In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1057
Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game
Buy, sell and swap tickets
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Absolutely. I've written many expert witness reports for class action suits. You can use any/all publicly available data or quotes to make your case. This will definitely be used against the NCAA. The NCAA cannot have it both ways. The fact that it came out and contradicted itself is a huge mistake from a legal perspective--especially since this element is a key point in determining whether a case should move forward into discovery. I think the NCAA is about to go into discovery. I also think that we will find brown-stained-undies during discovery.
This post was edited by PennSt8er 13 months ago
I think the VIP injections to this thread is why people go out and create their own thread about a topic. What could be sooooooo secret that needs to be VIP?
Just my thoughts but if threads are going to be hijacked by VIP's then why can't we have others so people can discuss things?
It just happens on accident man - people don't know they've made a VIP post and then people respond to it.
I know one way to never ever get blocked from a VIP post again
"I like your head, it's a good look." - James Franklin, to a bald reporter asking a question.
I wish I had that money right now to do so. I really think this is one of the best boards out there and enjoy everything daily. I don't get frustrated when I see the big green VIP but do get a little upset when there is some good convo going and it becomes stale or non eventful because people don't know what is being said.
And I would like to believe that people don't know they are making it VIP but I look at the names associated and believe they know exactly what they are doing.
Maybe Sean will give you a scholly.
VIP also tends to keep the yoyo trolls out of the threads.
Many times, VIP is used to keep the outside trolls away. So even if a post doesn't have any "inside" content, people may choose to make it VIP for that reason. If another user continues the conversation by just hitting "reply" on that VIP post, 247 automatically checks the VIP box so you get a domino effect that is many times unintentional. To make the post non-VIP in that situation, you have to manually un-check the VIP box.
Honestly, after you have VIP access for awhile, you don't really look to see if what you are replying to is VIP. It's all the same (to me anyways).
Just FYI, when you're VIP on mobile you can't see what posts are VIP and what aren't. The only way to tell is that it automatically makes your replying post VIP, and if people don't notice that then they won't realize they're posting VIP.
And yes, I usually default to VIP, especially when talking about this sort of topic simply because that way I really don't have to worry about trolls.
Freeh worked with the prosecution. Emails between Freeh's team and Kelly's team show connection. Real independence!
Based off those emails, it's reasonable to conclude that "interfaced and cooperated" means that Freeh was only interested in creating the most dramatic report possible for the sake of publicity.
It is known that Freeh worked with the AG office in terms of handing over evidence that they discovered during the investigation, but these emails imply that there may have been more than that. Interesting.
(That doesn't mean that anything dirty was happening, but it does put doubt in the "indepedent" part of the investigation)
This is also the quality of character on our BOT. You're not showing respect if you question them?
Agreed it doesn't mean "dirty" but it does mean not independent.
Yes, the university needed to give the prosecution subpoenad evidence, but Freeh shouldn't have worked with them. I mean that's like having Linda Kelly investigate the people she's prosecuting. Real unbiased and independent.
He seemed touchy. It's not good to bash the people that you are supposed to be serving.
Silvis has responded that way a few times now that I've seen.
The last one was over the Freeh contract and it was the same - what are you looking for? What do you think you'll find? You're just looking to nail someone, where do these rumors start - type stuff.
Give me a break Silvis.
Another story about the emails. I bet Freeh could place blame and assign a motive based off these.
A series of emails that were exchanged between Pennsylvania prosecutors assigned to the Jerry Sandusky case and members of the Louis Freeh Group are raising new questions.
Of all the things Freeh did wrong, I don't think turning over any Sandusky evidence to Sandusky's prosecutors and congratulating them on winning the case is one of them. The whole world, even the Freeh-dumb fighters, congratulated the Sandusky prosecution.
There would be a huge problem if Freeh were to congratulate Spanier, Curley, and Shultz prosecutors based upon his faulty analysis. But Sandusky was an open/shut case.
How about the opposite scenario then?
Shortly after Freeh's findings were announced, prosecutor Fina sent an email to Paw.
“Greg – Truly great work,” he wrote. “Please extend my congratulations to your team.”
“Frank – this note really means a lot to me,” Paw responded. “I have a tremendous amount of respect for you and your work, and it was my pleasure to have an opportunity to work with you on this matter.”
Great job, Ryan. Perhaps the first of many dominoes to start falling.
Blehar's reply. This might not be earth shattering but hopefully as Ray suggests this is only the first of something bigger.
Here's the thing. Freeh was hired to find out what went wrong and how the university could change things so it wouldn't happen again. Freeh had no power to subpoena. It is a scary thought that the AG would take this info and use it in their cases. Especially in Spaniers case. He was the only one not charged before the report came out.jMO
Not the same scenario here. And ugh, I hate sounding like I'm defending Freeh, it makes me feel all dirty like licking an ashtray. But I have led and conducted a number of military analysis reports in my career. You conduct the analytical work "independently" and "unbiased" if possible but in the end, your conclusions usually favors one or more recommendations. The result is no longer "unbaised" because you concluded.
Here we see the misuse of the word independent. Both Freeh & the Prosecution used much of the same evidence. They both looked at it. They both concluded Sandusky was a monster. Freeh made the assessment and conclusion first. The Prosecution and the jury made it after. The Prosecution is under no obligation to work "independently" from Freeh after the report was published. The prosecution does not have to be "unbiased". The prosecution does not have to be "impartial." It is their job to take a side that prosecutes Sandusky.
In this case Freeh did his assessment independently from the prosecution (we assume). Once the report was completed, Freeh's group arrived at conclusions. Ideally, those conclusions are derived in an independent, unbiased, and impartial investigation (which they were not, IMO).
Once Freeh's conclusion is published, he is no longer under obligation to be "impartial" regarding the conclusions. As a human being (and that is still up for debate), the mountain of evidence convinced Freeh that Sandusky was a monster.
And Freeh did a horribly crappy job in "independent" analysis. But at least the prosecution did theirs well.
This post was edited by Grue 13 months ago
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports