtroom because it is a witnesses own statement against his interest.
No. It can be testified to. And he testified to a statement by Wade.
Posted on 4/30/19 at 5:13 pm to Macavity92
quote:
What I was saying is that the testimony was not hearsay. Thought that was pretty clear.
Sood testified that Book told him that WW said he had 300k. You don’t think that’s hearsay?
Posted on 4/30/19 at 5:53 pm to LSUgrad1998
quote:
You do know Bruce Pearl said he wasn't talking to the NCAA, and there isn't anything they can do about it.
link to that?
quote:
The NCAA was there because JA allowed them to be there.
boy, you are just full of bad information today
Posted on 4/30/19 at 6:04 pm to LSUgrad1998
He's on a very short leash now with Woodward imo…
With the continued bad 'press' which I equate to Trump's presidency, he'll either capitulate or hopefully continue with the great job he's done as hoops coach at LSU.
I love the dude and hope he survives all this BS.
With the continued bad 'press' which I equate to Trump's presidency, he'll either capitulate or hopefully continue with the great job he's done as hoops coach at LSU.
I love the dude and hope he survives all this BS.
Posted on 4/30/19 at 10:19 pm to LSUgrad1998
Oh really. Why are you ignoring rhe part where he thought mom and son took too much of the offer and the handler didnt get enough?
Posted on 5/1/19 at 12:04 am to AlceeFortier
LOL holy shite. You guys are clueless.
Hearsay is any testimony where the witness is talking about what someone else said.
Just because the witness says it in open court does not mean it was “admitted” evidence. Its testimony that is not evidence, unless an exception applies. Additionally, the probative value of all his testimony is weighed by the Court. And his testimony about what others said is meritless. Now if he said, he saw Will Wade hand over a bag of cash, we’d have a problem. But him merely saying what someone said allegedly is nothing, its just hearsay.
In this case we have a convicted felon who is a witness. The probative value of his testimony is a big issue here, i.e. the court will weigh whether or not they think he is truthful or a lying sack of shite.
GTF, ya’ll are clueless.
Hearsay is any testimony where the witness is talking about what someone else said.
Just because the witness says it in open court does not mean it was “admitted” evidence. Its testimony that is not evidence, unless an exception applies. Additionally, the probative value of all his testimony is weighed by the Court. And his testimony about what others said is meritless. Now if he said, he saw Will Wade hand over a bag of cash, we’d have a problem. But him merely saying what someone said allegedly is nothing, its just hearsay.
In this case we have a convicted felon who is a witness. The probative value of his testimony is a big issue here, i.e. the court will weigh whether or not they think he is truthful or a lying sack of shite.
GTF, ya’ll are clueless.
This post was edited on 5/1/19 at 12:07 am
Posted on 5/1/19 at 12:09 am to LSUgrad1998
quote:
It's not much really. First, He supposedly is on a tape saying he made a strong arse offer to a player. Nothing monetary was mentioned, just that it was an offer. Second, a witness,NOT WADE ON TAPE, says that Wade told him he made a $300k deal for Naz Reid. So Wade isn't on the tape himself saying this. In a court of law it's hearsay without any proof of wrong doing. Until there is proof he cheated and/or violated NCAA rules in recruiting he still has the presumption of innocence.
Man, I love when the rant actually get it!! Rare occasion! God bless America!
Posted on 5/1/19 at 12:46 am to LSUgrad1998
I’m ignoring this unless or until something concrete comes of it.
Posted on 5/1/19 at 7:47 am to LSUgrad1998
quote:
He isn't on trial.
...yet!
Posted on 5/1/19 at 7:51 am to Lester Earl
Bruce Pearl refused to officially meet with his own AD, with NCAA officials present. So he and his AD have spoken informally. He wasn't and hasn't been suspended for that refusal. Even coached his team to the final four. The only difference is Auburn is ok with him not talking to them until the trial in April is over, LSU's administration wasn't.
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
Posted on 5/1/19 at 2:13 pm to LSUgrad1998
quote:
When did he ever offer money?
The lawyers and the judge all believe WW was referring to money. I'm thinking the NCAA will as well.
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News