The Scheme (HBO)

Connell62

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
3,092
Has anyone watched the documentary on HBO Sports regarding the Christian Dawkins /college basketball scandal? I thought it was rather entertaining. It feels like this kid got a raw deal.

I'll be careful what I say as I don't want to spoil it for anyone that hasn't watched, but if that case wasn't entrapment, then what the hell is? Perhaps HBO didn't tell the whole story, but it felt like he tried to avoid what they ultimately pinned on him.

BTW..if you didn't already think that Will Wade and Sean Miller were lying *** cheats before, you certainly will after watching. Wade flat out admits to cheating and paying players.

How in the hell does this guy still have a job? That is a travesty!
 

kg01

Get-Bak! Coach
Featured Member
Messages
15,170
Location
Atlanta
Has anyone watched the documentary on HBO Sports regarding the Christian Dawkins /college basketball scandal? I thought it was rather entertaining. It feels like this kid got a raw deal.

I'll be careful what I say as I don't want to spoil it for anyone that hasn't watched, but if that case wasn't entrapment, then what the hell is? Perhaps HBO didn't tell the whole story, but it felt like he tried to avoid what they ultimately pinned on him.

BTW..if you didn't already think that Will Wade and Sean Miller were lying *** cheats before, you certainly will after watching. Wade flat out admits to cheating and paying players.

How in the hell does this guy still have a job? That is a travesty!

I didn't watch it because I wanted to avoid having my head explode all over again with this stuff.

There are some really political avenues I can do down to explain why/how some folks in the mix got pinched and others didn't. But there's no need to go there in the bball thread. Plus I don't want to give @Peacone36 another reason to hate me as much as he hates the coaching changes twitter clowns. :D

Honestly, I think it's clear nike was involved in this on some level - which explains why it was adidas-heavy as if they were bidding against themselves. :rolleyes: Plus it seems the investigation was ham-fistedly handled overall.

And yes, this was entrapment imho. I'd be curious how my personal attorney, whether he knows it or not, @RonJohn , thinks about this.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,995
I didn't watch it because I wanted to avoid having my head explode all over again with this stuff.

There are some really political avenues I can do down to explain why/how some folks in the mix got pinched and others didn't. But there's no need to go there in the bball thread. Plus I don't want to give @Peacone36 another reason to hate me as much as he hates the coaching changes twitter clowns. :D

Honestly, I think it's clear nike was involved in this on some level - which explains why it was adidas-heavy as if they were bidding against themselves. :rolleyes: Plus it seems the investigation was ham-fistedly handled overall.

And yes, this was entrapment imho. I'd be curious how my personal attorney, whether he knows it or not, @RonJohn , thinks about this.

I am not a lawyer (I'll skip the somewhat risque looking acronym). If you rely on my opinion as legal advice, you are likely to end up in prison.

I haven't watched this documentary yet. I will. What I read about it sounds like it is a one sided commercial for Dawkins. In my opinion in general, they all got railroaded. The trial was limited to what the compliance officials at the school thought. I compare it to being accused of stealing from my mother. If the only evidence that can be entered is whether I took $400 from my mother, then I would be convicted. If I was able to present that my mother told me to get $400 out of her safe, go to the pool supply store and buy pool supplies for her, and put the change back in the safe, that would appear different to a jury.
 

Connell62

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
3,092
I am not a lawyer (I'll skip the somewhat risque looking acronym). If you rely on my opinion as legal advice, you are likely to end up in prison.

I haven't watched this documentary yet. I will. What I read about it sounds like it is a one sided commercial for Dawkins. In my opinion in general, they all got railroaded. The trial was limited to what the compliance officials at the school thought. I compare it to being accused of stealing from my mother. If the only evidence that can be entered is whether I took $400 from my mother, then I would be convicted. If I was able to present that my mother told me to get $400 out of her safe, go to the pool supply store and buy pool supplies for her, and put the change back in the safe, that would appear different to a jury.

