Dapper or other Lawyers; thoughts on NCAA stuff

[bacane]

Humphrey and a few colleagues let their tunnel vision get the best of them, getting obsessed with a case and doing anything to obtain evidence to support their premise, even if unethical and beneath the standards the NCAA expects of others. This time they got caught and Mr. Emmert would be wise to move on and limit the potential exposure.

 

[3FW]

I'm pretty sure she is on record as saying that she was only reimbursed for copies. 20K does not pass the test.

 

[UMJer026]

I read that article as saying that Humphrey, who works in enforcement, said (when she first notified parties over the phone that the NCAA had been involved with Perez) that the NCAA was going to claim attorney client privilege. In the same conversation she said basically said the NCAA got great info from working with Perez (obviously, that isn't going to mean anything) and that they would claim attorney client privilege with respect to dealings with Perez (this could also be outdated at this point). The whole call was enforcement flexing its muscles - just like they tried to do in paying Perez in the first place. At this point, I wouldn't attach any significance to anything Humphrey said during that call, unless Emmert comes out and says the same thing.

Based on the news he reported, I have no idea why the author felt he had to talk to a lawyer and ask about attorney client privilege. There is nothing to this story at this point.

Agree with that reading. This doesn't seem like anything new to me.

 

[The Franchise]

Lawyers are the lowest forms of scum on the planet. Passing the bar means you are barred from telling the truth "just let the process unfold". These scummy focks have zero morals or ethics. Lie, lie, lie, deny, deny, deny... That's lawyerism 101. Produce nothing and rob, lie, cheat, and steal is how these parasites make their money.

The NCAA came and stated they had to have an investigation into their own inner workings due to fraudulent BS. Then they hired a "private investigative firm" to clean up the mess and low and behold nothing happened? GTFOOH! Lawyer scum is going to lawyer scum...

I get the sneaking suspicion this dude doesn't like lawyers.

 

[tsimonitis]

Lawyers are the lowest forms of scum on the planet. Passing the bar means you are barred from telling the truth "just let the process unfold". These scummy focks have zero morals or ethics. Lie, lie, lie, deny, deny, deny... That's lawyerism 101. Produce nothing and rob, lie, cheat, and steal is how these parasites make their money.

The NCAA came and stated they had to have an investigation into their own inner workings due to fraudulent BS. Then they hired a "private investigative firm" to clean up the mess and low and behold nothing happened? GTFOOH! Lawyer scum is going to lawyer scum...

I get the sneaking suspicion this dude doesn't like lawyers.

or he is one

 

[Canesfan1899]

And if Perez isn't allowed to talk to their own investigation of the investigation, then what good is their report going to be?

Load of bull****

It's all bull**** at this point. Thye eed to finish this quickly and painlessly, they've hammered us enough already.

 

[eliteproxy]

This is not discussed much but Shapiro told everyone he had another "Ace"

Shapiro made sure the NCAA was at the deposition to hear this new "Ace" info.

This is the reason all this went down. This was suppose to be the death penalty ace. and this had legs

Shapiro gambled and placed bets on UM games and he claimed that he changed the outcome of games because of what he told/paid players to do and not to do. This was asked during the deposition but Sean Allen denied under oath knowing anything about it.

This is why Emerett said repeatedly we didn't get any big info here. They were not there to confirm or get info they already had. EVERYTHING they got from that deposition they already knew.

NCAA could not collaborate this piece of information.

 

[ScubaCane]

When's this **** gonna end? Nothing I hate more than the NCAA.

They still run a distant 2nd to that b*tch Shapiro for me

 

[NoahZach]

I read that article as saying that Humphrey, who works in enforcement, said (when she first notified parties over the phone that the NCAA had been involved with Perez) that the NCAA was going to claim attorney client privilege. In the same conversation she said basically said the NCAA got great info from working with Perez (obviously, that isn't going to mean anything) and that they would claim attorney client privilege with respect to dealings with Perez (this could also be outdated at this point). The whole call was enforcement flexing its muscles - just like they tried to do in paying Perez in the first place. At this point, I wouldn't attach any significance to anything Humphrey said during that call, unless Emmert comes out and says the same thing.

Based on the news he reported, I have no idea why the author felt he had to talk to a lawyer and ask about attorney client privilege. There is nothing to this story at this point.

Agree with that reading. This doesn't seem like anything new to me.

I don't think it is anything particularly new, but I do wonder how the NCAA is going to be able to claim an expectation of confidentiality in connection with any communications with Perez, given that she was representing and presumably reporting to Shapiro at the same time. The NCAA would find itself, at a minimum, with substantial egg on its face if it took the position that it shared interests with a person it is investigating and who has acknowledged that his motivation is to bring down the UM Athletic Program. That's walking right into the investigatory bias argument--never mind the issues regarding improper use of the bankruptcy proceedings.

