Paniro named in ISU gambling probe

[Ski]

I don’t think Willie needs burned at the stake, but when it comes to legal issues, it’s best to not comment/tweet any absolutes. Especially if you are a journalist.

I genuinely hope Paniro gets to wrestle in college again.. It’s clear the NCAA (and professional leagues) need to change the way they handle gambling. Betting on your own team or league/ncaa is an absolute no no. If you’re old enough, you should be able to gamble on everything else.

If a NCAA basketball player betting on football gets himself into a deep financial hole and is approached by the bookie who says, "just shave points off your next game so we can make a killing and we will call it even", what does he do? The rule exists to protect the young athlete as much as anything else.

 

[nitlion6]

If a NCAA basketball player betting on football gets himself into a deep financial hole and is approached by the bookie who says, "just shave points off your next game so we can make a killing and we will call it even", what does he do? The rule exists to protect the young athlete as much as anything else.

That most certainly happens way more frequently than any of us realize and yet sports thrives. Punishing the snot out of someone for spitting some snuff juice on a sidewalk because you want to protect them from oral cancer is a ridiculous approach.

 

[tikk10]

From the article El Jefe posted I guess Johnson got swept up in a larger investigation.

I'm still mulling the indictment's odd construction where it cites five "legal and regulatory frameworks" having been contravened, because it's awfully suggestive and if I was a defense attorney I'd be going out of my mind.

I mean, it's disturbing to think that you can be indicted for Tampering by failing to adhere to a website's terms of service, yet that's one of the five regulatory frameworks the indictment cites as constituting the "wrongdoing" sought by the statute. Similar to the violation of university policies. To the extent those are wrongdoings, civil court might be a better forum.

And the indictment doesn't even allege that Johnson evaded taxes yet there it is as an additional basis for wrongdoing, only because Johnson et al. would be better situated to evade taxes, not that they had.

I think the prosecutors are likely going to succeed because the facts fit inside the statute, and there is a legitimate state interest in regulating gambling among minors (and regulating gambling by student athletes for that matter), but I don't have to like how they went about enforcing it.

 

[TheRealSmee]

From the article El Jefe posted I guess Johnson got swept up in a larger investigation.

I'm still mulling the indictment's odd construction where it cites five "legal and regulatory frameworks" having been contravened, because it's awfully suggestive and if I was a defense attorney I'd be going out of my mind.

I mean, it's disturbing to think that you can be indicted for Tampering by failing to adhere to a website's terms of service, yet that's one of the five regulatory frameworks the indictment cites as constituting the "wrongdoing" sought by the statute. Similar to the violation of university policies. To the extent those are wrongdoings, civil court might be a better forum.

And the indictment doesn't even allege that Johnson evaded taxes yet there it is as an additional basis for wrongdoing, only because Johnson et al. would be better situated to evade taxes, not that they had.

I think the prosecutors are likely going to succeed because the facts fit inside the statute, and there is a legitimate state interest in regulating gambling among minors (and regulating gambling by student athletes for that matter), but I don't have to like how they went about enforcing it.

Yep, suckful actions. I'd write this off to "trial by media" on the prosecution's part, but the reality is that of the very small sample size of prosecutors I know personally, this type of indictment is beyond par for the course for any charges of note (and absolutely so for things that might create a modicum of media interest). Throw anything and everything against the wall. Make the other side see the futility in time, reputation, and especially big money in fighting the charges. Get them to plea to something that allows you to show how you triumphed good over evil, and then get elected again or to a higher office (Odd, isn't it, that 2 of the last 3 PA guvs were AG's when they got elected?). Lather, rinse, repeat.

So what's the takeaway? Stay as far away as you can from the criminal justice system.

 

[tullfan68]

mother knows best!!

 

[TheRealSmee]

I am going to respectfully disagree. But to show you how much I'm bothered by this, I will tell you that I'm more bothered by your egregious misspelling of doo-doo.

While I'm sensitive to everything you write, in today's environment, journalists HAVE to be right. I understand oops and sorry, but if you're a voice, you've GOT to be right. What if I took Willie's tweet (or X) and bet $10K on Paniro to win the national championship at 149?

"... journalists HAVE to be right."
Yeah, I get it. We take this title "journalist" and imbue it with a sense of professionalism and morality and respect and the ability to tell the truth. So we the people know what's happening, gosh darn it! It's a wonderful Fourth Estate-type belief that has never been close to the truth. I rarely read something in the "press" I can't pick apart in minutes. Grab a beer tonight, sit down in front of the big screen TV, and watch "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance," or "Absence of Malice." There's some realistic journalism.

All that said, I too am more bothered by the egregious misspelling of doo-doo.

 

[El-Jefe]

If a NCAA basketball player betting on football gets himself into a deep financial hole and is approached by the bookie who says, "just shave points off your next game so we can make a killing and we will call it even", what does he do? The rule exists to protect the young athlete as much as anything else.

This is exactly what happened in the 1990s Arizona State point shaving case, except they didn't stop with 1 game.

 

[mjmirv]

If a NCAA basketball player betting on football gets himself into a deep financial hole and is approached by the bookie who says, "just shave points off your next game so we can make a killing and we will call it even", what does he do? The rule exists to protect the young athlete as much as anything else.

That’s why I said “Betting on your own team or league/ncaa is an absolute no no”. I wrote “NCAA” because no NCAA athlete should bet on any NCAA sport. No NBA players should bet on any NBA game. etc. etc.

I understand there might be a gray area with an NBA player betting on an NFL game because he may know a guy from college. Where do you draw that line? I don’t know. To say athletes that can legally gamble should not be allowed to make any bets of any kind seems a little too strong handed in today’s world.

 

[Phantom of the Palestra]

Seconded…..but raise your hand if you’d be ok with law enforcement spending the public dime tracking down Hawkeye violators ✋

I couldn't find the hand raise emoji.

 

[WexfordWarrior]

Seconded…..but raise your hand if you’d be ok with law enforcement spending the public dime tracking down Hawkeye violators ✋

 

[NittanyChris]

If a NCAA basketball player betting on football gets himself into a deep financial hole and is approached by the bookie who says, "just shave points off your next game so we can make a killing and we will call it even", what does he do? The rule exists to protect the young athlete as much as anything else.

Exactly this. Also, this is how it jeopardizes the integrity of the sport even if betting on your own team to win.

 

[Eyecatcher]

Below this text stands a bronze statue imploring you to hold strong and don’t enter a four leg parlay in hopes of saving your weekend.

 

[tullfan68]

no worries the Brands brothers will pay off all witnesses!

 

[HikeNatParks]

I think this is why journalists typically don't report things from single sources. Because those single sources can be wrong.

Sidebar: Careful with the word “journalist.” Means something different than it once did. Their output used to provide the most objective, honestly-sourced intel that unbiased reporters could uncover. Today, it’s often just words shaped to support the provider’s opinion or view. We’ve painfully learned that “never having to identify a source” means the source can be fictional, the story an utter lie. With never a consequence for inaccuracy (see an addict’s laptop and 51 intelligence officers unjailed for a collusive lie that seated a senile dictator in a country once known for liberty), “journalists” largely write whatever they want. That said, the reporting on a non-political story like this may be accurate.

 

[anon_d29z1jdixxwey]

Sidebar: Careful with the word “journalist.” Means something different than it once did. Their output used to provide the most objective, honestly-sourced intel that unbiased reporters could uncover. Today, it’s often just words shaped to support the provider’s opinion or view. We’ve painfully learned that “never having to identify a source” means the source can be fictional, the story an utter lie. With never a consequence for inaccuracy (see an addict’s laptop and 51 intelligence officers unjailed for a collusive lie that seated a senile dictator in a country once known for liberty), “journalists” largely write whatever they want. That said, the reporting on a non-political story like this may be accurate.

That’s great. You make a fair point, but you have emphasize it with a fairy tale. Then you say, that’s not a fairy tale, a$$hole! And I say, no, you’re an a$$hole. And then this wrestling thread becomes yet another dumpster fire.

