NCAA investigation, go ahead, ask me...

[DapperSlapper]

Dapper, what does this new information mean now?

We Skate?

Quick bit before I get back to work:

Obviously, today's news was good news for UM. I am still concerned about the timeline, irrespective of what Emmert said today. While he is a sophisticated guy who has dealt with lawyers before, lawyers who are billing by the hour generally don't abide clients' timelines. People who don't deal with lawyers are often shocked by how long things take (and how much they cost...). On the other hand, having outside lawyers review the evidence is probably good for UM as well - I am sure they will be thorough, since they will get paid for all their time.

The duration of the investigation, the reliance on information from the bankruptcy proceeding (even the public records, which would be fine for the NCAA to do), along with the "silence will be construed as guilt" letter, had me believing that NCAA enforcement was exasperated by their inability to obtain information anywhere near as bad for UM as the information set out in yahoo's article. I guess they were more exasperated than I thought.

I'm almost believing at this point that Enforcement did not corroborate many of Shapiro's claims. Maybe only a small fraction of the evidence was obtained in a manner that makes it inadmissible, but, if they don't have too much to go on anyway, it could still be crippling to the NCAA's case.

Lastly, if enforcement purposely delayed its investigation in order to gain information from bankruptcy proceedings that had yet to occur, I would hope UM call the NCAA out on that, as it could be a mitigating factor for UM.

I still expect a hearing to occur, and I still expect a Public Infractions Report to be issued.

Maybe Nevin's lawyer is as great a troll as DBC, and purposely set Enforcement up, while pocketing their money... That would be right up there with Kaiser Soze, given what she has appeared to be up to now.

Let me summarize this for you. Lawyers are crooks!

When you pass the bar it means you are barred from telling the truth. End of story...

There was a great line in the book "The Godfather" that did not make it into the movie (going from memory here, so don't jump on me if I'm a little off): "A lawyer with his briefcase can steal more than 100 men with guns." That's why Tom became a lawyer.

 

[pook187]

What's your prediction on sanctions?

 

[DapperSlapper]

Dapper, NCAA has known about their eff up for awhile, IMO. Do you think Miami threw their trump card at them and force the NCAA's hand?

It wouldn't surprise me - UM may have needed to find out about the allegations that will be included in the NOA in order to know for sure that the NCAA intended to rely on information that it gained through impermissible means.

 

[hasena75]

Not sure if you can answer on this but Dapper, what do you think the penalties will be now that this has unfolded?

 

[wushah]

For the first time, I think we might skate from this point forward.

 

[DapperSlapper]

Not sure if you can answer on this but Dapper, what do you think the penalties will be now that this has unfolded?

It is impossible to make an educated guess about sanctions without being educated...educated on what the alleged violations are and what allegations support those alleged violations. I'm also not into making predictions - too much goes into the process for me to ignore it and just venture a guess. Trust in the process.

 

[canesman]

Great call.....if they blew the whistle on this earlier then the NCAA could have just omitted the info from the NOA.

Dapper, NCAA has known about their eff up for awhile, IMO. Do you think Miami threw their trump card at them and force the NCAA's hand?

It wouldn't surprise me - UM may have needed to find out about the allegations that will be included in the NOA in order to know for sure that the NCAA intended to rely on information that it gained through impermissible means.

 

[3FW]

Dapper, in your opinion is it likely that this could now be resolved using summary disposition?

 

[DapperSlapper]

Dapper, in your opinion is it likely that this could now be resolved using summary disposition?

Highly doubt it. While it may appeal to enforcement at this point to save face (and UM may be able to use that to its advantage), all parties, including involved individuals, have to agree on summary disposition. If any of the former coaches are looking at unethical conduct (as has been reported), it will be in their interests to fight that at a hearing.

 

[minus13]

Seriously, Dapper - do you agree that Ms. Perez might have some explaining to do to the the Florida Bar?

 

[LuCane]

Would love to see Nevin Shapiro's little inferiority complex-filled face right now. Cot**** lollipop-sucking adult desperate to be liked (especially by teenagers).

 

[k9cane]

so I guess Charles Robinson isn't winning the Pulitzer Prize, now?

 

[LuCane]

so I guess Charles Robinson isn't winning the Pulitzer Prize, now?

It's being spun like Robinson handed the NCAA a perfect case, and the NCAA ****ed it up.

I don't really care. I just want it to be over. I just want Al to be able to recruit a full class in 2014.

 

[Southcane]

I don't know but it feels that there was malice on the part of the NCAA staff breaking their own rules to come after Miami. I am not a lawyer but maybe someone here can discus this.

"A California case filed by former USC assistant football coach Todd McNair, who said the NCAA was "malicious" in its investigation into his role in the benefits scandal surrounding Heisman Trophy winner Reggie Bush. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Frederick Shaller said he was convinced that the actions of NCAA investigators were "over the top."

