Wow, College Coaches Arrested by FBI

Donate To GopherHole




WCCO: U Officials Haven’t Been Contacted By FBI In Basketball Scandal

For now, the Gopher basketball program, led by coach Richard Pitino, Rick’s son, is not being investigated. University officials said Wednesday they have not been contacted by the FBI and had no comment on the investigation, since the school is not involved in any way. Officials also said no individuals in the athletic department are being investigated, and nobody has been contacted by investigators.

Richard Pitino was not available for comment on Wednesday.

http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2017/09/27/university-minnesota-gophers-fbi-basketball-scandal/

Go Gophers!!
 


gopherhoopsguy said:
Duke , Kentucky Indiana with Thompson all of a sudden reclassify brother of Sean Miller. Oregon , Baylor so many are going down.
Click to expand...

Tell me more about Duke getting caught up in this, hope it's true (I'm obviously not a Duke fan)...
 



It will be interesting to see in the end who is clean and who isn't from this.

Maybe this is why the Big Ten hasn't won a title since Mateen Cleaves.
 



Bad Gopher said:
Hadn't thought of that. Hypothetically, Gaston taking us down would be worse than Russ taking us down.
Click to expand...

Not worried unless I hear George Dornwhatever has a son who is a reporter for the Pioneer Press.
 

http://www.scotusblog.com/2010/06/honest-services-law-pared-down/

Enron's ghost:

It should be noted that the FBI case rests on the interpretation of "honest services". As this analysis pointed out in 2010, the Supreme Court pared down the law's usage and left some doubt as to how the court may rule in the future. (Look at the dissenters to the 2010 decision).

For nearly a quarter of a century, federal prosecutors pursuing corruption cases — involving public officials and those in private life — have had a broadly worded criminal law available, and they have used it both creatively and expansively. On Thursday, the Supreme Court, while refusing to strike down the law under the Constitution, pared it down to what the majority called its “solid core”: the law may be used only to prosecute bribery or kickbacks. The Court suggested that Congress may want to try to expand the law’s reach, but warned the lawmakers to approach that prospect with constitutional hesitation...


...Three separate rulings, threatening (though not quite nullifying) convictions or prosecutions in three different criminal corruption cases, put an exclamation point on the defeat for government prosecutors in their efforts to salvage wide discretion in employing the so-called “honest services fraud” law, enacted in 1988 in an attempt to overturn a 1987 Supreme Court ruling....


...Those parts of the ruling, in the main opinion written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, had the support of Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., and Justices Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and John Paul Stevens. Justices Antonin Scalia — a long-time critic of the “honest services” law — would have struck down the law as too vague to satisfy the Constitution. His opinion had the support of Justices Anthony M. Kennedy and Clarence Thomas.

The dissenters argued that the majority had not simply reinterpreted the “honest services” law, but had actually enacted a new law as if it were doing a legislative task. Of all of the lower court rulings applying that law in specific cases, Justice Scalia wrote for the dissenters, “not one is limited to bribery and kickbacks. That is a dish the Court has cooked up all on its own.” Because the law’s meaning is so unclear, the dissenters said, it cannot be salvaged by an act of judicial “invention.”
 





You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom