How does the CL actually omit reference to NCAA

[CoastRat.sixpack]

I know most of you regular posters on here dog the CL, which I have generally taken with a grain of salt. I have always thought they sucked, but at least they cover our state's college sports unlike our glorious Sun Herald on the coast.

But good Lord, when the very Motion filed on behalf of Freeze references the NCAA and his desire to keep his testimony from them, how does the CL maintain any credibility by omitting that, and filling the article with, well "filler?" Unless, of course, TMZ made that part up.**

The fact that he put that in a court pleading IS the story. I know you will all give me your best smart assed responses, but no one has noted this glaring omission.

Does anyone have a copy or a link to the actual Motion filed on behalf of Freeze. I would love to read that work of art.

 

[TBone.sixpack]

Bruiser you are up**

 

[The Peeper]

jughead/arlo will be here pronto. That said, if there is nothing to hide, wht try to get out of it?

 

[Dawg4ever49]

Wonder why the Clarion Ledger didn't uncover this whole mess in Oxfart, rather than have outside media report it all first? Wonder why once the outside media having uncovered the Clarion Ledger dig to the bottom of the story and stay on top of it? They certainly stayed on top of the investigation of our program under Jackie with articles everyday until the NCAA rendered our punishment.

 

[johnson86-1]

Does anyone have a copy or a link to the actual Motion filed on behalf of Freeze. I would love to read that work of art.

No copy of the motion, but espn quotes this:

"As the plaintiff has acknowledged, the general public has great interest in information about Defendant, soon to be an NFL player," Freeze's attorneys wrote in the motion. "In addition, the general public has great interest in Freeze and the Ole Miss football program. At this time, the NCAA is considering allegations against the University and its football program, including allegations related to Defendant. The parties should use information disclosed in this litigation solely for purposes of discovering facts relevant to the claims and defenses in this litigation."

Doesn't exactly say TMZ reported, although the implicit message seems to be pretty clear. If the NCAA already wants to hit UM, this will probably motivate them more. There's nothing special about a deposition compared to being questioned by NCAA investigators, except that the deposition is under oath. Looks pretty damning.

 

[121Josey]

"As the plaintiff has acknowledged, the general public has great interest in information about Defendant, soon to be an NFL player," Freeze's attorneys wrote in the motion. "In addition, the general public has great interest in Freeze and the Ole Miss football program. At this time, the NCAA is considering allegations against the University and its football program, including allegations related to Defendant. The parties should use information disclosed in this litigation solely for purposes of discovering facts relevant to the claims and defenses in this litigation."

B-b-b-b-b-b-b-but Jughead say that the quote was taken out of context.

 

[patdog]

I think the CL has quit even pretending it's not just a mouthpiece for Bjork and Freeze. Literally every bit of bad news is broken by an out of state source.

 

[KurtRambis4]

Wait a minute!

Jughead said that TMZ just made this part up? Are you saying he was wrong?

I'm sure he'll be over to clarify.

Someone start an "oxford sucks!" thread.

 

[Arloguthrie]

Yes, the TMZ quote was clearly taken out of context. The motion merely says the plaintiff shouldn't be allowed to use the deposition as a fishing expedition into unrelated NCAA matters. That's an entirely reasonable position. But TMZ reported Freeze said he shouldn't have to give the deposition because of the pending NCAA investigation. That is twisting what the motion said to fit what the story wanted it to say. Again, I think any attorney on this board, if he's being honest, would take the same position.

 

[121Josey]

Yes, the TMZ quote was clearly taken out of context. The motion merely says the plaintiff shouldn't be allowed to use the deposition as a fishing expedition into unrelated NCAA matters. That's an entirely reasonable position. But TMZ reported Freeze said he shouldn't have to give the deposition because of the pending NCAA investigation. That is twisting what the motion said to fit what the story wanted it to say. Again, I think any attorney on this board, if he's being honest, would take the same position.

So, do you deny that Freezus said (through his attorneys, who may or may not be twisting what he said) either Freezus shouldn't give the deposition or Freezus "shouldn't have to give the deposition because of the pending NCAA investigation?" You clearly don't understand proposal and argumentation (or you clearly don't understand the definition or the connotation of "merely")

I believe that you twisted TMZ's article by using "shouldn't" instead of "doesn't want". (But in the big picture there is no significant difference).

