e******u
发帖数: 537 | 1 Now we have a solid basis to sue NCAA and get our wins back!
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2015/12/07/court-sla
The NCAA disregarded the truth in the Reggie Bush case to reach a "
predetermined conclusion" against the USC football program, casting new
doubt about whether the Trojans should have been slammed with penalties in
the case, according to a ruling Monday by a California appeals court.
At issue was whether former USC running backs coach Todd McNair was aware of
NCAA violations involving Bush when Bush was a USC running back.
McNair said he didn't know about the violations, and he sued the NCAA for
defamation after the organization hammered USC with severe sanctions in 2010.
A three-judge panel reviewed evidence as part of an appeal by the NCAA to
have McNair's case thrown out.
USA TODAY
Reggie Bush visits with USC before Pac-12 championship
"This evidence clearly indicates that the ensuing (NCAA infractions
committee) report was worded in disregard of the truth to enable the (NCAA
committee) to arrive at a predetermined conclusion that USC employee McNair
was aware of the NCAA violations," said the ruling from California's Second
District Court of Appeal. "To summarize, McNair established a probability
that he could show actual malice by clear and convincing evidence based on
the (committee's) doubts about McNair's knowledge, along with its reckless
disregard for the truth about his knowledge, and by allowing itself to be
influenced by nonmembers to reach a needed conclusion."
The court threw out some parts of his McNair's lawsuit but preserved his
defamation claim, ruling that he demonstrated a probability of prevailing at
trial based on the merits of his case. The court's ruling allows the case
to proceed to trial. It also adds new fuel to the debate about the fairness
of the penalties USC received, including a two-year postseason bowl ban and
the loss of 30 scholarships over three seasons.
NCAA investigator Rich Johanningmeier acknowledged during a pretrial
deposition that the NCAA would need evidence that a USC employee knew of the
improper benefits to sanction USC for Bush's receipt of those benefits, the
court noted.
USA TODAY
USC's Clay Helton fires four assistants, including DC Justin Wilcox
"As Johanningmeier acknowledged in his deposition, without a finding against
McNair, no penalties could have been instituted against USC for Bush's
receipt of improper benefits," said the ruling filed by Justice Richard
Aldrich, with two other justices concurring. "McNair produced evidence that,
while the (committee) had difficulty reaching a conclusion about McNair, it
violated its own procedures by considering facts outside the record without
affording McNair an opportunity to explain, and by allowing nonvoting
members to influence the deliberations."
Bush forfeited his 2005 Heisman Trophy as a result of the scandal, which
included allegations of improper benefits received by him and his family
while he played at USC. In its 2010 report condemning USC, the NCAA
infractions committee said that McNair "knew or should have known" that Bush
was engaged in violations with a prospective sports marketing agency.
The committee listed McNair's "unethical conduct" as the first finding in
its report, giving it huge significance in the case against USC. It notes a
phone call in January 2006 between McNair and Lloyd Lake, one of the would-
be marketers trying to woo Bush and his family with impermissible benefits.
The call lasted about two and a half minutes.
USA TODAY
Derrick Henry, Christian McCaffrey, Deshaun Watson are Heisman finalists
The court noted the call appears to be the sole basis for the NCAA's ethics-
violation finding against McNair.
"Yet, a jury could reasonably conclude that Lake's interview did not support
the statement that McNair knew about the NCAA violations," the court said.
"Lake appeared to be confused when questioned about his relationship with
McNair. Lake accepted that McNair called him. Although Lake said in his
interview that McNair `knew about the money [Bush] took, he knew that [Bush]
had an [agency] agreement,' when pressed by the interviewers, Lake made
clear that this was Lake's own assumption. Nowhere during Lake's description
of the two-minute call did Lake ever say that he informed McNair of, or
that McNair claimed knowledge about, the agency agreement and improper
benefits. Instead, Lake speculated that Bush told McNair, or that McNair
knew from osmosis because 'he was around a lot' and 'watched.' Lake's later
statement that he called McNair to get his money back only creates a factual
dispute but does not defeat McNair's evidence as a matter of law."
USA TODAY
Steve Sarkisian sues USC for contract breach
The court stated that "McNair presented admissible evidence, which if
credited by a jury, indicates that he did not know about the NCAA violations
."
The court also said "McNair made a sufficiently convincing showing that the
NCAA recklessly disregarded the truth when the (committee) deliberately
decided not to correct the investigation's errors or to acquire more
information about what McNair knew concerning the rules violations."
