- Messages
- 15,709
What if Dawkins' accusations aren't crazy and have hard evidence already known to Dawkins' defense team?
Arrests coming due to college bball kickbacks
- Thread starter msargent1
- Start date
What if Dawkins' accusations aren't crazy and have hard evidence already known to Dawkins' defense team?
mstranahan
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,561
evidence would give him credibility
- Messages
- 15,709
Should we assume there is or isn't evidence?
mstranahan
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,561
Evidence is produced and seen. Crazy accusations hint at the existence of evidence. The former would bolster credibility. The latter would point to a convicted felon spewing conspiracy theories
g0lftime
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 5,917
News in Raleigh showed a letter from NCSU about Dennis Smith payoff. They claim legal fees up to $200K for the school and they claim had no knowledge of the money. They are trying to avoid NCAA punishment. It will be interesting if NCAA agrees it was solely between Smith family AAU and Adidas.
- Messages
- 15,709
So theres no evidence because you haven't seen it?
LibertyTurns
Banned
- Messages
- 6,216
There’s no such thing as keeping things confidential these days. If they had evidence some money grubbing stooge would have leaked it already to get a free meal at Golden Corral and a few free beers at the local dive.
ESPNjacket
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,531
And NC State with an interesting twist to this:
mstranahan
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,561
Never said there was or wasn't evidence. Just said it would be interesting to see if the guy already convicted will start throwing crazy crap out there. You asked if evidence would change that. I said yes. You seem to throw lots of accusations and innuendo around, but so far you seem pretty light on evidence yourself. Coincidence?
- Messages
- 15,709
I would have never questioned anything else you said, had you not opened with what appears to be a declaration that Dawkins has crazy accusations. It appears framed in a way that assumes there is no evidence to support the accusations, just that they're baseless from the open. Thus, my challenge to you.
mstranahan
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,561
You forgot to highlight the next six words... assuming he makes some big ones. I said that because he has nothing to lose (already convicted) and many people in that situation throw out crazy stuff to try and curry favor with the DA for sentencing relief and/or distract from their own transgressions by creating larger issues for the press and general public to ponder
Until he hits the stand, we won’t know what he will / won’t do.
Until he hits the stand, we won’t know what he will / won’t do.
Deleted member 2897
Guest
Follow the UNCheat model - fight back with arrogant obstinance. It has proven to work.
- Messages
- 15,709
I expected this retort. Big or little, you stated a declaration of crazy accusations. Size of the accusation is a separate matter from evidence being available.
- Messages
- 5,864
i believe both L'ville and Kansas have also filed for restitution.
The interesting thing in these cases are that the defense and prosecution are almost flipped. The Prosecutors want to focus solely on whether the defendants have broken federal rules. The defendants are out to show that their actions are just part of normal recruiting and that they willingly broke NCAA rules, but that it was for the coaches, but that their actions did not constitute breaking any federal laws. The Feds want to keep things as tight as possible, the defendants want dirt flying all over the place. so you get battles like the first trial where the defendants want wiretaps played and documents shown and the prosecutors actually want them kept out of the trial. The prosecutors won the first round. But with the subpeona's it will be interesting if the judge is going to allow more wiretaps and other evidence be admitted for this trial than the first one.
it puts the coaches that have to testify in a tight spot. They have said from the beginning they didn't pay anyone. that may be technically true, but they may have a harder time keeping out evidence that suggest they committed NCAA violations. it's one thing to make broad statements in front of press, its a whole other issue to say something like that under oath when there might be evidence that suggests otherwise. If evidence like that comes out they have a choice between potentially perjuring themselves or admitting to actions that could cost them their job.
The interesting thing in these cases are that the defense and prosecution are almost flipped. The Prosecutors want to focus solely on whether the defendants have broken federal rules. The defendants are out to show that their actions are just part of normal recruiting and that they willingly broke NCAA rules, but that it was for the coaches, but that their actions did not constitute breaking any federal laws. The Feds want to keep things as tight as possible, the defendants want dirt flying all over the place. so you get battles like the first trial where the defendants want wiretaps played and documents shown and the prosecutors actually want them kept out of the trial. The prosecutors won the first round. But with the subpeona's it will be interesting if the judge is going to allow more wiretaps and other evidence be admitted for this trial than the first one.
it puts the coaches that have to testify in a tight spot. They have said from the beginning they didn't pay anyone. that may be technically true, but they may have a harder time keeping out evidence that suggest they committed NCAA violations. it's one thing to make broad statements in front of press, its a whole other issue to say something like that under oath when there might be evidence that suggests otherwise. If evidence like that comes out they have a choice between potentially perjuring themselves or admitting to actions that could cost them their job.
Bogey
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,727
I'm am wondering if say a player will graduate in the spring and has a year of eligibility left and will not earn meaningful playing time, is it a NCAA violation if a booster offers this player an incentive not to play his last year?
Sent from my ASUS_Z01RD using Tapatalk
Sent from my ASUS_Z01RD using Tapatalk
YlJacket
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 3,260
You mean a job?
Bogey
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,727