 

[k9cane]

so I guess Charles Robinson isn't winning the Pulitzer Prize, now?

It's being spun like Robinson handed the NCAA a perfect case, and the NCAA ****ed it up.

I don't really care. I just want it to be over. I just want Al to be able to recruit a full class in 2014.

Yeah, but you could also argue that Shapiro not only duped Robinson, but then the NCAA( as others have stated)

But Im with you, just cant wait to turn the page and get into the real Golden-era of Cane football

 

[DapperSlapper]

Seriously, Dapper - do you agree that Ms. Perez might have some explaining to do to the the Florida Bar?

I haven't read anything that leads me to believe she violated any Rules Regulating the Florida Bar. There is nothing that would prevent her from accepting work from the NCAA (unless it created a conflict with her client, which it doesn't appear to have done) - if they violated their own internal policies in hiring her that's their problem. I get asked by other attorneys to work on cases all the time - it's the same thing.

As for PeeWee's depo, I mentioned that above. PeeWee was a bag man for Nevin and delivered money for him. That information could have proven useful in the bankruptcy.

 

[cdmd]

Dapper,

If information obtained through the bankruptcy depositions led to the NCAA enforcement bullying someone into meeting independently with investigators (i.e "hey we have your sworn testimony might as well talk to us now") would the information obtained from those subsequent meetings be considered part of the evidence that was obtained improperly and be thrown? And if enforcement chooses to include evidence obtained that way in the NOA can UM successfully challenge it when it reaches the COI?

Also, can this get really ugly and lead to UM suing the NCAA?

Thanks Dapper!

 

[tsimonitis]

Dapper,

Can you break down Donna's statement? Take it from well craftred legalize into layman's terms?


President Donna Shalala released the following statement in response to Mark Emmert's conference call:

“Since the University first alerted the NCAA to the possibility of violations more than two years ago, we have been cooperative and compliant with the NCAA and, I believe, a model for how institutions should partner with NCAA staff during investigations. In addition to encouraging current and former staff members and student-athletes to cooperate with investigators, we have provided thousands of documents to the enforcement staff.


I am frustrated, disappointed and concerned by President Emmert’s announcement today that the integrity of the investigation may have been compromised by the NCAA staff.


As we have done since the beginning, we will continue to work with the NCAA and now with their outside investigator hoping for a swift resolution of the investigation and our case.


I want to thank our community for their continued support and patience.


Stand with the U.”

 

[DapperSlapper]

Dapper,

If information obtained through the bankruptcy depositions led to the NCAA enforcement bullying someone into meeting independently with investigators (i.e "hey we have your sworn testimony might as well talk to us now") would the information obtained from those subsequent meetings be considered part of the evidence that was obtained improperly and be thrown? And if enforcement chooses to include evidence obtained that way in the NOA can UM successfully challenge it when it reaches the COI?

Also, can this get really ugly and lead to UM suing the NCAA?

Thanks Dapper!

Presumably, all evidence derived directly or indirectly from the use of impermissible method would be barred as fruit of the poisonous tree. I have not dealt with this issue in an NCAA infractions case before, so I can't guarantee that's how the NCAA will look at it, but that's the only logical way to treat such evidence. If enforcement got the same information from an independent source, then they would presumably be able to use the info received from the independent source.

 

[RaiseCane]

Dapper,

If information obtained through the bankruptcy depositions led to the NCAA enforcement bullying someone into meeting independently with investigators (i.e "hey we have your sworn testimony might as well talk to us now") would the information obtained from those subsequent meetings be considered part of the evidence that was obtained improperly and be thrown? And if enforcement chooses to include evidence obtained that way in the NOA can UM successfully challenge it when it reaches the COI?

Also, can this get really ugly and lead to UM suing the NCAA?

Thanks Dapper!

Presumably, all evidence derived directly or indirectly from the use of impermissible method would be barred as fruit of the poisonous tree. I have not dealt with this issue in an NCAA infractions case before, so I can't guarantee that's how the NCAA will look at it, but that's the only logical way to treat such evidence. If enforcement got the same information from an independent source, then they would presumably be able to use the info received from the independent source.

But what will be the NCAA's burden of proof with respect to the allegations, now that Emmert has admitted they obtained information improperly? If they allege payments made by Shapiro to player X, and such payments were mentioned at all in the bankruptcy, will Miami be able to force the NCAA to prove that it didn't get such information from the bankruptcy proceeding? I'd think it would be very difficult for the NCAA to be able to prove that it did NOT obtain information either directly or indirectly from improper sources. Wouldn't the NCAA have to be able to source all of their allegations to information that it can prove did not come directly or indirectly from the improper sources?