McNair, 50, claims his career and reputation have suffered as a result of
the NCAA case. After his contract wasn't renewed at USC in 2010, he filed
his suit in 2011. |
e******u
发帖数: 537 | 2 Quote from court ruling
"The defamatory publication is the operative statement’s recitation that
McNair knew about the NCAA rules violations and lied about that knowledge.
Yet, this conclusion is based on the interviews of Lake and McNair about the
two-minute call, which interviews were not disclosed. Furthermore, the
operative statement was the justification for the serious sanctions against
McNair, and common sense tells us that a sanction is more than a simple
opinion. In sum, a reasonable factfinder could conclude that the published
statement declares a provably false assertion of fact and not opinion with
the result that McNair has established a probability of prevailing on the
merits of his libel cause of action."
http://www.scout.com/college/usc/story/1620676-mcnair-prevails-
of
2010.
【在 e******u 的大作中提到】
: Now we have a solid basis to sue NCAA and get our wins back!
: http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2015/12/07/court-sla
: The NCAA disregarded the truth in the Reggie Bush case to reach a "
: predetermined conclusion" against the USC football program, casting new
: doubt about whether the Trojans should have been slammed with penalties in
: the case, according to a ruling Monday by a California appeals court.
: At issue was whether former USC running backs coach Todd McNair was aware of
: NCAA violations involving Bush when Bush was a USC running back.
: McNair said he didn't know about the violations, and he sued the NCAA for
: defamation after the organization hammered USC with severe sanctions in 2010.
|
t***u
发帖数: 20182 | |
m***e
发帖数: 112 | 4 USC就是个joke
这种破事总是爱粘在二三流球队身上。
【在 t***u 的大作中提到】
: 还在撕啊
|
e******u
发帖数: 537 | 5 豪门哪个不是30年河东30年河西。02-08时我们一样是杀的其它豪门哭爹叫娘
【在 m***e 的大作中提到】
: USC就是个joke
: 这种破事总是爱粘在二三流球队身上。
|
a****h
发帖数: 1012 | 6 right，就像这个commercial里面的一样。。
【在 e******u 的大作中提到】
: 豪门哪个不是30年河东30年河西。02-08时我们一样是杀的其它豪门哭爹叫娘
|
x********d
发帖数: 102 | 7 可惜把全国冠军和胜场拿回来是唯一能做的事情了，失去的五年再也回不来了。
of
2010.
【在 e******u 的大作中提到】
: Now we have a solid basis to sue NCAA and get our wins back!
: http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2015/12/07/court-sla
: The NCAA disregarded the truth in the Reggie Bush case to reach a "
: predetermined conclusion" against the USC football program, casting new
: doubt about whether the Trojans should have been slammed with penalties in
: the case, according to a ruling Monday by a California appeals court.
: At issue was whether former USC running backs coach Todd McNair was aware of
: NCAA violations involving Bush when Bush was a USC running back.
: McNair said he didn't know about the violations, and he sued the NCAA for
: defamation after the organization hammered USC with severe sanctions in 2010.
|
Y******e
发帖数: 20256 | 8 我对这个McNair的证据证明自己不知道，很感兴趣。我逻辑上没想通怎么证明自己不知
道一件事。除了测谎，怎么证明？ |
e******u
发帖数: 537 | 9 难道不是没有证据证明McNair知道? 法庭主要依据就是 NCAA只知道McNair通过2分钟
的电话，而且 NCAA拒绝透漏电话内容（可能也不知道电话内容），就断定McNair
should have known it,进而得出USC lack of institutional control 的结论。
现在大量的证据是，NCAA的COI委员会在没有任何证据之前已经作出USC lack of
institutional control 的结论，然后再捏造McNair should have known it的证据。
McNair的case 肯定是赢定了。NCAA肯定会settle,因为不想让更多的丑史暴光。现在就
看USC有没有决心向NCAA讨回公道了
【在 Y******e 的大作中提到】
: 我对这个McNair的证据证明自己不知道，很感兴趣。我逻辑上没想通怎么证明自己不知
: 道一件事。除了测谎，怎么证明？
|
Y******e
发帖数: 20256 | 10 你根本没有回答我的问题，我不care这个过程。文章说他举出证据说自己不知道，我想
知道怎么举。举出证据说对方知道是逻辑上可行的。但是举出证据不知道似乎不那么容
易，至少按不知道怎么证明自己不知道，除了测谎。若是说他推翻NCAA证明他知道的证
据拿还说得过去。
anyway，我觉得这些事情，其实和他和USC的场上表现没什么关系。罚得重不重，不是
按说了算。但是不要tmd装说不知道，我密自己的program，连球员车坏了，别人帮他修
免费，后来都可以知道，要球员退钱的，AD还专门有人打电话问当事人，具体到多少钱
，什么时候都问得一清二楚。这些bush事情不知道，就是著名的lack of institution
control。 |
|
|
x********d
发帖数: 102 | 11 非专业人士纯猜测，法律上有种说法叫做举证责任，就是说如果burden在ncaa一方，
ncaa就必须提供不可辩驳的证据证明这件事发生过，如果做不到，就是表示没有证据。
但是什么时候举证责任在谁这种事就需要专业法律人员才能懂了。
打个比方，举证责任就像official review，如果裁判看视频没有所谓的undisputable
evidence，就不能改判。
当然，看了你下面的回复，如果你就是想来挑事说我特活该我特二流队的话，就当我什
么都没说过。
【在 Y******e 的大作中提到】
: 我对这个McNair的证据证明自己不知道，很感兴趣。我逻辑上没想通怎么证明自己不知
: 道一件事。除了测谎，怎么证明？
|
e******u
发帖数: 537 | 12 一个球员也叫lack of institution control？何况bush的房子还是在圣地亚哥。如果
这也叫lack of institution control，这些豪门那个不是满屁股的屎？别那安阿波说
事，都是彼此彼此。
institution
【在 Y******e 的大作中提到】
: 你根本没有回答我的问题，我不care这个过程。文章说他举出证据说自己不知道，我想
: 知道怎么举。举出证据说对方知道是逻辑上可行的。但是举出证据不知道似乎不那么容
: 易，至少按不知道怎么证明自己不知道，除了测谎。若是说他推翻NCAA证明他知道的证
: 据拿还说得过去。
: anyway，我觉得这些事情，其实和他和USC的场上表现没什么关系。罚得重不重，不是
: 按说了算。但是不要tmd装说不知道，我密自己的program，连球员车坏了，别人帮他修
: 免费，后来都可以知道，要球员退钱的，AD还专门有人打电话问当事人，具体到多少钱
: ，什么时候都问得一清二楚。这些bush事情不知道，就是著名的lack of institution
: control。
|
x********d
发帖数: 102 | 13 前辈我真的很好奇ncaa为什么会把这件事搞得这么严重，真的是因为mike garrett对他
们态度倨傲么。。。
【在 e******u 的大作中提到】
: 一个球员也叫lack of institution control？何况bush的房子还是在圣地亚哥。如果
: 这也叫lack of institution control，这些豪门那个不是满屁股的屎？别那安阿波说
: 事，都是彼此彼此。
:
: institution
|
e******u
发帖数: 537 | 14 说白就是NCAA COI committee 的那几个其他豪门的委员看着当年USC红眼，想尽阴招。
特别是买阿米那个AD paul dee ， 吗的自己的program 一屁股虱，一堆球员出事，竟
然都没lack of institutional control.
undisputable
【在 x********d 的大作中提到】
: 非专业人士纯猜测，法律上有种说法叫做举证责任，就是说如果burden在ncaa一方，
: ncaa就必须提供不可辩驳的证据证明这件事发生过，如果做不到，就是表示没有证据。
: 但是什么时候举证责任在谁这种事就需要专业法律人员才能懂了。
: 打个比方，举证责任就像official review，如果裁判看视频没有所谓的undisputable
: evidence，就不能改判。
: 当然，看了你下面的回复，如果你就是想来挑事说我特活该我特二流队的话，就当我什
: 么都没说过。
|
e******u
发帖数: 537 | 15 法律我不懂。 网上有完整的ruling. 可以自己看
institution
【在 Y******e 的大作中提到】
: 你根本没有回答我的问题，我不care这个过程。文章说他举出证据说自己不知道，我想
: 知道怎么举。举出证据说对方知道是逻辑上可行的。但是举出证据不知道似乎不那么容
: 易，至少按不知道怎么证明自己不知道，除了测谎。若是说他推翻NCAA证明他知道的证
: 据拿还说得过去。
: anyway，我觉得这些事情，其实和他和USC的场上表现没什么关系。罚得重不重，不是
: 按说了算。但是不要tmd装说不知道，我密自己的program，连球员车坏了，别人帮他修
: 免费，后来都可以知道，要球员退钱的，AD还专门有人打电话问当事人，具体到多少钱
: ，什么时候都问得一清二楚。这些bush事情不知道，就是著名的lack of institution
: control。
|
e******u
发帖数: 537 | 16 你可以网上看那些公布的NCAA COI Committee的邮件，赤裸裸的仇狠USC. 除了嫉妒，
想不出还有什么其他原因。这些邮件都是调查开始之前的。也就是说这帮孙子在调查开
始前已经决定怎么整USC了。
【在 x********d 的大作中提到】
: 前辈我真的很好奇ncaa为什么会把这件事搞得这么严重，真的是因为mike garrett对他
: 们态度倨傲么。。。
|
x********d
发帖数: 102 | 17 usc地方好，球队成绩再好的话其他学校确实没法活了，哎pac12现在这样相对均衡挺好
的，再出现这种事stanford oregon ucla usc可以互相保护。
【在 e******u 的大作中提到】
: 你可以网上看那些公布的NCAA COI Committee的邮件，赤裸裸的仇狠USC. 除了嫉妒，
: 想不出还有什么其他原因。这些邮件都是调查开始之前的。也就是说这帮孙子在调查开
: 始前已经决定怎么整USC了。
|
f*******e
发帖数: 280 | 18 不可能“平反”。NCAA惩罚一学校所需的证据不会象法院的那么严格。
of
2010.
【在 e******u 的大作中提到】
: Now we have a solid basis to sue NCAA and get our wins back!
: http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2015/12/07/court-sla
: The NCAA disregarded the truth in the Reggie Bush case to reach a "
: predetermined conclusion" against the USC football program, casting new
: doubt about whether the Trojans should have been slammed with penalties in
: the case, according to a ruling Monday by a California appeals court.
: At issue was whether former USC running backs coach Todd McNair was aware of
: NCAA violations involving Bush when Bush was a USC running back.
: McNair said he didn't know about the violations, and he sued the NCAA for
: defamation after the organization hammered USC with severe sanctions in 2010.
|
f*******e
发帖数: 280 | 19 布什家住的房子等事，明摆着放在那儿，USC说自己不知道，只能证明自己失职，成了
lack of institutional control的证据。
【在 e******u 的大作中提到】
: 说白就是NCAA COI committee 的那几个其他豪门的委员看着当年USC红眼，想尽阴招。
: 特别是买阿米那个AD paul dee ， 吗的自己的program 一屁股虱，一堆球员出事，竟
: 然都没lack of institutional control.
:
: undisputable
|
a****h
发帖数: 1012 | 20 这个，只要法官愿意掺和这事，不管是什么组织，都可以掺和进来，至少也要掺和到让
双方settle。。
参见Tom Brady v. NFL。。
【在 f*******e 的大作中提到】
: 不可能“平反”。NCAA惩罚一学校所需的证据不会象法院的那么严格。
:
: of
: 2010.
|
|
|
e******u
发帖数: 537 | 21 你恰恰理解错了NCAA关于lack of institutional control的定义。lack of
institutional control的前提是有证据证明学校知情不查。否则一堆犯事的学校都是
lack of institutional control，因为只要有学生犯事，学校必有失察之责。但是失
察不等于lack of institutional control，有证据证明学校知情不查才是。
参见当年俄孩鹅州立的案例。如果不是Jim Tressel的邮件被发现作为教练知情不查的
直接证据，俄孩鹅州立根本不会有事。
【在 f*******e 的大作中提到】
: 布什家住的房子等事，明摆着放在那儿，USC说自己不知道，只能证明自己失职，成了
: lack of institutional control的证据。
|
e******u
发帖数: 537 | 22 问题是NCAA根本没有任何学校lack of institutional control的证据。NCAA像鸡贼一
样叮了USC这么多年，没有发现任何Bush以外的case. 也没有发现任何学校或教练知情
的证据。
处罚Bush没问题。但是一个学生犯事是不能作为lack of institutional control的证
据。否则只要有学生犯事，就是lack of institutional control了
【在 f*******e 的大作中提到】
: 不可能“平反”。NCAA惩罚一学校所需的证据不会象法院的那么严格。
:
: of
: 2010.
|
x********d
发帖数: 102 | 23 上网做了一些功课，再也不同情Miami了，他们的足球队就这么混着挺好的。lol
【在 e******u 的大作中提到】
: 说白就是NCAA COI committee 的那几个其他豪门的委员看着当年USC红眼，想尽阴招。
: 特别是买阿米那个AD paul dee ， 吗的自己的program 一屁股虱，一堆球员出事，竟
: 然都没lack of institutional control.
:
: undisputable
|
l*****y
发帖数: 4887 | 24 NCAA的绝大部分案子在法律上都立不住，一给无罪推定几乎全能推翻
但是这就是体育的玩法，管理靠的是行规，不是法律
Sportsmanship理论上就应该比法要严格些。。。 |
