Iowa Department of Public Safety releases statement on sports wagering investigation
- Thread starter NorthernHawkeye
- Start date
Your position is:
“It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out. Two sides to every story, legalities and otherwise.”
That’s it? Gonna Switzerland it? No inkling something went wrong here?
That's for the courts to decide.
Even so, if determined legal, and if it was a fishing expedition, I don't approve.
Good question. The student athletes have something called and injury in fact which is one of the key components a federal court will evaluate in relation to standing. These athletes were in fact injured by the actions of the state
For example, in Laird v. Tatum, the Court held that plaintiffs challenging a domestic surveillance program lacked standing when their alleged injury stemmed from a "subjective chill," as opposed to a "claim of specific present objective harm or a threat of specific future harm."39 And in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, the Court explained that a concrete injury requires that an injury must "actually exist" or there must be a "risk of real harm," such that a plaintiff who alleges nothing more than a bare procedural violation of a federal statute cannot satisfy the injury-in-fact requirement.40
The student athletes may not want to sue but they should do so in federal court. What the state did here is egregious
Iowa athletes suing over betting investigation
More than two dozen athletes who were based in Iowa have filed a federal lawsuit alleging state criminal investigators violated their constitutional rights during a widespread sports wagering investigation.
What happens if the state settles for millions of dollars . . . will you still be waiting for the courts to decide???? Besides we already know it was a fishing expedition. Done at multiple college facilities, before they finally got the information needed . . . ya know to actually get a warrant.
Email from Iowa DCI agent.
He actually out this in an email.
I must have missed the State’s statement on this:
“As far as the coaches, players, and managers are concerned, we don't necessarily have a crime on the books in lowa, but I think it would be a good idea to report them to the University, the Big Ten, and the NCAA. If they get suspended or get a scholarship taken away, so be it.
He actually out this in an email.
I must have missed the State’s statement on this:
“As far as the coaches, players, and managers are concerned, we don't necessarily have a crime on the books in lowa, but I think it would be a good idea to report them to the University, the Big Ten, and the NCAA. If they get suspended or get a scholarship taken away, so be it.
Nor a warrant. Taxpayers gonna be left holding the bag again.
Brenna Bird should be fired over this. She's the boss, and although not responsible for the initial f*** up, she has shown ZERO leadership. She's the one clearly trying to sweep something under the rug as Special Agent Adkins bemoaned about the schools and local PDs covering things up.
Brenna Bird’s office does not oversee DCI. Brenna Bird’s office, however, will be actively defending the merits of DCI’s actions in the federal lawsuit.
Only an absolutely incompetently run AG’s office wouldn’t know about these communications. The threat of a lawsuit has existed for quite some time. In light of that, the AG’s office should have been “all over” these issues, doing an internal investigation, interviewing the key DCI agents, examining critical documents, etc.
You can’t convince me that folks higher up the ladder are just learning about this stuff now. You’ve had Bird making a public statement something to the effect of “we’ve seen no evidence of wrongdoing and are not concerned about DCI’s actions.” You’ve had a state rep (who happens to be a DCI agent) make an impassioned speech about DCI being wrongly criticized and DCI being well within their authority to do what they did.
To my knowledge, the AG’s office could open a criminal investigation and potentially pursue criminal charges against the agents. (Criminal lawyers help me here)
So … what will it be? AG’s office defend the actions or take the opposite approach and open a criminal investigation?
The AG’s office won’t be able to run and hide from this …
Only an absolutely incompetently run AG’s office wouldn’t know about these communications. The threat of a lawsuit has existed for quite some time. In light of that, the AG’s office should have been “all over” these issues, doing an internal investigation, interviewing the key DCI agents, examining critical documents, etc.
You can’t convince me that folks higher up the ladder are just learning about this stuff now. You’ve had Bird making a public statement something to the effect of “we’ve seen no evidence of wrongdoing and are not concerned about DCI’s actions.” You’ve had a state rep (who happens to be a DCI agent) make an impassioned speech about DCI being wrongly criticized and DCI being well within their authority to do what they did.
To my knowledge, the AG’s office could open a criminal investigation and potentially pursue criminal charges against the agents. (Criminal lawyers help me here)
So … what will it be? AG’s office defend the actions or take the opposite approach and open a criminal investigation?
The AG’s office won’t be able to run and hide from this …
sigh. Yes, she's not technically their boss. She is, however, as the Attorney General, the highest ranking law enforcement official in the state. She made numerous statements in support of their actions and the case as a whole. She doesn't get to just wash her hands of the whole thing.
If she didn't know about any of the communications, or what they'd been up to once it became clear something fishy had been going on, then she's culpable as well for sheer incompetence.
As that Attorney General, when it comes to the actions of law enforcement in the state, the buck stops with her.
We can agree to disagree on this.
The DPS/DCI is an independent agency.
I suspect if this was Tom Miller (D), the reaction here would be quite different.
Yes, you would have posted until you were blue in the face about his interference and bungling.