Here's what TMZ wrote (unless I myself am twisting what TMZ wrote)

The stepdad now wants to depose Laremy's college football coach Hugh Freeze -- believing he has information that will help prove his story.

But Freeze doesn't want that to happen -- and has filed court docs to block the deposition -- in part because "at this time, the NCAA is considering allegations against the University and its football program, including allegations related to [Tunsil]." (emphasis mine)

Or, OR... or you are affirming that Freezus wants to give the deposition! Dubmass.

 

[johnson86-1]

Yes, the TMZ quote was clearly taken out of context. The motion merely says the plaintiff shouldn't be allowed to use the deposition as a fishing expedition into unrelated NCAA matters. That's an entirely reasonable position. But TMZ reported Freeze said he shouldn't have to give the deposition because of the pending NCAA investigation. That is twisting what the motion said to fit what the story wanted it to say. Again, I think any attorney on this board, if he's being honest, would take the same position.

I'd like to see the actual motion (but not enough to actually track it down) and see what else is in there. The TMZ paragraph: "Freeze says he's concerned that any information from the deposition could be accessed by the NCAA investigators and possibly used against him...and he doesn't believe that's fair." is hopefully not a characterization of the paragraph the Clarion Ledger quoted.

I think it would be fair for TMZ to take the quoted paragraph and the request that the deposition be sealed and make a statement that the request is out of an apparent concern of what the NCAA might do with it, as TMZ is not exactly a straight news reporting information. But either TMZ made up a it's claim regarding what "Freeze says", or the CLarion Ledger chose to omit an extremely juicy bit of news. I'm not sure whether TMZ or Clarion Ledger is more credible, but if Mayo is the attorney, I'm guessing that he wouldn't let anything that damaging slip through. What's quoted by ESPN is bad enough for Freeze, and I don't think there's any better way he could have worded it.

 

[Arloguthrie]

Obviously Freeze is asking the judge to rule that he doesn't have to give a deposition. But he's also saying that IF he has to give a deposition, the plaintiff shouldn't be allowed to go on a fishing expedition into unrelated NCAA matters. So again, when TMZ said he doesn't want to give a deposition because of the NCAA investigation, that's taking the statement out of context. If TMZ had included the entire quote, as ESPN did, I would have no criticism. They extracted that line to make it sound different than what he actually said in the motion, i.e., taking it out of context. If you can't or won't see that, that's fine, we can just agree to disagree, because I don't know how else to explain it.

 

[TBone.sixpack]

At least you have the stones to come here and defend this mess. The rest of your people have all but disappeared. Which is unsurprising.

 

[crushing]

If there is a question asked that doesn't pertain specifically to the Tunsil case, then HF lawyer should be able to object and have HF not answer the question. That's what his lawyer is there for. So, why the hell is he so scared to talk about things. Why does he want everything sealed? Why does he want the courtroom closed to outsiders? Something to hide Hugh? Especially since he's doing everything the right way already anyhow.

For you attorneys, what chance do you think they have at getting these requests fulfilled. There being an ongoing NCAA investigation should have no bearing at all on this court case.

 

[Arloguthrie]

Oh we may get hammered. I don't claim to know one way or another. I've never said otherwise. I was only attempting to weigh in in a civil manner regarding why freeze's attorney has taken the position that he has, and to explain why that position (not the investigation itself) is not a big deal, imo.

 

[121Josey]

Obviously Freeze is asking the judge to rule that he doesn't have to give a deposition. But he's also saying that IF he has to give a deposition, the plaintiff shouldn't be allowed to go on a fishing expedition into unrelated NCAA matters. So again, when TMZ said he doesn't want to give a deposition because of the NCAA investigation, that's taking the statement out of context. If TMZ had included the entire quote, as ESPN did, I would have no criticism. They extracted that line to make it sound different than what he actually said in the motion, i.e., taking it out of context. If you can't or won't see that, that's fine, we can just agree to disagree, because I don't know how else to explain it.

If ESPN would have included that comment, you would have still said that it was taken out of context. That's the easiest reply in the book (ok, second easiest behind denying it outright). What do you not understand about that Freezus not wanting to give a deposition includes everything under the part "IF he has to give a deposition?"

You seem to be very adept at "extracting" different parts of the quotations (of the document) (i.e., taking them out of context) to fit your own purposes, but you claim that TMZ has twisted the statement.

However, a motion for protective order filed Tuesday in Lafayette County Circuit Court argues that there is “no basis for deposing Freeze at any point concerning his claims against Defendant [Tunsil]” and describes the request “as a fishing expedition as to Freeze’s liability.” (emphasis mine)

From ESPN - Do you see that break in the dialogue? It would be nice to know what filled that space in the document.

"As the plaintiff has acknowledged, the general public has great interest in information about Defendant, soon to be an NFL player," Freeze's attorneys wrote in the motion. "In addition, the general public has great interest in Freeze and the Ole Miss football program. At this time, the NCAA is considering allegations against the University and its football program, including allegations related to Defendant. The parties should use information disclosed in this litigation solely for purposes of discovering facts relevant to the claims and defenses in this litigation." (emphasis mine)

 

[crushing]

Oh we may get hammered. I don't claim to know one way or another. I've never said otherwise. I was only attempting to weigh in in a civil manner regarding why freeze's attorney has taken the position that he has, and to explain why that position (not the investigation itself) is not a big deal, imo.

Well, I'll say this, whether this is normal procedure or not, this makes his supposed "squeaky clean character" look guilty as sin.

 

[DerHntr]

Obviously Freeze is asking the judge to rule that he doesn't have to give a deposition. But he's also saying that IF he has to give a deposition, the plaintiff shouldn't be allowed to go on a fishing expedition into unrelated NCAA matters. So again, when TMZ said he doesn't want to give a deposition because of the NCAA investigation, that's taking the statement out of context. If TMZ had included the entire quote, as ESPN did, I would have no criticism. They extracted that line to make it sound different than what he actually said in the motion, i.e., taking it out of context. If you can't or won't see that, that's fine, we can just agree to disagree, because I don't know how else to explain it.

Why would he care if the lawyers go on an NCAA fishing expedition? I thought Bjork and Freeze both can't wait to tell their side of the story and they are having to wait because of the NCAA. The US court system clearly trumps the NCAA. They now have their chance to answer all sorts of questions and set the record straight. I expect they should be excited about the potential good press that would come from the court documents, unless of course the bible Freeze places his hand on causes him to tell a different story under oath.

 

[TBone.sixpack]

Agreed. Perception is not swinging Danny Hugh's way at the present.

 

[johnson86-1]

If there is a question asked that doesn't pertain specifically to the Tunsil case, then HF lawyer should be able to object and have HF not answer the question. That's what his lawyer is there for. So, why the hell is he so scared to talk about things. Why does he want everything sealed? Why does he want the courtroom closed to outsiders? Something to hide Hugh? Especially since he's doing everything the right way already anyhow.

For you attorneys, what chance do you think they have at getting these requests fulfilled. There being an ongoing NCAA investigation should have no bearing at all on this court case.

Not exactly a legal opinion, but I believe there is a right of access that applies to court proceedings but not necessarily to discovery, unless it's discovery attached to a dispositive motion. No clue how the judge will rule, but he's an elected judge that I presume has to get votes from heavily UM tilting areas. I think it's pretty much in his discretion whether or not to seal it and don't think it would be unethical or unlawful for him to seal the transcript, so I would guess that's what he does, just looking at concerns about being re-elected.

 

[TBone.sixpack]

He will seal it for certain. Political survival as you said.

 

[OleMissLogo]

Just want to point out that NCAA sitting in on a deposition during the Shapiro bankruptcy case is what ended up getting them sued by Miami and Miami won. Freeze is basically saying that a judge has already ruled that the NCAA cannot take part in depositions for matters outside the investigation and they do not have the power to depose.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2013/1/24/3907888/ncaa-miami-investigation-scandal

 

[KurtRambis4]

THIS^^^

Freezus has stated MULTIPLE times, in various interviews that he wished he could get his point of view out. Now, here he is, with the greatest chance to do so, and he clams up. It doesn't seem like something a person with nothing to hide would do.