 

[PSU Mike]

Sidebar: Careful with the word “journalist.” Means something different than it once did. Their output used to provide the most objective, honestly-sourced intel that unbiased reporters could uncover. Today, it’s often just words shaped to support the provider’s opinion or view. We’ve painfully learned that “never having to identify a source” means the source can be fictional, the story an utter lie. With never a consequence for inaccuracy (see an addict’s laptop and 51 intelligence officers unjailed for a collusive lie that seated a senile dictator in a country once known for liberty), “journalists” largely write whatever they want. That said, the reporting on a non-political story like this may be accurate.

That took a turn …

 

[GogglesPaizano]

That’s great. You make a fair point, but you have emphasize it with a fairy tale. Then you say, that’s not a fairy tale, a$$hole! And I say, no, you’re an a$$hole. And then this wrestling thread becomes yet another dumpster fire.

The first one who resorts to name-calling, is tantamount to admitting defeat in an argument.

 

[anon_d29z1jdixxwey]

Let me try to get this back on track. 7 have been charged from Iowa and Iowa State. Is this “so far”? Are there likely more to come? Or is it likely that they identified these 7 and that’s that? My guess is that is it.

 

[anon_d29z1jdixxwey]

Let me try to get this back on track. 7 have been charged from Iowa and Iowa State. Is this “so far”? Are there likely more to come? Or is it likely that they identified these 7 and that’s that? My guess is that is it.

I’ll answer my own question…

The Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation, which has been leading the investigation, said in a statement Wednesday its investigation into Iowa and Iowa State athletes “is ongoing and may result in the filing of additional charges.”

Iowa indicated 26 current athletes were involved in the sports gambling probe, and Iowa State had “approximately 15” current athletes involved.

Not every player known to be involved in the NCAA’s sports wagering investigation has been charged in law enforcement’s sports gambling investigation.

 

[86PSUPaul]

Let me try to get this back on track. 7 have been charged from Iowa and Iowa State. Is this “so far”? Are there likely more to come? Or is it likely that they identified these 7 and that’s that? My guess is that is it.

7 wrestlers or 7 athletes?

 

[Folkstylefan]

Sidebar: Careful with the word “journalist.” Means something different than it once did. Their output used to provide the most objective, honestly-sourced intel that unbiased reporters could uncover. Today, it’s often just words shaped to support the provider’s opinion or view. We’ve painfully learned that “never having to identify a source” means the source can be fictional, the story an utter lie. With never a consequence for inaccuracy (see an addict’s laptop and 51 intelligence officers unjailed for a collusive lie that seated a senile dictator in a country once known for liberty), “journalists” largely write whatever they want. That said, the reporting on a non-political story like this may be accurate.

At what time did this objective, honest, lmao unbiased reporting ever happen. You must be with those that hate history. For that fantasy journalism has never happen with enough regularity to make it so.

 

[HikeNatParks]

That’s great. You make a fair point, but you have emphasize it with a fairy tale. Then you say, that’s not a fairy tale, a$$hole! And I say, no, you’re an a$$hole. And then this wrestling thread becomes yet another dumpster fire.

At what time did this objective, honest, lmao unbiased reporting ever happen. You must be with those that hate history. For that fantasy journalism has never happen with enough regularity to make it so.

Sorry for going off trail. My old-and-cranky acting up. Never thought it would trigger such distress, so I apologize for any grief caused. Fair warning. With my addled brain, it may happen again some time. Maybe get an emotional support animal ready.

 

[Hazy_Davey]

If a NCAA basketball player betting on football gets himself into a deep financial hole and is approached by the bookie who says, "just shave points off your next game so we can make a killing and we will call it even", what does he do? The rule exists to protect the young athlete as much as anything else.

This might have happened before sports gambling became available on pretty much everyone's phone, but I doubt someone from Draft Kings is reaching out trying to setup points shavings schemes. I'm sure they're out there, but doubt there are too many illegal bookies still operating. Similar to how the moonshining industry dried up when prohibition was repealed.

 

[jack66]

This might have happened before sports gambling became available on pretty much everyone's phone, but I doubt someone from Draft Kings is reaching out trying to setup points shavings schemes. I'm sure they're out there, but doubt there are too many illegal bookies still operating. Similar to how the moonshining industry dried up when prohibition was repealed.

You don't need a bookie to setup a point-shaving scheme.

With NIL and online betting, athletes can hatch their own schemes.