Bird should be fired. She’s proving that she’s a raging incompetent more interested in political theater than in protecting the rights of Iowans.
She should have already. Northern is too brand loyal to admit that. A competent AG would have done so immediately. Now the state is getting pummeled in the courts, and well behind in the PR battle.
Just curious, why don’t you count the court filings from a few months back that detailed the actions taken here, leading to a subsequent dropping of all charges, as “getting pummeled”?
There haven’t been any court rulings per se because prosecutors realized they had losing hands. Based on what’s come out since, there’s not likely imo to be ANY court rulings because I think it’s far more likely to be settled out of court.
Based on what we know now, do you think there’s any defense of what state investigators did?
I've said from the start that I have issues with fishing expeditions by law enforcement. Guardrails need to be in place to prevent such.
From a strictly legal perspective, I'm interested in seeing a court ruling on the legality of their actions.
This whole time, my biggest question was, why were the universities getting informed about a rule violation from the DCI? I guess we now have an answer. Chris Adkins specifically stating he wanted the DCI to go after people breaking Big Ten and NCAA rules. If he keeps his job, that is some major rug-sweeping.
Not a fan of wasting tax dollars on investigating victimless crimes. Especially since we are talking about on average a very low amount per wager.
I would layoff a lot of agents if this is the top priority. Or any priority.
What’s next? Lost tax revenue from garage sales and lemonade stands?
I would layoff a lot of agents if this is the top priority. Or any priority.
What’s next? Lost tax revenue from garage sales and lemonade stands?
I found that comment curious as well given that county attorneys ended up filing various charges.
The dismissal of the criminal charges against all defendants who were fighting the charges effectively (conveniently?) precluded you from the very information you seek.
For me, the dismissal of the charges before any judge presided over an evidentiary hearing tells me a lot about whether the searches met constitutional requirements.
Two follow up questions:
1. If the State settles with the group of athletes, will that be sufficient basis for you to conclude that DCI acted outside permitted lines?
2. If simply settling doesn't convince you, is there a "base" amount of a settlement that will lead you to conclude that DCI acted outside permitted lines?
Underage were charged I think.
I’m guessing the comment was directed in the smaller context of players who were of age. No crime but what do we do?
Answer - report them to Iowa and the NCAA to f up their season.
We're some alleged to have used accounts under other's names?
Didn't that dismissal also cite the county attorneys inability to obtain a response from the company?
Those court rulings already exist. It is blatantly unconstitutional to utilize geofencing in this wah.
The only court rulings that should happen here is a civil judgment and hopefully a criminal prosecution of these agents. Accepting a settlement on both would be fine as long as there is a full disclosure of evidence to the public
Prosecutors dismiss gambling charges against 4 ex-Iowa State athletes, including Broncos' Eyioma Uwazurike
Uwazurike was suspended by the NFL in 2023 for betting on games during his rookie season.
sports.yahoo.com
All charges dropped against Cyclone athletes in sports gambling investigation
STORY COUNTY, IOWA — Prosecutors in Story County are dropping the charges against four current and former Iowa State Cyclone athletes after new court documents this week showed that a DCI inv…
who13.com
Atkins' email tells me a lot. For me, statements made before the proverbial "shit hits the fan" carry a great deal of credibility. Statements "after the fact" are often structured to serve as a CYA. Atkins' email is, IMO, akin to an admission.
In his motion, Matchan wrote that GeoComply “has failed to respond” to his inquires this week.
Prosecutors drop charges against former Iowa State athletes in gambling investigation
An assistant Story County attorney cited evidence that DCI investigators used gambling tracking software inappropriately
www.desmoinesregister.com
I believe so but I don’t think that’s a crime if both are of age. It hides an NCAA violation potentially but it’s not criminal to share a DK account (I think).
Is it illegal for you to conduct transactions in your parents bank account if they are aware and are OK with it?
It isn't illegal. It can become illegal of course but as a stand alone act it is not illegal
How confident must that dude be to put that shit in writing.
Prosecutors dismiss gambling charges against 4 ex-Iowa State athletes, including Broncos' Eyioma Uwazurike
Uwazurike was suspended by the NFL in 2023 for betting on games during his rookie season.
All charges dropped against Cyclone athletes in sports gambling investigation
STORY COUNTY, IOWA — Prosecutors in Story County are dropping the charges against four current and former Iowa State Cyclone athletes after new court documents this week showed that a DCI inv…
Atkins' email tells me a lot. For me, statements made before the proverbial "shit hits the fan" carry a great deal of credibility. Statements "after the fact" are often structured to serve as a CYA. Atkins' email is, IMO, akin to an admission.
Do attorneys ever try and unpack old cases when they discover a bad actor like this? Say an attorney had a client accept a plea deal on a completely unrelated case 2 years ago. Does anyone ever go back after seeing this level of bullshit and redo discovery? Reopen a case? Feels like this type of thing should radiate backwards for those convicted or that for example took an Alford plea.
