Former Player Speaks to NCAA per Eric Crawford

[UKortho]

And without independent proof, it's just one guy's word against another's. If the lawyers in the room don't wanna call it hearsay, let them offer another word for it. Doesn't change the quality of the evidence, which is pretty low.

"Elite program", my a$$...

Lyles first hand account regarding what he witnessed isn't hearsay. Not sure about that the quality of the evidence since it is still being compiled.

 

[Cardiotonic]

Lyles first hand account regarding what he witnessed isn't hearsay. Not sure about that the quality of the evidence since it is still being compiled.

You're right It's likely just a flat out lie.

 

[Atwood8665]

Unfortunately, I've been in various situations over the years where I have had to deal with a number of lawyers. And I have NEVER had a lawyer call the type of evidence that's being thrown around in this matter anything but hearsay. Namely because it can't be independently proven or disproven. Were all of the lawyers I have interacted with incompetent, at least on what constitutes hearsay evidence? I doubt it. Are lawyers a little careless referring to hearsay evidence? Perhaps.

But is it a rose by any other name? Sure it is. And that's the point... Because Lyle said it happened doesn't make it so. And his word is no better than Luke Hancock's saying, in effect, I know what went on in Minardi, and that didn't go on. So which guy's right, your honor?

Now, can the NCAA choose to believe whichever guy it wants to? Absolutely. But if the situation is like I described, it has nothing to do with the quality of the evidence. Except for text messages still waiting to be verified, all of this stuff is what I've always heard referred to as "hearsay". You call it what you want if you don't like the word...it doesn't change the quality of the evidence.

And I completely understand why an LPT fan would want to call it something better than hearsay--to try to make it better evidence. That's why your opinion on the subject means next-to-nothing.

Hearsay is not "rumor" or "innuendo" BTW.

And for the record, Pitino mentioned the word "hearsay" at the tip-off dinner today.

"Elite program", my a$$...

Like I have said in many past posts, I don't think the allegations are true and I hope they aren't. You can claim that I'm trying to make it more substantial than it is, but I promise that no matter what you call it, the testimony is not, in and of itself, strong evidence. I'm not being a homer and I'm not trying to bash your program, just trying to show that the testimony given is not hearsay. A person's personal account of what they experienced cannot and will never be hearsay. It can be a lie, but that still doesn't make it hearsay.

Hearsay is simply a statement made by a person, about events that they weren't a part of and didn't witness. Here, Lyle told investigators about his personal experiences. He may have been lying through his teeth, but it wasn't hearsay. Ask any of those lawyers what the definition of hearsay is and I guarantee you they will say "an out of court statement given to prove the truth of the matter asserted." It was drilled into our heads nearly every day of Evidence and will stick with us the rest of our lives. Part of hearsay is that it cannot be proven, and I think that's where the hangup is coming from. The reason it is hearsay is not because it might not be true, but rather that the court isn't given the chance to question the person who was there to determine whether their testimony is believable.

Also, rumor and innuendo can be forms of hearsay, just to clear that up too.
- Ex: "Frankie beat me up" - First person testimony
"I heard Frankie beat up that kid over there" - Rumor and hearsay

A lot of the allegations and claims made by people in this case are hearsay. For example, if the "madam" told someone what her daughter experienced, then that statement would be hearsay. It makes sense for Pitino to bring up "hearsay," since much of what is flying around is hearsay. But the testimony given by Lyle about his own experiences is not hearsay.

 

[Atwood8665]

And without independent proof, it's just one guy's word against another's. If the lawyers in the room don't wanna call it hearsay, let them offer another word for it. Doesn't change the quality of the evidence, which is pretty low.

"Elite program", my a$$...

Call it what it is. First hand witness testimony.

 

[Atwood8665]

But is it a rose by any other name? Sure it is. And that's the point... Because Lyle said it happened doesn't make it so. And his word is no better than Luke Hancock's saying, in effect, I know what went on in Minardi, and that didn't go on. So which guy's right, your honor?

"Elite program", my a$$...

If you have two conflicting stories that are unable to be proven or disproven, the court would err on the side of innocence, as we do in the American system of justice, which in this case means the NCAA would believe Louisville and everyone goes home, without sanctions.

 

[zipp]

Thanks for the lesson in "hearsay". Seriously. I'm not a lawyer and don't try to be one. I've simply worked with a lot of lawyers professionally over more than three decades, and I've witnessed firsthand--not hearsay!--how they ply their trade. Very little of that has been in court, but my experience is most of what attorneys do is not in a court setting.

I understand what evidence quality is, and I interpret the label of "hearsay", rightly or wrongly used, as low quality evidence. Even "eyewitness testimony", if held in higher regard, is not compelling coming from someone, for example, claiming to be a ho. If that's typical of the evidence against U of L, a U of L fan should feel good.

In the end, I'll say it again, you can call it what you want. It doesn't change the quality of the evidence. IMO, an LPT fan with an ax to grind needs to quit debating this stuff and focus on verifying text messages.

"Elite program", my a$$...

 

[lurkeraspect84]

I really don't understand why UK or it's fans are brought up in this mess. The issue at hand doesn't involve UK at all.

 

[lurkeraspect84]

Because you are our arch rival and at the moment are in the middle of a terrible scandal. I'm pretty sure if the shoe were on the other foot, you'd be interested too.

Yeah, but you wouldn't welcome UL fans on the UK board talking about it. Just STHU, on this board at least.

 

[KerryRhodes]

I really don't understand why UK or it's fans are brought up in this mess. The issue at hand doesn't involve UK at all.

Its UofL

Mr uofk fan........