 

[johnson86-1]

Just want to point out that NCAA sitting in on a deposition during the Shapiro bankruptcy case is what ended up getting them sued by Miami and Miami won. Freeze is basically saying that a judge has already ruled that the NCAA cannot take part in depositions for matters outside the investigation and they do not have the power to depose.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2013/1/24/3907888/ncaa-miami-investigation-scandal

To my knowledge, it wasn't that they were sitting in, it was that they had arranged with the attorney doing the deposition to ask questions that weren't aimed to elicit information relevant to the case at hand (and that might have as a secondary effect revealed information relevant to the NCAA probe), but instead had the primary purpose of revealing info for the purposes of the NCAA investigation. Not sure if that was actual wrong doing by the NCAA investigators, but it was definitely a no-no for the attorney doing the deposition. '

There wouldn't be anything wrong with the NCAA asking Miller's attorney for a copy of the deposition transcript and Miller's attorney providing it, provided the judge hasn't directed otherwise.

 

[OleMissLogo]

To my knowledge, it wasn't that they were sitting in, it was that they had arranged with the attorney doing the deposition to ask questions that weren't aimed to elicit information relevant to the case at hand (and that might have as a secondary effect revealed information relevant to the NCAA probe), but instead had the primary purpose of revealing info for the purposes of the NCAA investigation. Not sure if that was actual wrong doing by the NCAA investigators, but it was definitely a no-no for the attorney doing the deposition. '

There wouldn't be anything wrong with the NCAA asking Miller's attorney for a copy of the deposition transcript and Miller's attorney providing it, provided the judge hasn't directed otherwise.

And that is what Freeze is asking to be restricted.

 

[Shamoan]

tRant

 

[TBone.sixpack]

Cause he is guilty as 17.

 

[Drebin]

Just want to point out that NCAA sitting in on a deposition during the Shapiro bankruptcy case is what ended up getting them sued by Miami and Miami won. Freeze is basically saying that a judge has already ruled that the NCAA cannot take part in depositions for matters outside the investigation and they do not have the power to depose.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2013/1/24/3907888/ncaa-miami-investigation-scandal

But is this really a matter outside the investigation? The crux of Miller's argument is that he and Tunsil got into a dispute over Tunsil riding around with agents. He accuses Freeze of instead going public with Tunsil's version that he was defending his mother. The validity of Miller's lawsuit goes directly to his story over Tunsil's involvement with agents, which the NCAA is currently investigating.

I know you lawyer-types can twist, wordsmith, and parse with the best of them, but you're reaching here.

 

[johnson86-1]

And that is what Freeze is asking to be restricted.

I'm sure he's asking for that (which would be perfectly normal to only want to be asked questions relevant to the case or designed to lead to information relevant to the case), but he's also asking for the entire deposition to be sealed. He's certainly free to ask that, but it looks really bad. And sealing the transcript is probably going to be the only thing he can get, because the agent contact is so central to Miller's case, that lots of stuff related to impermissible benefits and how they came about, and whether Freeze or other people at the university knew about them might lead to discoverable information.

 

[OleMissLogo]

But is this really a matter outside the investigation? The crux of Miller's argument is that he and Tunsil got into a dispute over Tunsil riding around with agents. He accuses Freeze of instead going public with Tunsil's version that he was defending his mother. The validity of Miller's lawsuit goes directly to his story over Tunsil's involvement with agents, which the NCAA is currently investigating.

I know you lawyer-types can twist, wordsmith, and parse with the best of them, but you're reaching here.

Yes it is a matter outside of the investigation because the (disputed) reasons for the fight have nothing to do with whether or not Tunsil or Ole Miss broke any NCAA rules. Contact with an agent is not breaking a rule.

 

[OleMissLogo]

I'm sure he's asking for that (which would be perfectly normal to only want to be asked questions relevant to the case or designed to lead to information relevant to the case), but he's also asking for the entire deposition to be sealed. He's certainly free to ask that, but it looks really bad. And sealing the transcript is probably going to be the only thing he can get, because the agent contact is so central to Miller's case, that lots of stuff related to impermissible benefits and how they came about, and whether Freeze or other people at the university knew about them might lead to discoverable information.

I'm rading it as him asking for it to be sealed if and only if the questions are not restricted.

 

[TBone.sixpack]

The OM Think Tank is hard at it. Good Lord the lawyer culture is disgusting.

We are only guilty if you can prove it!

What a way to live.

 

[Dawgzilla]

No. This is a totally different situation. Shapiro's attorney conspired to ask questions in bankruptcy depositions that were totally unrelated to the case, and she asked those questions of people who were beyond the jurisdiction of the NCAA. She committed some serious ethical violations in doing so.

Freeze is required to answr any questions the NCAA might ask him, so there is no need for the NCAA to use his deposition to get him to answer questions. The only way this could be damaging to Freeze is if he gives different answers in his deposition than what he gives to the NCAA. I can understand him wanting to keep his deposition answers out of the hands of the general public, but I don't see how he can complain about answering questions related to the NCAA investigation.

Further, those questions are potentially relevant to the case. Freeze is an important witness in the defamation case, and could ultimately be named as a co-defendant. Therefore his credibility is at issue, which means any character evidence that tends to shed light on his credibility is subject to discovery. His reputation in his professional field for truthfulness and integrity are clearly discoverable, and that includes any allegations and investigations against him or his staff regarding professional impropriety.

 

[Drebin]

Yes it is a matter outside of the investigation because the (disputed) reasons for the fight have nothing to do with whether or not Tunsil or Ole Miss broke any NCAA rules. Contact with an agent is not breaking a rule.

It matters if Tunsil or Freeze are already on record with the NCAA with a different story.

Put more bluntly, if they didn't break an NCAA rule, then why do they want the deposition sealed? There should be nothing to hide.

 

[KeyserSoze1999]

Tweets confirmed by Ole Miss THEMSELVES. Did THEY misunderstand the question? Ole Miss is gonna need some of their most "lawyering" lawyers to talk their way outta this one.

View attachment 3948View attachment 3949View attachment 3950

 

[johnson86-1]

I'm rading it as him asking for it to be sealed if and only if the questions are not restricted.

I have not read the entire motion, but ESPN and Clarion Ledger are both reporting that Freeze's attorney asked for a protective order to take place and if that's not granted, asked that the deposition be conducted in writing, the scope limited, and the deposition sealed. The request to seal it is not being reported as contingent on the request to do it in writing or limiting the scope being denied.

 

[johnson86-1]

Yes it is a matter outside of the investigation because the (disputed) reasons for the fight have nothing to do with whether or not Tunsil or Ole Miss broke any NCAA rules. Contact with an agent is not breaking a rule.

That's a pretty big leap of faith. You think Miller is claiming that the fight erupted because of permissible contact with agents?

 

[Sam Adams Dog]

its way past a witch hunt at this point. And the context is Freeze should

have no problem testifying about anything related to Tunsil IF he was honest with the NCAA to begin with. What could possibly be asked at this point that would be damaging that wasnt already covered? If its an unrelated NCAA matters as they claim, then why does he care if the NCAA or anyone has access to his deposition?

b

Obviously Freeze is asking the judge to rule that he doesn't have to give a deposition. But he's also saying that IF he has to give a deposition, the plaintiff shouldn't be allowed to go on a fishing expedition into unrelated NCAA matters. So again, when TMZ said he doesn't want to give a deposition because of the NCAA investigation, that's taking the statement out of context. If TMZ had included the entire quote, as ESPN did, I would have no criticism. They extracted that line to make it sound different than what he actually said in the motion, i.e., taking it out of context. If you can't or won't see that, that's fine, we can just agree to disagree, because I don't know how else to explain it.

 

[121Josey]

Yes it is a matter outside of the investigation because the (disputed) reasons for the fight have nothing to do with whether or not Tunsil or Ole Miss broke any NCAA rules. Contact with an agent is not breaking a rule.

But a dispute over what benefits the agents are providing is in play. Did the previous poster write "riding around with agents"? I guess that is defined as (appropriate) "contact" with an agent... but maybe not to Miller.** Nevertheless, motives in court cases can be a *****, don't you think?

From the fingers of that fraudulent journalist Riley Blevins:

Per NCAA rules, Tunsil would be allowed to speak with certified NFL agents and still maintain his eligibility as long as he doesn't accept any impermissible benefits or sign.

If that NOA was public we would have a little better insight into what "riding around with agents", I mean "contact", really meant.**

 

[mount lefroy]

And that is what Freeze is asking to be restricted.

Seems to me that it is a high probability that anything he says in the deposition would contradict something he told the NCAA already.