 

[TheRealSmee]

You don't need a bookie to setup a point-shaving scheme.

With NIL and online betting, athletes can hatch their own schemes.

Yeah, given technology today, I'm a fan of using the SEC as a model (that's the Securities and Exchange Commission, not the southern d-bags). Insider betting (trading) is a no-no, but otherwise have at it.

 

[vhsalum]

Admit it. We are all bummed the most, because this weakens Iowa State's chances of beating the Hawkeyes in the dual. The Hawks of course have already replaced all of their offenders in the lineup.

no they didn't.

 

[Cali_Nittany]

Sorry for going off trail. My old-and-cranky acting up. Never thought it would trigger such distress, so I apologize for any grief caused. Fair warning. With my addled brain, it may happen again some time. Maybe get an emotional support animal ready.

 

[El-Jefe]

Maybe get an emotional support animal ready.

 

[Cali_Nittany]

no they didn't.

 

[82bordeaux]

 

[El-Jefe]

Admit it. We are all bummed the most, because this weakens Iowa State's chances of beating the Hawkeyes in the dual. The Hawks of course have already replaced all of their offenders in the lineup.

Iowa seems focused on adding offenders.

 

[anon_d29z1jdixxwey]

The first one who resorts to name-calling, is tantamount to admitting defeat in an argument.

What about the first one that resorts to “Sorry for going off trail. My old-and-cranky acting up. Never thought it would trigger such distress, so I apologize for any grief caused. Fair warning. With my addled brain, it may happen again some time. Maybe get an emotional support animal ready."?

 

[Kale_yeah]

When you register for the draft at 18 yrs of age ,you should be legally allowed to drink and gamble, or make the draft age 21.

 

[anon_d29z1jdixxwey]

When you register for the draft at 18 yrs of age ,you should be legally allowed to drink and gamble, or make the draft age 21.

 

[TheRealSmee]

View embedded media

Sergeant Hulka was correct, but Selective Service registration started (1980) the year before Stripes came out (1981). The purpose of registration is to "provide our Nation with... the most prompt, efficient, and equitable draft possible, if the country should need it." Meaning that Kale is also correct when he writes, "When you register for the draft at 18 yrs of age," even though an actual draft is not currently ongoing. Just sayin'!

 

[Chickenman Testa]

Sergeant Hulka was correct, but Selective Service registration started (1980) the year before Stripes came out (1981). The purpose of registration is to "provide our Nation with... the most prompt, efficient, and equitable draft possible, if the country should need it." Meaning that Kale is also correct when he writes, "When you register for the draft at 18 yrs of age," even though an actual draft is not currently ongoing. Just sayin'!

All that said, having to register for a hypothetical (but highly implausible) future draft does not equal actually drinking and gambling. Now, if you actually had a service obligation at that age (e.g. were in the service) at 18, then bootstrapping a right to drink/gamble would be fair. As it is, all you’ve done at 18 is fill out a form - hardly a privation that might be counterbalanced by being allowed to drink and gamble.

 

[PSU_Pride_93]

When you register for the draft at 18 yrs of age ,you should be legally allowed to drink and gamble, or make the draft age 21.

You can gamble in a lot of states at the age of 18, that’s not an issue. However sports gambling which is mainly online, i disagree, especially when you can gamble on potentially your own university as we’ve seen. Which means that many individuals are too immature to actually properly gamble on sports. And we see the same exact thing in professional sports. You give an inch and someone will take a mile.

 

[PAgeologist]

All that said, having to register for a hypothetical (but highly implausible) future draft does not equal actually drinking and gambling. Now, if you actually had a service obligation at that age (e.g. were in the service) at 18, then bootstrapping a right to drink/gamble would be fair. As it is, all you’ve done at 18 is fill out a form - hardly a privation that might be counterbalanced by being allowed to drink and gamble.

I registered for the NFL and MLB drafts also but they didn't want me either.

 

[Chickenman Testa]

I registered for the NFL and MLB drafts also but they didn't want me either.

They are clearly ageist!

 

[El-Jefe]

I registered for the NFL and MLB drafts also but they didn't want me either.

If you register for the WNBA draft, will anyone notice?