Grand jury: UL stripper scandal
- Thread starter Delk#00
- Start date
The fecal matter could hit the air circulating device. I love it.
ole turtle neck better cut loose with some of that under the table money and slid it over to the DA. or with macgee having to finally testify or go to prison then all the tards or I mean cards will come tumbling down 
The proper authorities will be notified about this....
The timing on this is all about trying to shift focus from the impending response from the NCAA and put the focus on her. This has Jurich's fingerprints all over it.
I
I have always called him Lord Turtleneck.......I will have to change that to the "Fixer". There hasn't been any info about the FB players getting shot at the party several months ago.
I have always called him Lord Turtleneck.......I will have to change that to the "Fixer". There hasn't been any info about the FB players getting shot at the party several months ago.
A lot of water has gone under the bridge since this broke,I doubt much will come out of a Grand Jury at this stage. Ms Powell might need to worry a little,but if she is called as a witness then she is not the target of the investigation the same would go for McGee
Aside from the direct consequences of this (which are unclear because we do not know for sure who is being targeted by the grand jury and what witnesses/evidence it would implicate), a potential indirect consequence of this would be even greater pressure on the NCAA to make an example out of Louisville. Once they get word that there is a criminal investigation involving sex with minors, they could be forced to make an example out of Louisville, especially if the grand jury investigation goes anywhere. Correct me if I am wrong, but I do not recall any discussions of minors being involved on either side of the sex acts in the NCAA's papers to this point, which I always found strange considering some of the recruits implicated had to be under age (and now there is a criminal investigation presumably about the underage prostitutes).
I know a head coach who doesn't want that to happen.
How can you even bring this up on the anniversary of the day Star Wars was released?
I think there were questions about the ages of one or more of the girls and maybe one recruit,the timing is curious,this could end poorly for UL or it could be an exercise just to clear the books of the case.
I recall there being questions, but I don't recall it ever being part of the NCAA's investigation or UofL's responses, at least not publicly. I also do not recall any real discussion of it in the media when covering the NCAA case.
Hate to sound paranoid or skeptical....but the decision to prosecute is in many ways just political. The politicians in this town overwhelmingly favor UofL. 2+2.....this isn't being done to make Louisville look bad, but instead is an effort to rehabilitate the school/Jurich/Pitino, and to punish Powell. Just guessing.......
"The grand jury is hearing evidence against three people, according to one source."
"Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Chris Foster, who is in charge of a unit that prosecutes crimes against children, is handling the case."
"If my office receives credible evidence of sexual abuse or other criminal activity involving minor children, we will vigorously prosecute those responsible for those crimes."
"Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Chris Foster, who is in charge of a unit that prosecutes crimes against children, is handling the case."
"If my office receives credible evidence of sexual abuse or other criminal activity involving minor children, we will vigorously prosecute those responsible for those crimes."
I thought there was a question about one of her(Ms Powell's) daughters and maybe Blakeney
I have been saying since the law suits started being filed that the last thing they wanted was for this to go to the legal system. You can get by with lying to the NCAA to save your school. When you are sworn in and sitting next to a judge are you going to be as loyal? IF any of this was to go to trail, (I think it will) then the truth will come out.
Anything is possible with UofL, but I am not sure how this could ever be a good thing for them at this point, no matter what happens. They have already admitted to basically everything (at least what they essentially had to admit to), they have already been severely punished, and there is likely more punishment to come. Further publicity, especially about sex with minors, is not good and may force the NCAA to come down on them even harder. Not to mention the remote possibility that McGee is forced to spill the beans under threat of criminal prosecution.
If McGee and Powell are targets they can't be compelled to testify,they could choose to testify but that is unusual at this stage of a criminal proceeding
Right, that is why I said there were questions. As I said in my first post, we all know there were discussions about it among those that were following the story from the beginning (including message boards), but I certainly don't recall the age thing being a central issue in the actual NCAA case against UofL. I am not sure it is even mentioned in the allegations or responses, but I could be wrong.
Unless he is granted immunity, then he could be compelled to testify against Powell or others.
From the NCAA's position the ages wouldn't make any difference,they(NCAA) have no authority from a criminal standpoint.The NCAA learned that from their rush to judgement in the Penn St case.
with the kind of scandals they've been up to i'm not sure purgery would scare him off from a payoff, or just winding up dead.
![[jumpingsmile]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/happy/happy0028.r191677.gif "Jumping Smile [jumpingsmile]")
I disagree. They have discretion in how they punish, which is based in part on subjective factors. That much is clear based on statements from the NCAA that this is not a normal extra benefits case because it involves providing sex to recruits/players, not just money. So I think the fact that it may have involved sex with minors could be very relevant to how the NCAA approaches the case.
I think that when they are talking about recruits, it is assumed that they are underage, as HS students.
Maybe but if they(NCAA) go that direction then they are inviting any ruling they make to be tied up in court for years,again citing the Penn St case did the NCAA not backtrack from their original sanctions based on the criminality of the issues there?
Maybe, but I doubt it because that would be a dangerous assumption given the implications. You can't assume that, not only because the recruits may have in fact been 18 at the time (or even older), but also because different states have different laws. In many states, 16 and 17 are fine so long as the other person is not older by several years.
My guess is that one will receive a deal (immunity) to testify against the other. UL should not want this to happen because McGee could offer new evidence that the NCAA could use to revisit the case.
Best case scenario is McGee hits the witness stand and sings like a canary. His testimony brings to light all the dirty laundry that is unknown at this point.
But the Penn St was apples and oranges. That case had nothing to do with actual NCAA infractions. It was basically the NCAA saying that we did not like what you did, and it looks horrible, so we have to act. Here, there were actual violations of NCAA regulations, and the nature of those violations (i.e., they didn't just provide recruits with extra sandwich spread) will absolutely play a role. Do you think if the extra benefits here was simply $10,000 in cash provided to various recruits to eat and party over several years that UofL would have ever voluntarily imposed a post-season ban? They only did so because they were trying to get out in front of the NCAA due to the unique nature of the violations.
You make a good point and may very well be correct,however I believe there has to be a clear separation between an NCAA violation and a criminal action that is an element of that violation and the two should remain separate thru their conclusion.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Um, what? Huh? Karl Ravech talking about the SEC- Latest: the nail at the foul line