Page 27 of 37
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2018 11:02 pm
by DCHawk1
Geezer wrote: ↑Fri Oct 19, 2018 8:59 pm
He knew Billy Preston got paid.
Honestly, that's the thing that makes no sense. Sit Preston and then play SDS?
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2018 7:43 am
by Deleted User 89
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2018 8:07 am
by jfish26
DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 19, 2018 11:02 pm
Geezer wrote: ↑Fri Oct 19, 2018 8:59 pm
He knew Billy Preston got paid.
Honestly, that's the thing that makes no sense. Sit Preston and then play SDS?
I agree 100%. I just think there’s enough smoke around Silvio now, and enough heat around the program right now, that we won’t play Silvio.
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2018 8:12 am
by Deleted User 57
IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Fri Oct 19, 2018 8:56 pm
Self knowing about players getting paid doesn't make him not a "good man".
I agree 100%
Do you agree 100% that it doesn't make him a good man either?
Self knows what the majority of the other elite coaches know. Their players get "paid".
If it's a bad thing and you base good man / bad man solely on that, then yes, he and pretty much everyone else are bad men.
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2018 8:54 am
by Lonestarjayhawk
twocoach wrote: ↑Fri Oct 19, 2018 4:11 pm
IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Fri Oct 19, 2018 3:29 pm
Self and Kansas with their own segment on "high noon"...face palm.
Headline: Kansas coach "requested" Adidas pay SDS $20k.
I hadn't seen that yet. Sensational reporting? Fake news?
Merl Code's lawyer made that claim in his closing argument to try to show that since the schools were involved that they knew and since they knew, they weren't defrauded and since they weren't defrauded the fraud charges were bunk.
I am not a lawyer but if I have any actual EVIDENCE that supported that claim then you can bet I would have submitted it as part of my client's defense. But since that did not occur I tend to believe that his claim is just an attempt to muddy the waters to create doubt in an effort to clear his client.
Twocoach is right that single piece of evidence would guarantee a ‘NOT GUILTY’ verdict. Can’t defraud someone who is asking you to defraud them.
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2018 9:02 am
by Deleted User 75
Can an employee of the school defraud the university? I may have already asked this.
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2018 10:03 am
by jfish26
IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Sat Oct 20, 2018 9:02 am
Can an employee of the school defraud the university? I may have already asked this.
Yes, but that’s not the question here. The question is can the university be said to have been defrauded if an employee knew what was going on. I think it would be absurd to say “KU” didn’t know if the coaching staff knew.
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2018 10:14 am
by Geezer
Knew generally or knew specifically, big difference.
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2018 10:25 am
by jfish26
Geezer wrote: ↑Sat Oct 20, 2018 10:14 am
Knew generally or knew specifically, big difference.
When we’re talking about sending people to prison for fraud, I think the “generally” should be quite enough for an acquittal.
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2018 12:50 pm
by Lonestarjayhawk
Much has been said about the lawyer including his opinion that Self knew about the payments and even asked for them. But he didn’t show evidence of that knowledge. To the lawyers on the board, can a defense attorney make statements in opening and/or closing based on conjecture ?
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2018 1:32 pm
by Deleted User 83
The jury is entitled to make reasonable inferences from the evidence presented. So I'm sure the attorney is arguing that from the texts and convo's, considering the context and all other evidence in the record, allows the jury to make the reasonable inference the self requested the payments, even if only indirectly. Although I think it's a stretch.
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2018 7:20 am
by kubowler99
Maybe a stupid question, but why wasn't Self or Townsend called as a witness?
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2018 7:52 am
by Deleted User 89
probably because Adidas doesn't want to burn that bridge, and the feds don't want their case of universities being the victims to be weakened
edit: would also make sense given the defense lawyer's post-trial comments
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:55 am
by jfish26
TraditionKU wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 7:52 am
probably because Adidas doesn't want to burn that bridge, and the feds don't want their case of universities being the victims to be weakened
edit: would also make sense given the defense lawyer's post-trial comments
I would tend to think the prosecution's case would be blown wide open by any high-major coach testifying completely and truthfully as to his knowledge of what goes on.
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2018 9:59 am
by DCHawk1
So...yesterday, my third-grader comes home from "wear your favorite team" day at school and tells me: Kansas cheats at basketball.
I ask, where did you hear that? He says three of his friends said it to him.
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2018 10:02 am
by Deleted User 183
So why didn't you include the part where you then told your son to go back to school today and tell those 3 friends that their mom cheats on their dad?
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2018 10:09 am
by Kyblueblood
jfish26 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:55 am
TraditionKU wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 7:52 am
probably because Adidas doesn't want to burn that bridge, and the feds don't want their case of universities being the victims to be weakened
edit: would also make sense given the defense lawyer's post-trial comments
I would tend to think the prosecution's case would be blown wide open by any high-major coach testifying completely and truthfully as to his knowledge of what goes on.
Absolutely would blow the prosecution’s case. This would be a good time for the highest profile coaches of the largest programs to tell it like it is. They need to allow the players to profit from their own likeness. They don’t really understand the poverty some of these kids come from. Pay them!
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2018 10:13 am
by Deleted User 75
DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 23, 2018 9:59 am
So...yesterday, my third-grader comes home from "wear your favorite team" day at school and tells me: Kansas cheats at basketball.
I ask, where did you hear that? He says three of his friends said it to him.
Tis the life of a Jayhawk fan from now on. Sad reality. Probably hurts extra bad for the people who have spent years blasting other schools for cheating. Oh well. It's possible by the end of it all we won't look quite as bad if some other big name coaches have texts or phone calls released....unfortunately it'll take more than Sean miller. We need Calipari or K to get caught up on this for us to become less relevant.
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2018 10:16 am
by pdub
It hurts to see it go down to us - getting caught in this.
But it certainly doesn't stop me believing that Cal is the dirtiest coach out there ( yes, more than Self ) and just has it down to a science.
Re: Shoe money trial
Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2018 10:20 am
by Deleted User 75
How can you be much dirtier than we look? Paying players is paying players.
Of course UK does it also. I think most of us all know that.
Paying players. Force outs. Etc. We've got a lot in common with UK..and it should be no surprise since the head coaches at each school are Larry Brown protégés.
And for the record I no longer consider paying players as "dirty".