My thoughts exactly..What worse though - Spoiler Alert - the dude is on tape telling them that he didn't want to do it, that it didn't make sense.

So he took their money and "supposedly" put it back into the business that the FBI funded for him. Plus, the FBI was doing shady **** and wouldn't let that be brought into evidence.

The main FBI agent never once testified in either trial.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,995
My thoughts exactly..What worse though - Spoiler Alert - the dude is on tape telling them that he didn't want to do it, that it didn't make sense.

So he took their money and "supposedly" put it back into the business that the FBI funded for him. Plus, the FBI was doing shady **** and wouldn't let that be brought into evidence.

The main FBI agent never once testified in either trial.

In the college "bribe" scandal, supposedly the FBI strong-armed the main guy to change his description of the payments from "donations" to "bribes" and to trick suspects on the phone confusing them to admit to paying "bribes". It hasn't been a good couple of years for the integrity of the FBI.
 

kg01

Get-Bak! Coach
Featured Member
Messages
15,170
Location
Atlanta
I am not a lawyer (I'll skip the somewhat risque looking acronym). If you rely on my opinion as legal advice, you are likely to end up in prison.

I haven't watched this documentary yet. I will. What I read about it sounds like it is a one sided commercial for Dawkins. In my opinion in general, they all got railroaded. The trial was limited to what the compliance officials at the school thought. I compare it to being accused of stealing from my mother. If the only evidence that can be entered is whether I took $400 from my mother, then I would be convicted. If I was able to present that my mother told me to get $400 out of her safe, go to the pool supply store and buy pool supplies for her, and put the change back in the safe, that would appear different to a jury.

See that's the sound legal advice I plan on relying on (if I ever get arrested). Can you imagine a jury of my peers convicting me after that little anecdote? :D

Agree with you and ol' con, this whole thing stank. The pinnacle was that grand-standy press conference from the DA or w/e at the beginning of all this. It was all way downhill from there.
 

Connell62

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
3,092
See that's the sound legal advice I plan on relying on (if I ever get arrested). Can you imagine a jury of my peers convicting me after that little anecdote? :D

Agree with you and ol' con, this whole thing stank. The pinnacle was that grand-standy press conference from the DA or w/e at the beginning of all this. It was all way downhill from there.

Funny that you mention that.. The directors point that out.. "We've got your playbook"! Yeah, they had it and all the evidence they needed and didn't do ****.
 

LawTalkin Jacket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
342
I watched last night and I think it was definitely worth my time. I am a lawyer (not a criminal defense lawyer) and man it looked like a weak case and even if it wasn't technically entrapment, you would think jurors would see how much this case smelled. The fact that the FBI informant likely stole the cash and that was never disclosed seems like a Brady violation which should get the guy new trials, BUT I was floored that the judges quashed the defendant's subpoenas to the FBI informant. If I am bored I may go dig up the filings. Seem Dawkins should have been able to confront the informant in court AND would seem relevant that the coaches or school presidents should have had to come per subpoena and be cross-examined as to whether they were "victims" of beneficiaries of the "scheme." wow.

BUT, as it relates to NCAA sports, it screams out to me that GT had been handicapped for years and years with a Russell shoe deal and been missing out on the Adidas $$ and connections. It may not be a coincidence that, once GT went Adidas, Pastner is able to get K. Sturdivant and Usher, and coach Collins to get Jeff Simms, etc. What I learned made me optimistic about GT in view of the Adidas connection.
 

CuseJacket

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
19,554
Watched it. Loved it. Even though it was in large part a commercial for Dawkins.

The story laid out the main players in a helpful/easy to understand way - getting faces to names, particularly. And the documentary added history on Dawkins that I hadn't personally read before, which was fascinating by itself for a hoops junkie.

The 2 hours succeeded in changing my opinion around the possible influence of entrapment/coercion in the case. And I recognize the documentary was one-sided.
 
Top