ISU Gambling Megathread
- Thread starter Cyclonemaniac
- Start date
What I would love to know is how far up the chain of command did this cluster **** go?
Who decided to green light this disaster?
I've always thought that there has to be a political angle here. Some elected official(s) who would then use the results to run on a "tough on crime/gambling" type message.
Iowa State is a public institution and we still do not know what the WBB settlement was.
Well the director of the Department of Public Safety got mentioned in the lawsuit. He reports directly to the governor.
From the reports I read a bit ago. Sanger was told to stop when he told his boss what he was doing. Then when he didn’t and came back with some meat in the bones, his boss green lighted it and they kept going. It never talked about if they went higher up and /or when whey did.
I hope they all sue the state and get a bunch of money and “Give the State the Bird.”
That might be the smokiest gun I've ever seen.
Also, it might be low key problematic for them that email explicitly calls out the U of I for trying to sweep sexual assault allegations under the rug.
Holy crap! It's right there in black and white, folks. The athletes' lawyer now has the receipt.
So the DCI used illegal investigative methods to investigate something they already conceded was likely not a violation of Iowa law, all in an effort to bring attention and notoriety to their department. And if any of the athletes lost their scholarship or eligibility as a result, "so be it."
Time for the state of Iowa to start backing up the brinks trucks.
So the DCI used illegal investigative methods to investigate something they already conceded was likely not a violation of Iowa law, all in an effort to bring attention and notoriety to their department. And if any of the athletes lost their scholarship or eligibility as a result, "so be it."
Time for the state of Iowa to start backing up the brinks trucks.
Ruined sone guys over this, makes me sick.
Yeah this shows how much of a stupid waste of time and resources this was to begin with, and that will help their lawsuit. Just some guy with a hard on for gambling and college athletes apparently.
But here is what made me sit up straight-
"They will do everything possible to keep it in house and sweep it under the rug. I have direct experience with this dealing with the U of I athletic department. We investigated a sexual assault by two football players years ago, and the athletic department was aware of it months before we found out. They tried to deal with it 'in house'."
I know this is nothing new really, but to see a law enforcement agent just blast it out directly as a fact is a damning thing, isn't it?
But here is what made me sit up straight-
"They will do everything possible to keep it in house and sweep it under the rug. I have direct experience with this dealing with the U of I athletic department. We investigated a sexual assault by two football players years ago, and the athletic department was aware of it months before we found out. They tried to deal with it 'in house'."
I know this is nothing new really, but to see a law enforcement agent just blast it out directly as a fact is a damning thing, isn't it?
Is this the Everson and Satterfield case in that "ghost" dorm room? That whole thing stunk to high heaven.
There's just so much that's gross about the e-mails.
First, you're the ******* DCI. Your job isn't about notoriety. You, more than perhaps any other agency in the entire State, should not be driven by notoriety. You should be driven by protecting people and investigating actual crimes, and doing so in a manner that will hold up in Court. If you do your job correctly, no one should know anything about what you are doing. Admittedly doing this for notoriety tells you every last thing you need to know.
Also, **** them for trying to equate this to U of I sweeping a sexual assault under the rug and not trusting the AD to take care of this. This is, without a shadow of a doubt, the type of thing each athletic department could have handled internally. There is no victim here. It's the result of some poor judgment and at worst resulted in a very, very minor criminal offense. You tell the athletic departments "hey, as a part of a search we noticed some irregular stuff coming from some of your players. We trust you will impart on them how important it is they aren't placing wagers, especially if they are underaged, and even more especially on games they are involved in. We are keeping an eye on it and if there is any more we may have to bring charges." Done. Fin. No doubt in my mind it gets taken care of.
First, you're the ******* DCI. Your job isn't about notoriety. You, more than perhaps any other agency in the entire State, should not be driven by notoriety. You should be driven by protecting people and investigating actual crimes, and doing so in a manner that will hold up in Court. If you do your job correctly, no one should know anything about what you are doing. Admittedly doing this for notoriety tells you every last thing you need to know.
Also, **** them for trying to equate this to U of I sweeping a sexual assault under the rug and not trusting the AD to take care of this. This is, without a shadow of a doubt, the type of thing each athletic department could have handled internally. There is no victim here. It's the result of some poor judgment and at worst resulted in a very, very minor criminal offense. You tell the athletic departments "hey, as a part of a search we noticed some irregular stuff coming from some of your players. We trust you will impart on them how important it is they aren't placing wagers, especially if they are underaged, and even more especially on games they are involved in. We are keeping an eye on it and if there is any more we may have to bring charges." Done. Fin. No doubt in my mind it gets taken care of.
Last edited:
1 - ******* stupid on their part to put that in writing. That alone should disqualify them from any sort of meaningful job. Anybody that has been in business knows there are certain things said and not documented. Note - not saying it makes it right.
2 - That's about as clear as day what the agenda was both from the get-go and in the continued push later on.
3 - That letter would basically be Lee Harvey Oswald making a film of exactly where and how he was going to shoot JFK and what his getaway route was going to be.
2 - That's about as clear as day what the agenda was both from the get-go and in the continued push later on.
3 - That letter would basically be Lee Harvey Oswald making a film of exactly where and how he was going to shoot JFK and what his getaway route was going to be.
Lee Harvey Oswald didn’t kill JFK though
Well the players didn't really commit much of a crime either - so works well
Yeah, i can picture this already as a GREAT 5 part mini-series on Netflix. I can see the text already on the screen "U of Iowa staff declined to comment for this series" LOL
