Former Player Speaks to NCAA per Eric Crawford
- Thread starter Knucklehank1
- Start date
Per Eric Crawford:
This particular player told a university investigator that no sex took place (that he knew of), and that the only money he saw changing hands came in the form of dollar bills thrown at the women in the room, according to the source, who spoke on the condition that the identities of player and source be anonymous.
The source also said that the player, who is mentioned in the book, claimed that former U of L director of basketball operationsAndre McGee, who Powell says arranged multiple meetings and paid her for the services of women who had sex with recruits and some players, was not present in the room on this occasion.
According to the source, the player told investigators that he never saw McGee hand money to anyone before or after. Powell's book, however, includes text messages -- that publishers say have been authenticated -- showing McGee making various meeting arrangements with Powell, and even discussing compensation.
http://www.wdrb.com/story/30218982/...player-told-investigator-of-strippers-in-dorm
Sounds a lot less damning than people jumped to.
This particular player told a university investigator that no sex took place (that he knew of), and that the only money he saw changing hands came in the form of dollar bills thrown at the women in the room, according to the source, who spoke on the condition that the identities of player and source be anonymous.
The source also said that the player, who is mentioned in the book, claimed that former U of L director of basketball operationsAndre McGee, who Powell says arranged multiple meetings and paid her for the services of women who had sex with recruits and some players, was not present in the room on this occasion.
According to the source, the player told investigators that he never saw McGee hand money to anyone before or after. Powell's book, however, includes text messages -- that publishers say have been authenticated -- showing McGee making various meeting arrangements with Powell, and even discussing compensation.
http://www.wdrb.com/story/30218982/...player-told-investigator-of-strippers-in-dorm
Sounds a lot less damning than people jumped to.
The problem is that this is the 2nd person to verify at least some of her claims. The NCAA doesn't operate on a reasonable doubt litmus test. One would make the natural jump that if strippers came there to dance, that they were compensated for that activity.
Glass half full version...
This new person (ex-player) refutes hearsay testimony that anything more took place. Anyone can take their clothes off, esp. a chick looking to be a baby mama for a future NBA player. Doesn't take money for that. And I don't know that's against any rules or laws.
An ex-player also has more credibility than a current NCAA basketball player like Lyle. A current player may be under pressure to tell the NCAA what he thinks it wants. And ex-player doesn't much give a damn...
Thus impermissible benefit, not improper.
The story went from strippers to UofL paying whores to have sex with recruits.
That would be improper.
The story went from strippers to UofL paying whores to have sex with recruits.
That would be improper.
According to the above article, it sounds like strippers who did not receive compensation other than singles thrown at them. If true, this is not as bad as it may have looked a few hours ago. We are only in the 1st qtr of this football game...
Great...so McGee at least did a great job of hiding that part of the transaction.
I think it also meets the preponderance of evidence test. That glass is actually 51% full...
And it was Katina who told you there was a "transaction"?
I think it is reasonable to assume that when a whore and her whore friends are brought into a dorm to dance and are feted as strippers normally are that it is reasonable to think that they did that for compensation. If any of the texts between her and McGee that talk about $ are authenticated then I think we are toast because 1) they talked about a transaction and an amount, 2) she and her friends showed up for the transaction 3) two different players verified that the transaction took place. If 1,2,3 appear to have occurred, then it could be reasonably assumed that 4) money changed hands.
If a player brought a stripper into the dorm to entertain himself and other players, there is nothing impermissible about that. We would like to think stuff like that doesn't happened, but we would like to think that college age kids out on their own don't do a lot of the other things that they do. Furthermore, can the player prove it was a paid stripper or some drunk girls trying to impress the basketball players who threw dollar bills at her.
Just not enough info in this account to prove anything shady. Bad behavior, yes. Shady or impermissible? Not enough info to conclude this.
Just not enough info in this account to prove anything shady. Bad behavior, yes. Shady or impermissible? Not enough info to conclude this.
No, Zipp, the ex-player didn't refute anything. He was speaking to a certain instance. I believe Powell said sometimes they had stripper parties. Other times were other things. Whomever leaked about Lyles talking said he corroborated the "gist" of what the book says. Anything close to the "gist" of what the book says is outrageous and I would hope you could agree with that. There is no reason to believe the ex-player would ever see money changing hands since McGee apparently texted about meeting places for that. On your second point, you have it backwards. The ex-player can say anything with impunity. He is facing no threat in either direction. It is Lyles who is under the gun to be truthful and I'm sure he was. To say he intentionally lied requires a wild conspiracy theory that you have already shot down by stating it would not be in the NCAA's best interest for the allegations in this book to be true. If that is correct, then they wouldn't force Lyles to incriminate UL in any way, yet it appears that he did. You can't have it both ways. One thing is clear now that Lyles has talked. Every basketball recruit who visited UL during this time period will be interviewed, at least if they are still under NCAA jurisdiction. They will all know that Lyles confirmed some things. In the near future I imagine we'll hear about many more corroborating statements. What happens then, I have no idea.
