ISU Gambling Megathread

[Halincandenza]

Hope you’re right. Find it strange how Iowa state has got hammered the most. They still haven’t announced the other four impact players for Iowa state football yet.

Probably because they chose game days or weekends to look for violations and with the large gathering of people in those cities in game days it would make sense to target those cities as say just looking all over the state. Most likely to find violations at those times.

 

[Halincandenza]

I think it's also undoubtedly a message from the defense attorney to the prosecutor saying "how much time do you want to devote to prosecuting a victimless aggravated misdemeanor"

Exactly.

 

[Stormin]

I have no idea who was targeted. But I do think if the facts play out anything like what the lawyer has suggested they would have a problem on their hands.

To your example, of course you don't have a defense to that because of the impracticality of one cop pulling over 4-5 different people at once. But if law enforcement goes and breaks up and underage party and lets all the athletes go but writes all the band kids tickets, do you not think they'd have a problem on their hands? It comes down to selective enforcement aimed blatantly at a certain group of people.

There's no practical reason why you'd charge Dekkers, Enyi, Sauser, Ulis, etc. and not charge the fellas down at the frats who are doing the same thing. I'd be amazed if they could not, with some level of diligence, bring these same charges against hundreds, if not thousands, of other non-athletes.

Privileged athletes and children of privileged families are let off all the time. Been that way for years around here. Poor and those without any clout get nailed. We have always had selective enforcement.

 

[Clonefan32]

Privileged athletes and children of privileged families are let off all the time. Been that way for years around here. Poor and those without any clout get nailed. We have always had selective enforcement.

No disagreement here.

 

[Clark]

I have no idea who was targeted. But I do think if the facts play out anything like what the lawyer has suggested they would have a problem on their hands.

To your example, of course you don't have a defense to that because of the impracticality of one cop pulling over 4-5 different people at once. But if law enforcement goes and breaks up and underage party and lets all the athletes go but writes all the band kids tickets, do you not think they'd have a problem on their hands? It comes down to selective enforcement aimed blatantly at a certain group of people.

There's no practical reason why you'd charge Dekkers, Enyi, Sauser, Ulis, etc. and not charge the fellas down at the frats who are doing the same thing. I'd be amazed if they could not, with some level of diligence, bring these same charges against hundreds, if not thousands, of other non-athletes.

you think it's practical for officers to go get and comb through gambling data of every single person in Iowa?

They focused on the people who could influence the outcome of their betting (potentially) Where I agree with you and the attorney is if they only did this for the male athletes.

Your example is interesting because I wonder if they would have a problem on their hands (legally speaking, public relations would be a different story) I'm not so sure.

 

[jdolson27]

Probably because they chose game days or weekends to look for violations and with the large gathering of people in those cities in game days it would make sense to target those cities as say just looking all over the state. Most likely to find violations at those times.

That makes sense

 

[Clonefan32]

you think it's practical for officers to go get and comb through gambling data of every single person in Iowa?

They focused on the people who could influence the outcome of their betting (potentially) Where I agree with you and the attorney is if they only did this for the male athletes.

Your example is interesting because I wonder if they would have a problem on their hands (legally speaking, public relations would be a different story) I'm not so sure.

It's not about whether it's practice for officers to comb through gambling data for every single person in Iowa. It's about have a legal charge that has nothing to do with their status as athletes (i.e. falsifying your account), and choosing to only apply it to a certain, extremely specific group of people. I would imagine that male athletes at Iowa or Iowa State can't even make up 1% of the people who are falsifying information to get a gambling account, but I'd venture to guess they make an extraordinarily high percentage of the people actually charged with that crime. There's a tipping point where it goes from law enforcement/prosecutorial discretion to overt and obvious selective enforcement.

 

[Statefan10]

It's not about whether it's practice for officers to comb through gambling data for every single person in Iowa. It's about have a legal charge that has nothing to do with their status as athletes (i.e. falsifying your account), and choosing to only apply it to a certain, extremely specific group of people. I would imagine that male athletes at Iowa or Iowa State can't even make up 1% of the people who are falsifying information to get a gambling account, but I'd venture to guess they make an extraordinarily high percentage of the people actually charged with that crime.

That's a good point.. Why aren't they pulling data of all students across the state of Iowa?

 

[CyNews]

Well, he is a grown ass man though.

Guess you can’t fix ‘stupid.’

 

[CascadeClone]

Disagree. I don’t see anyone arguing they are innocent, but it could have been an illegal search.

My interpretation is they are arguing there must have been other students breaking the law - why only bring cases against high profile male athletes? It has nothing to do with illegal search.

But only charging SOME people when you have caught a bunch of people - that IS something that could get those charged out of legal trouble (tho not NFL/NCAA trouble) and perhaps open the door to a lawsuit.

 

[SMG]

My interpretation is they are arguing there must have been other students breaking the law - why only bring cases against high profile male athletes? It has nothing to do with illegal search.

But only charging SOME people when you have caught a bunch of people - that IS something that could get those charged out of legal trouble (tho not NFL/NCAA trouble) and perhaps open the door to a lawsuit.

So did they geo fence at UNI and Drake? Any of the smaller schools?

 

[Gunnerclone]

I think it's also undoubtedly a message from the defense attorney to the prosecutor saying "how much time do you want to devote to prosecuting a victimless aggravated misdemeanor"

And in a high profile case like this the lawyers are probably going to work for pretty cheap.

 

[mark82]

For me the bottom line is that a few players in the program presumably made some incredibly stupid bets that hurt ISU, the coaches and the other players. They knew the rules and supposedly violated them anyway.

What happened at other schools or with other people is irrelevant. Focus on Iowa State and put it behind us.

 

[werdnamanhill]

Iowa Gambling Commission re-affirmed today that there is no evidence to suggest the integrity of any Iowa or Iowa State sporting events should be thrown into question.

 

[khardbored]

SIAP, but since this whole thing broke, I've thought of this GIF:

 

[t-noah]

[facepalm]

Well to be fair Mandalay bay in the background sort of reminds a person of the Towers

No, isn't this the new exit off of I-35, using those fake palm trees?

 

[t-noah]

I'm literally watching Suits, so...

Is it any good? Netflix seems to be really pushing it.

 

[ripvdub]

Listening to cdub on the morning rush yesterday, but I'm sorry, the coaches did know that was coming.

 

[3TrueFans]

Given all these circumstances, if Hunter Dekkers is ruled permanently ineligible, he should sue the NCAA for selective enforcement.

You lost me here.

 

[06_CY]

You lost me here.

Yep, I was all good until we got to that part.