Perez herself made comments immediately after Emmert revealed the relationship that suggested that she did not perceive there to be an attorney-client relationship. While that latter point means little, particularly given the questions that surround her ability to perceive much of anything in general, it just further suggests that there likely was little thought of attorney-client privilege and confidentiality in communications at the time of those communications. I'd expect that she revealed what the NCAA now would claim to be privileged information to Shapiro--and the NCAA likely would have expected her to do so or, at least, should have assumed that she would do so, absent contrary instruction.

Man, I'd love to see the conflict waivers on this one (and I doubt anyone wrote one up). What if she discovered something in her efforts on behalf of the NCAA that negatively impacted the investigation, Shapiro's credibility or Shapiro's legal position? Was she going to reveal it to Shapiro? To the NCAA? What a mess.

At bottom, this just seems like the NCAA is trying to keep Perez from continuing to yap to the media and others about the matter to avoid further embarrassment. But, it points up the nature of the problem the NCAA confronts.

 

[NoahZach]

This is not discussed much but Shapiro told everyone he had another "Ace"

Shapiro made sure the NCAA was at the deposition to hear this new "Ace" info.

This is the reason all this went down. This was suppose to be the death penalty ace. and this had legs

Shapiro gambled and placed bets on UM games and he claimed that he changed the outcome of games because of what he told/paid players to do and not to do. This was asked during the deposition but Sean Allen denied under oath knowing anything about it.

This is why Emerett said repeatedly we didn't get any big info here. They were not there to confirm or get info they already had. EVERYTHING they got from that deposition they already knew.

NCAA could not collaborate this piece of information.

Didn't Sean Allen say that he had provided false information when he spoke to the NCAA and only corrected it in the deposition because he was under oath? Was that only concerning potential gambling issues or was it involving other issues as well?

 

[eliteproxy]

This is not discussed much but Shapiro told everyone he had another "Ace"

Shapiro made sure the NCAA was at the deposition to hear this new "Ace" info.

This is the reason all this went down. This was suppose to be the death penalty ace. and this had legs

Shapiro gambled and placed bets on UM games and he claimed that he changed the outcome of games because of what he told/paid players to do and not to do. This was asked during the deposition but Sean Allen denied under oath knowing anything about it.

This is why Emerett said repeatedly we didn't get any big info here. They were not there to confirm or get info they already had. EVERYTHING they got from that deposition they already knew.

NCAA could not collaborate this piece of information.

Didn't Sean Allen say that he had provided false information when he spoke to the NCAA and only corrected it in the deposition because he was under oath? Was that only concerning potential gambling issues or was it involving other issues as well?

Sean Allen may have lied to the NCAA but the NCAA confirmed allot of this information.

remember i think it w as 11 player that got suspended. The NCAA does not need much to find your guilt. They came out and said that allot of info they got from him during the deposition they already knew.

The NCAA knowingly took a risk here based on Shapiros words. If it was proven that the Spahiro changed the outcome of NCAA games because of gambling.. the media and everyone would want the U to get the death penalty regardless how the info was uncovered.

 

[UCaneDoIt]

This is not discussed much but Shapiro told everyone he had another "Ace"

Shapiro made sure the NCAA was at the deposition to hear this new "Ace" info.

This is the reason all this went down. This was suppose to be the death penalty ace. and this had legs

Shapiro gambled and placed bets on UM games and he claimed that he changed the outcome of games because of what he told/paid players to do and not to do. This was asked during the deposition but Sean Allen denied under oath knowing anything about it.

This is why Emerett said repeatedly we didn't get any big info here. They were not there to confirm or get info they already had. EVERYTHING they got from that deposition they already knew.

NCAA could not collaborate this piece of information.

Didn't Sean Allen say that he had provided false information when he spoke to the NCAA and only corrected it in the deposition because he was under oath? Was that only concerning potential gambling issues or was it involving other issues as well?

Sean Allen may have lied to the NCAA but the NCAA confirmed allot of this information.

remember i think it w as 11 player that got suspended. The NCAA does not need much to find your guilt. They came out and said that allot of info they got from him during the deposition they already knew.

The NCAA knowingly took a risk here based on Shapiros words. If it was proven that the Spahiro changed the outcome of NCAA games because of gambling.. the media and everyone would want the U to get the death penalty regardless how the info was uncovered.

Were there questions regarding gambling in the deposition?

/I didn't read it

 

[Problem2]

Friday and still no report on their report.

Lol at this sham

 

[FullyERicht]

Why doesn't Miami hire its own firm to investigate the NCAA?

 

[rudebuddha]

Lawyers are the lowest forms of scum on the planet. Passing the bar means you are barred from telling the truth "just let the process unfold". These scummy focks have zero morals or ethics. Lie, lie, lie, deny, deny, deny... That's lawyerism 101. Produce nothing and rob, lie, cheat, and steal is how these parasites make their money.

Thank you, do all Jews have horns or just the ones that haven't had the surgery to remove them.

Everybody always says stuff like this......and then the day comes when they need a lawyer.

 

[BALDYCHUTES]

Thanks for a seriously solid post.

Your point about Perez possibly knowing weakenesses in Shapiro's case or the NCAA's case is freakin glorious. If this ends up in court, and UM can prove that Perez, the NCAA and/or Shapiro possibly waived the privilege, wow, would that be a freakin bombshell.

I read that article as saying that Humphrey, who works in enforcement, said (when she first notified parties over the phone that the NCAA had been involved with Perez) that the NCAA was going to claim attorney client privilege. In the same conversation she said basically said the NCAA got great info from working with Perez (obviously, that isn't going to mean anything) and that they would claim attorney client privilege with respect to dealings with Perez (this could also be outdated at this point). The whole call was enforcement flexing its muscles - just like they tried to do in paying Perez in the first place. At this point, I wouldn't attach any significance to anything Humphrey said during that call, unless Emmert comes out and says the same thing.

Based on the news he reported, I have no idea why the author felt he had to talk to a lawyer and ask about attorney client privilege. There is nothing to this story at this point.

Agree with that reading. This doesn't seem like anything new to me.

I don't think it is anything particularly new, but I do wonder how the NCAA is going to be able to claim an expectation of confidentiality in connection with any communications with Perez, given that she was representing and presumably reporting to Shapiro at the same time. The NCAA would find itself, at a minimum, with substantial egg on its face if it took the position that it shared interests with a person it is investigating and who has acknowledged that his motivation is to bring down the UM Athletic Program. That's walking right into the investigatory bias argument--never mind the issues regarding improper use of the bankruptcy proceedings.

Perez herself made comments immediately after Emmert revealed the relationship that suggested that she did not perceive there to be an attorney-client relationship. While that latter point means little, particularly given the questions that surround her ability to perceive much of anything in general, it just further suggests that there likely was little thought of attorney-client privilege and confidentiality in communications at the time of those communications. I'd expect that she revealed what the NCAA now would claim to be privileged information to Shapiro--and the NCAA likely would have expected her to do so or, at least, should have assumed that she would do so, absent contrary instruction.

Man, I'd love to see the conflict waivers on this one (and I doubt anyone wrote one up). What if she discovered something in her efforts on behalf of the NCAA that negatively impacted the investigation, Shapiro's credibility or Shapiro's legal position? Was she going to reveal it to Shapiro? To the NCAA? What a mess.

At bottom, this just seems like the NCAA is trying to keep Perez from continuing to yap to the media and others about the matter to avoid further embarrassment. But, it points up the nature of the problem the NCAA confronts.

 

[Bigtip]

the whole thing is a disaster and I would imagine will never make it to court since the NCAA paying the lawyer is like a Nuke bomb to the whole NCAA case. we have all of the leverage IMO.

this will get settled in our benefit

 

[jakeman1]

If the deposition was used to gain evidence, doesn't the other party have a right to that evidence? Once the NCAA comes out with the allegations, I think Miami will be given a chance to respond to them, which it seems like they would need to see what evidence the NCAA had and where they obtained it. It sounds like they went fishing for nothing, so it might all be moot, but I thought you couldn't have secret evidence and then use it to punish someone.

 

[Lifelongcane]

Lawyers are the lowest forms of scum on the planet. Passing the bar means you are barred from telling the truth "just let the process unfold". These scummy focks have zero morals or ethics. Lie, lie, lie, deny, deny, deny... That's lawyerism 101. Produce nothing and rob, lie, cheat, and steal is how these parasites make their money.

Thank you, do all Jews have horns or just the ones that haven't had the surgery to remove them.

Everybody always says stuff like this......and then the day comes when they need a lawyer.

Yes, I think that is referred to as a necessary EVIL. Show me a person who likes lawyers, even when they need one, and I'll show you a lawyer (or a liar)

 

[Angry Ibis]

Dapper -

Do you know if she has a Florida Bar inquiry into her as a result of this? --- Saying she does, how does that impact the NCAA ability to keep her mouth shut? --- Will any attempt she makes to save her own skin with the Bar, be available for Miami's use?

Thx!