Not that I give a rat's a$$ what an LPT fan thinks, but I will rebut your points...
Now, why's an LPT fan so interested in this stuff anyway?
"Elite program", my a$$...
Hilarious that you quote a ho for anything credible... The ex-player in effect said that all "parties" weren't created equal. (He was also quoted saying the ho is a liar.) And if any money changed hands, it's important whether it was systematic or a one-off situation.
What you or I think is "outrageous" is irrelevant. If it was outside of NCAA rules, it needs to be addressed. If it wasn't, it's up to U of L to decide the standard it wants to set and maintain. I prefer a higher standard than just meeting requirements, but my preference doesn't matter.
If witnesses don't consistently say they saw money changing hands, then it's all hearsay evidence unless verified texts confirm something. If it's all hearsay, then it's important that most of the stories are straight.
Thanks for your help, but I think I have it straight... There's no reason for the former player to lie--no one can exert any influence over him nor does he THINK that could happen. In a current player's case, we know the following: (1) he knows why he's being interviewed; (2) he's told that even if he incriminates himself, he's fine as long as he tells the truth; and (3) he may or may not have partied hard while on his recruiting visit. So, if a kid partied hard, why not tell the NCAA what he THINKS it wants to hear? There's no downside. What I think we can both agree is that Lyle got a little on his U of L recruiting trip.
Actually, I welcome more interviews. If this all comes down to hearsay evidence, those interviews sure as hell better be consistent. And as you know, the more people who witness something, the more versions of the truth result.
Now, why's an LPT fan so interested in this stuff anyway?
"Elite program", my a$$...
Well, if texts indicate money, then we're having a different discussion.
As far as your "reasonable" argument, what makes the most sense to me is what a ho or someone of a ho's character wants the most... And that's to become an NBA baby mama. Trading $100 bills for a million dollar pension. All a smart ho wants is that OPPORTUNITY...
Sorry Zipp, but you can't convince your own UL fans, let alone me. It will all come out in the wash. Believe whatever fairytale you choose. You will be sadly disappointed at the ending.
You should be careful here.... people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Forget everything else. It all comes down to one thing. Where those text messages in the book REALLY from McGee? If they are there is proof he is paying with cash and university tickets for strippers for recruits and players.
Author Cady says they took Powell's actual cell phone to a forensic team who verified every text in the book was from Andre McGee's phone.
Author Cady says they took Powell's actual cell phone to a forensic team who verified every text in the book was from Andre McGee's phone.
It's interesting, is it not? One thing you keep saying has me confused. What Lyles said is not hearsay, it is eye witness testimony. The same would be true for anyone interviewed who had direct knowledge, meaning they were there. Have you seen the official visit form the head coach has to sign and some of the specific restrictions it has? Even what your former player admits is going to be a serious issue if a recruit was present.
You obviously don't understand what "hearsay" evidence is or means. Not specific to "hearing" or "saying" or being an eyewitness. It simply means you're taking the word of someone testifying, and under oath or not doesn't matter. Just as importantly, it means that you have no other evidence to confirm that person's word.
If a lot of people are saying the same thing, it is still hearsay but it means more. Harder to get a bunch of people to lie or keep their stories straight. But in essence, it is still hearsay without proof.
The issue I have seen with such evidence so far is that the stories aren't all the same. One stripper was naked, another had a swimsuit on. Money changed hands and it didn't. Recruits were exposed to things and they weren't. All of that inconsistency in hearsay evidence undermines its value.
In a court of law, that would be a big problem trying to get a verdict against someone. The NCAA has their own standards and can believe what it wants. But their job can be easy or hard depending on how convincing the evidence is. And I understand how a wayward LPT fan wants to see the evidence a certain way.
"Elite program", my a$$...
Zipp, I hope you are a better engineer than lawyer because it is clear you have absolutely no clue what hearsay means. None at all.
I will say this though, what you posted is so wrong it is funny. Kind of reminds of a kid I knew who thought BMW stood for British Motor Works and he was confident enough in that misconception to post it on the internet.
I will say this though, what you posted is so wrong it is funny. Kind of reminds of a kid I knew who thought BMW stood for British Motor Works and he was confident enough in that misconception to post it on the internet.
I could care less about the money. In my opinion the focus should be on the underaged kids here. If this actually went down you guys should be all over McGee. I mean if that was my 17 year old son that was put in that position I would be furious at whoever orchestrated that. It's wrong on so many levels but #1 on my list is the lack of respect and principal that McGee allegedly used.
