Something is not right.

[Sec221]

From what I understand, if a recruit is on campus, someone is assigned to that recruit. They are not left alone to just wonder about.

Also, going in out and around campus would have been monitored by others too. Not only that, going in out of a dorm would have been monitored and recorded.

All of this to avoid personal liability issues, let alone recruiting issues. There is a report from someone in regards to the recruit's visit.

So who was the UofL person or people involved? Until they are interview by the NCAA, Smrt and UofL, we have no idea what took place in regards to UofL side of the story.

We only have a media source of a leak. Without the NCAA and/or UofL acknowledging the report, it is no more than speculation of what took place. It has to be verified or it doesn't matter.

McGee's lawyer, Scott knows something and is not bringing it forward for an obvious reason. He's waiting everyone out. It doesn't matter to him since he apparently has the "story" that protects his client (in turn, UofL). His language during the press conference was telling.

Let this stuff play out and hold judgement till the end. The accuser(s) will enjoy all of these distractions as it brings publicity to the book and most important, it draws attention away from how all of them were connected.

I have a feeling it will turn dramatically against the accuser given all of the inconsistencies within the book and interviews. Too many things that still do not make sense.

 

[zipp]

All of this latest info is hearsay which any lawyer will tell you is the weakest form of evidence.

And it sounds like today's reports may be contradictory, which is the worst case scenario if you're anti-U of L. He said-she said evidence is inconclusive when the stories differ.

The OP is correct...

 

[jho10]

Protecting his client, McGee in this case, does not mean protection for UL. In cases like this, self-preservation will rule the day.

 

[Sec221]

If McGee is clean, UofL is clean. He is the one who labeled as the point.

 

[jho10]

If McGee is clean, UofL is clean. He is the one who labeled as the point.

Yes, if McGee is clean you are correct. Clearly something was going on. To what extent we don't know. My only point is if McGee is not clean, he'll do whatever he needs to do to protect himself even at the expense of UL. I'm not saying this b/c I know him or how he feels or his loyalty to UL, I just think that this could be one outcome. People's motivations are greatly impacted when they're at risk and objective decision making can be skewed.

 

[Ipartiedwithhopgood]

People's motivations are greatly impacted when they're at risk and objective decision making can be skewed.

I do agree. Which means this applies to what Powell says to the Commonwealth if they dig in, compared to what she said in the book.

 

[jho10]

I do agree. Which means this applies to what Powell says to the Commonwealth if they dig in, compared to what she said in the book.[/QUOTE

Nice point

 

[Cardiotonic]

I do agree. Which means this applies to what Powell says to the Commonwealth if they dig in, compared to what she said in the book.

True

 

[LGwalt]

All of this latest info is hearsay which any lawyer will tell you is the weakest form of evidence.

I don't think you understand what "hearsay" means. Someone like Lyle relating what he witnessed is not "hearsay." Hearsay would be if Lyle had said: "I didn't see anything, but someone told me this is what they saw."

 

[zipp]

Definition of hearsay...

"...unverified, unofficial information gained or acquired from another and not part of one's direct knowledge..."

For example, if anyone but Lyle uses what Lyle has witnessed as evidence--and there's nothing else--it's hearsay...

 

[Ipartiedwithhopgood]

Right - Nobody has actually heard Lyle speak or read the transcript of what Lyle said to the NCAA, making it hearsay. His story leaked through a "source"....

So, we got that going for us.

I kid.

 

[davecmc]

So you're saying there's a chance?

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

 

[Sec221]

Yes, if McGee is clean you are correct. Clearly something was going on. To what extent we don't know. My only point is if McGee is not clean, he'll do whatever he needs to do to protect himself even at the expense of UL. I'm not saying this b/c I know him or how he feels or his loyalty to UL, I just think that this could be one outcome. People's motivations are greatly impacted when they're at risk and objective decision making can be skewed.

If McGee is guilty, the next thing would be to see if he was acting on his behalf or UofL's.

I personally think he's a patsy in all of this. The stooges are Powell, Cady, and the Lexington women. Find the money man and brains and you'll know why.

 

[LGwalt]

For example, if anyone but Lyle uses what Lyle has witnessed as evidence--and there's nothing else--it's hearsay...

It's not "hearsay" if the NCAA enters it into evidence. That's why this isn't "hearsay."

 

[REDFISTFURY3]

Come on guys McGee is dirty and has screwed this program bigtime. With his wantring to be a big shot with the recruits and players.

 

[Sec221]

It's not "hearsay" if the NCAA enters it into evidence. That's why this isn't "hearsay."

It's treated like a deposition.

 

[Cardiotonic]

It's not "hearsay" if the NCAA enters it into evidence. That's why this isn't "hearsay."

Where was it stated and by whom that the NCAA had entered anything to evidence ? Nowhere !

 

[Cardiotonic]

So you're saying there's a chance?

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

This is a joke right ? The Germans bombed Pearl Harbor......LOL
Japan bombed Pearl Harbor.

 

[CHAMPCAT11]

This is a joke right ? The Germans bombed Pearl Harbor......LOL
Japan bombed Pearl Harbor.

It's from the movie Animal House. A joke.

 

[Sec221]

It's from the movie Animal House. A joke.

I must be getting old. I got it.

 

[Cardiotonic]

I must be getting old. I got it.

Getting ? LOL

 

[zipp]

It's not "hearsay" if the NCAA enters it into evidence. That's why this isn't "hearsay."

The NCAA doesn't get to define the English language. It's hearsay if it meets the definition.

If the NCAA wants to indict or convict on the basis of such evidence, that's their ballgame and you have to play in it. That doesn't magically elevate the quality of the evidence.

And as we all know, the NCAA doesn't operate as a court of law.

 

[zipp]

It's treated like a deposition.

Fine, but on its own, a deposition is simply a body of hearsay evidence. Because it's recorded under oath doesn't change that. Just raises the stakes for the person providing the evidence...

 

[Sec221]

Like any deposition, it has to be proven with the facts at hand. If the proof doesn't exist, the information is no good.

 

[wreckcard#22]

um...to us it's hearsay; but to NCAA it's eye witness testimony...we didn't hear it from the source (hearsay) but they did (eye witness)...if there is eyewitness testimony to support the original claims, that's pretty heavy.

Bottom line is McGee was acting as an agent for UofL on campus when this purportedly went down, involving the corruption of minors and prostitution...if there is any evidence, this is a big time problem with big time penalties.

 

[thecycle21]

McGee is representing the University. The only question is did he provide money for the services. Is there a real money trail? That is the only connection that really matters for the NCAA. The NCAA has no authority over players going to strip clubs or dancers in dorms or even sex unless money was paid. If there is then the University will self impose penalties and the NCAA may take additional actions to make a point.

McGee being involved with a known prostitute then bringing that person close to recruits and players is disappointing and incredibly stupid. It doesn't even matter if money changed hands or even if nothing other the dancing happened in today's world people are brought down instantly by making an inappropriate comment. There was nothing to gain from this relationship long term with the chances of it going bad being pretty high.

All the other legal angles are a different animal. That is why you aren't going to hear from McGee.

 

[wreckcard#22]

money trail will be difficult to confirm, being relatively small amounts of cash bits at a time; but, eyewitness testimony, or circumstantial evidence such as the log of payments which may closely relate to ATM withdraws from McGee, bank deposit's and withdraws, etc. could lead to an understood confirmation.

In the book, tickets were also discussed as a form of payment...where did those come from and does she have the stubs are relevant regarding circumstantial evidence.

Unless McGee makes a definitive statement of guilt (which I think you're right in that he won't talk until he's subpoenaed), and then he'll likely seek immunity for testimony regarding others at UofL(Petino, Jurich) knowledge of these events.

I know we want this to all go away, but this process will be quite prolonged...even if it is subversive (which is looking less and less likely)...this will be quite messy.

I'm not an expert, but I did sleep in a Holiday Inn Express...haha...ha...

