Stuhoo

CW-1 is the financial adviser, who was working off a Securities Fraud charge from last year.

For sure for sure for sure. Doesn't mean that the evidence necessary for indictment and the public release of that information will ever be made public, though.

Maybe this could help to spell the beginning of the end for the abomination that is the "one-and-done" rule.

BREAKING NEWS: THE UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE HAS OFFICIALLY CHANGED ITS NAME TO "UNIVERSITY-6"

He left IUBB in April of 2014. Done - There's your positivity right there.

Hey Jason...Well...duh! Does ya thinks that Bowen was da only one that wanted to get his?

Hey pap...does "Hothoosiermama5" still check in on this board? I think her and Nips are dating or sumthin. :)

I could see it, but this investigation began in 2015. The undercover activity and recording authority probably not until 2016. Kenny Johnson left IUBB in April of 2014. Doesn't mean that Kenny isn't in big trouble, but from a statutory charging standpoint, his time with IUBB is probably off-limits. Could he tell a cooperation narrative of payments to Vonleh, Stan, or Troy from way back when? I guess so, but even that might never see the light of day. And that's if he was charged, pled, cooperated, and that unrecorded, historical narrative was released, which it probably wouldn't be.

Bruiser was at Drexel for the past many years. Nobody gets bribed to play at Drexel.

Only saying the others are all but impossible! No reason to think that Schilling is in the mix. Just that he's the only IUBB remote possibility.

Yes, that's the only IUBB-centric guy that I find remotely possible to have been caught up in this. And I don't see a glimmer of reason to think so yet. That's good, but ya never know.

Remember guys: Only future NBA players are "bribe-worthy." Archie never had a top 150 recruit at Dayton. Indictments like these are months in the making, and Archie just arrived at IUBB.

A few more thoughts. This time, not technical, but my own: Archie, Brusier, and Ostrom? No way. Too small a school, no budget for that nonsense, no recruits worth bribing. Archie since he took over? Extraordinarily unlikely. No top 50 recruits in our stable. And, the investigation is about two years old. This thing was cooking with gas a long time ago. And if they charged now, the operational activity was largely complete soon after Archie took over. The Tom Crean era? Just. Don't. See it. I just don't. Nervous because you think only Adidas schools will be affected? I doubt that will be the case.

Could be a second set of indictments coming. Could be among the Informations filed (via sealed filings). Could be sealed until arrests are formally made/defendants in custody

Sealed charging documents are very likely "Informations". Informations are federal charging documents that signify cooperation and a plea that will be unsealed at a later date.

Those are Jason Riley's words. "Wiretaps" can mean either a Title 3, or can be a general layman's term used to signify consensual recordings. FWIW, consensual recordings are targeted to meetings that are attended by CWs or undercover agents, and are FAR, FAR more effective. And that's what we have here. EDIT: Just saw another charging document re: Louisville and Bowen. Looks like they predicated a Title 3, used the results to flip a handler, and used the handler's consensually recorded conversations to predicate the introduction of an undercover agent. I'm still trying to digest the public documents; sorry for the evolving stream of updates.

Not a bad two sentence summary. It's a Financial Crimes Section case, using Fraud Against the Government and basic federal fraud statutes. AND (and this is critical): Operations like this are not initiated, they are predicated.

Nice! In the Chuck Person indictment it was CW-1. UC-1 is a very different animal. This is likely a Group 1 Undercover Operation. Look up what that entails... no small undertaking.

No....I believe they had a Cooperating Witness (named as "CW-1") bring $15k. Very different!

Si senor.

I have only read the Chuck Person indictment so far, but I have yet to see ANY mention of an undercover agent being utilized; only cooperating witnesses.

Let's just say I have more in common with the windshield, not the bug. ;)

Well...I have no way of knowing, but you certainly anything is possible when the kimchee hits the fan. But, probably not.

By the way guys, if you haven't surmised or have any legal questions, I know my way around this arena reasonably well ;)

AND HERE IT IS: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/998746/download What I'm seeing so far: The affiant is SA John Vouderis; a young agent who was local ADA until 2015. That means that he is NOT the primary case agent. It is common to use a member of the case team who will not testify as the affiant for charging documents. Three AUSAs on the indictment - that means it is a major resource effort. Statutes charged are broad in nature: Mail Fraud, Wire Fraud (+ deprivation of honest services wire fraud), Travel Act, etc. Having now skimmed the entire Chuck Person indictment, there does NOT appear to be an undercover introduction. It seems that the key to the matter is the CW, a "handler" who was flipped. CW-1 is more than likely looking at a criminal information once the case is resolved.