I'm stunned we haven't heard from any of the parents but then again, they probably want to keep it under their hats.
Again, forget about the money and RP's role in this, if this is true than McGee is a disgusting individual.
I'm stunned we haven't heard from any of the parents but then again, they probably want to keep it under their hats.
Again, forget about the money and RP's role in this, if this is true than McGee is a disgusting individual.
OK, lets say absolutely no money exchanged hands between McGee and Powell. Powell and her girls were nothing more than groupies, who occasionally stripped for the players and maybe even had sex with them sometimes.
Well, how do you explain the 15 year old? Even if no money exchanged hands, a 15 year old was still in the dorms stripping for, and possibly have sex with basketball players.
Well, how do you explain the 15 year old? Even if no money exchanged hands, a 15 year old was still in the dorms stripping for, and possibly have sex with basketball players.
Well, a former player has confirmed that girls were in the dorm stripping. It's very safe to assume these girls were the Powell crew. Part of that crew was Powell's three daughters, one of which was 15 years old.
OK, so if we're not assuming that the strippers confirmed by the former player are Powell and her girls, then who are they? A totally random group of other strippers not associated with Powell?
Umm... you have a woman saying her and her girls stripped for the players in the dorms, and then you have a former UofL player confirming that there were strippers in the dorms.
That's not just some random coincidence. It's not even an assumption to think it was Powell and her girls that the former player saw, it's logic. Anyways, good luck with that.
That's not just some random coincidence. It's not even an assumption to think it was Powell and her girls that the former player saw, it's logic. Anyways, good luck with that.
Which former player confirmed that? I must have missed that. If you are talking about a former recruit jaQuan Lyle he never played for us. as far as what he confirmed no one knows for sure what he has or has not confirmed, so we will have to wait and see.
Then enlighten me, tidycat?
Hearsay is "unverified, unofficial information gained or acquired from another and not part of one's direct knowledge." And when a lawyer uses it in court, it is evidence not what he knows himself, but what he has heard from others.
The problem for a slapd!ck is that a 5-star recruit or a ho won't be going into court or an NCAA hearing to make their own arguments. So for the lawyers in those roles, it's all hearsay. In fact, I doubt that this type of evidence would ever even make it into court.
I do understand how an LPT fan would hope otherwise. BTW, you and the courier oughta open a slapd!ck (mal)practice together. You can specialize in cases built on hearsay evidence.
"Elite program", my a$$...
You're posting in a thread about a former player confirming strippers in the dorm, yet you must have missed it? Read the article linked in the very first post of this thread.
BTW, it is actually two former players that have confirmed strippers in the dorm. One also confirmed it to ESPN.
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bas...-player-says-strippers-visited-dorm-one-two-s
BTW, it is actually two former players that have confirmed strippers in the dorm. One also confirmed it to ESPN.
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bas...-player-says-strippers-visited-dorm-one-two-s
Powell has three daughters that worked for her, one of them was only 15 years old. Deny it all you want, makes no difference to me.
The player from the ESPN article says he remembers Powell's face. So, that proves it was Powell's crew that was in the dorms stripping. One of the strippers in Powell's crew was her 15 year old daughter.
Not to mention, just a few days ago UofL fans were attacking Powell's character and credibility because of the fact that she is a woman that pimped her underage 15 year old daughter out, but now all the sudden you refuse to acknowledge that she had a 15 year daughter that worked for her. Again, good luck with that.
The player from the ESPN article says he remembers Powell's face. So, that proves it was Powell's crew that was in the dorms stripping. One of the strippers in Powell's crew was her 15 year old daughter.
Not to mention, just a few days ago UofL fans were attacking Powell's character and credibility because of the fact that she is a woman that pimped her underage 15 year old daughter out, but now all the sudden you refuse to acknowledge that she had a 15 year daughter that worked for her. Again, good luck with that.
I'm all for a good basketball discussion, but it's hard to have one with someone who want's more than anything to "assume" the worst, forgive me for wanting to "assume the best.
Not sure what you want here, do you want to see us freak out without knowing the facts? You do know that this lady wants to hurt UL right, that is her main goal, so is it out of the question that she would make up parts of this story? Can you not agree that some of what she is saying may not be the whole truth? I don't think you can because you want this to be 100% true.
I really believe in the end it will turn out to be worse than card fans want and better than what uk fans want. Why don't we wait for facts to come?
Not sure what you want here, do you want to see us freak out without knowing the facts? You do know that this lady wants to hurt UL right, that is her main goal, so is it out of the question that she would make up parts of this story? Can you not agree that some of what she is saying may not be the whole truth? I don't think you can because you want this to be 100% true.
I really believe in the end it will turn out to be worse than card fans want and better than what uk fans want. Why don't we wait for facts to come?