 

[Sec221]

um...to us it's hearsay; but to NCAA it's eye witness testimony...we didn't hear it from the source (hearsay) but they did (eye witness)...if there is eyewitness testimony to support the original claims, that's pretty heavy.

Bottom line is McGee was acting as an agent for UofL on campus when this purportedly went down, involving the corruption of minors and prostitution...if there is any evidence, this is a big time problem with big time penalties.

The NCAA, according to all of the media stuff only needs to have an appearance.

That being said you first have to establish an event did take place so that the appearance takes place.

Not as easy as you would think it would be. You would have to have all of the elements together at the same time, doing the things necessary to give the appearance of a rules violation.

Second you would have to have McGee identifiable as agent at the time to meet the minimum standard of appearance while everyone else was participating in the event.

You would the need for someone to witness him carrying out the act of or the appearance of a rules violation for the NCAA to either further investigate (the appearance of) and/or report the results.

 

[Cardiotonic]

The NCAA, according to all of the media stuff only needs to have an appearance.

That being said you first have to establish an event did take place so that the appearance takes place.

Not as easy as you would think it would be. You would have to have all of the elements together at the same time, doing the things necessary to give the appearance of a rules violation.

Second you would have to have McGee identifiable as agent at the time to meet the minimum standard of appearance while everyone else was participating in the event.

You would the need for someone to witness him carrying out the act of or the appearance of a rules violation for the NCAA to either further investigate (the appearance of) and/or report the results.

Are you by chance a Lawyer. Pretty good post.

 

[Cardiotonic]

From what I understand, if a recruit is on campus, someone is assigned to that recruit. They are not left alone to just wonder about.

Also, going in out and around campus would have been monitored by others too. Not only that, going in out of a dorm would have been monitored and recorded.

All of this to avoid personal liability issues, let alone recruiting issues. There is a report from someone in regards to the recruit's visit.

So who was the UofL person or people involved? Until they are interview by the NCAA, Smrt and UofL, we have no idea what took place in regards to UofL side of the story.

We only have a media source of a leak. Without the NCAA and/or UofL acknowledging the report, it is no more than speculation of what took place. It has to be verified or it doesn't matter.

McGee's lawyer, Scott knows something and is not bringing it forward for an obvious reason. He's waiting everyone out. It doesn't matter to him since he apparently has the "story" that protects his client (in turn, UofL). His language during the press conference was telling.

Let this stuff play out and hold judgement till the end. The accuser(s) will enjoy all of these distractions as it brings publicity to the book and most important, it draws attention away from how all of them were connected.

I have a feeling it will turn dramatically against the accuser given all of the inconsistencies within the book and interviews. Too many things that still do not make sense.

So do I.

 

[Cardiotonic]

From what I understand, if a recruit is on campus, someone is assigned to that recruit. They are not left alone to just wonder about.

Also, going in out and around campus would have been monitored by others too. Not only that, going in out of a dorm would have been monitored and recorded.

All of this to avoid personal liability issues, let alone recruiting issues. There is a report from someone in regards to the recruit's visit.

So who was the UofL person or people involved? Until they are interview by the NCAA, Smrt and UofL, we have no idea what took place in regards to UofL side of the story.

We only have a media source of a leak. Without the NCAA and/or UofL acknowledging the report, it is no more than speculation of what took place. It has to be verified or it doesn't matter.

McGee's lawyer, Scott knows something and is not bringing it forward for an obvious reason. He's waiting everyone out. It doesn't matter to him since he apparently has the "story" that protects his client (in turn, UofL). His language during the press conference was telling.

Let this stuff play out and hold judgement till the end. The accuser(s) will enjoy all of these distractions as it brings publicity to the book and most important, it draws attention away from how all of them were connected.

I have a feeling it will turn dramatically against the accuser given all of the inconsistencies within the book and interviews. Too many things that still do not make sense.

I agree.

 

[Sec221]

Are you by chance a Lawyer. Pretty good post.

I'm in real estate.

I've just spend way too much time with them.

 

[Cardiotonic]

I'm in real estate.

I've just spend way too much time with them.

LOL.......I know what you mean. Me too, way too much time.