ISU Gambling Megathread

Making my way through this new longform piece about the betting scandal. Haven't finished but one revelation, at least to me, is that these guys are saying they don't recognize some of the bets they're accused of making, specifically certain ones regarding their own games.

Has that been reported before? I haven't followed every detail since this broke last year.

 
Making my way through this new longform piece about the betting scandal. Haven't finished but one revelation, at least to me, is that these guys are saying they don't recognize some of the bets they're accused of making, specifically certain ones regarding their own games.

Has that been reported before? I haven't followed every detail since this broke last year.

I mean I wouldn't admit to that either and I am sure their lawyer is telling them the same.
 
Making my way through this new longform piece about the betting scandal. Haven't finished but one revelation, at least to me, is that these guys are saying they don't recognize some of the bets they're accused of making, specifically certain ones regarding their own games.

Has that been reported before? I haven't followed every detail since this broke last year.

Thought the most interesting part was the players (Lee specifically) being told by the DCI “we don’t want to get involved with the schools or to the NCAA, you guys are small fish compared to what we’re going after.”

That clearly wasn’t the case.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: bozclone
I mean I wouldn't admit to that either and I am sure their lawyer is telling them the same.

Fair point. But then I would think they would be advised to deny other bets too, if only because it looks sketchy to own up to all the bets you made except for the singular worst one.

Thought the most interesting part was the players (Lee specifically) being told by the DCI “we don’t want to get involved with the schools or to the NCAA, you guys are small fish compared to what we’re going after.”

That clearly wasn’t the case.

Got a buddy who's a former DCI guy who left specifically because of the culture there that allowed this kind of deceit to go on. I can't remember if he left before all this happened; he didn't know anything about any of it but wasn't surprised at the DCI's behavior.
 
Making my way through this new longform piece about the betting scandal. Haven't finished but one revelation, at least to me, is that these guys are saying they don't recognize some of the bets they're accused of making, specifically certain ones regarding their own games.

Has that been reported before? I haven't followed every detail since this broke last year.

I've followed this close enough. This is new information. Granted, most everything I've seen is from Keith Murphy and the DMR, so...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Trice
Thought the most interesting part was the players (Lee specifically) being told by the DCI “we don’t want to get involved with the schools or to the NCAA, you guys are small fish compared to what we’re going after.”

That clearly wasn’t the case.
Not entirely true based on the article. The Agent who said that in the interview with Lee and the Agent who started this whole thing are different. The Agent who told Lee that was led to believe the scope on the investigation was sportsbooks not the players. And the quoted agent seems quite remorseful of getting the players involved.
 
The judge claimed that the cops have qualified immunity from prosecution. That’s a concept that should be discontinued as it prevents plaintiffs from receiving justice when public servants break the law.
 
The judge claimed that the cops have qualified immunity from prosecution. That’s a concept that should be discontinued as it prevents plaintiffs from receiving justice when public servants break the law.
It's a really messed up ruling. It states their constitutional rights were violated but that law enforcement agents have immunity. Isn't the whole point of the 4th amendment to protect citizens from government overreach?
 
It rules that the athletes rights were violated, however both the state and the officers have qualified immunity because there was no precedent that they in fact were violating rights.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: WIBadger
Haven't followed this closely. How is it working out for athletes who gambled whilst attending schools in other states?
 
It rules that the athletes rights were violated, however both the state and the officers have qualified immunity because there was no precedent that they in fact were violating rights.
So none of the athletes will see a big check from the State?
 
The judge claimed that the cops have qualified immunity from prosecution. That’s a concept that should be discontinued as it prevents plaintiffs from receiving justice when public servants break the law.
Qualified immunity needs to be scrapped. Good cops doing the right thing dont need it. Bad cops with power trips and egos, use it as a license to get away with being bad cops.
 
Qualified immunity needs to be scrapped. Good cops doing the right thing dont need it. Bad cops with power trips and egos, use it as a license to get away with being bad cops.
So, if a LEO is chasing a criminal on foot, turns a corner and plows into a citizen, knocking them down, the LEO should be able to be sued for thousands?
 
So, if a LEO is chasing a criminal on foot, turns a corner and plows into a citizen, knocking them down, the LEO should be able to be sued for thousands?

Did that civilian get injured or suffer property damage? Then yes, they need to be made whole.

If someone injures someone while on the job, usually it’ll be the company’s insurance paying out, not the individual. In your example it would be the city’s liability policy.
 

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron