So Ole Miss...
- Thread starter HD6
- Start date
<blockquote><p>Mars: Phone arrangement through Foundation was a departure from Nutt's tenure. Why would school would create/allow that arrangement?</p>— Pat Forde (@YahooForde) <a href="https://twitter.com/YahooForde/status/892113496040771586">July 31, 2017</a></blockquote>
Last edited:
I guess Freeze can cancel those spiritual counselling sessions with his pastor. By the power of the Ole Miss Foundation, he's been redeemed!
I believe that this is itself a grey area, if the device was purchased for a state employee to use during the everyday completion of their state-assigned duties.
I bet it's still subject to FOI. I remember when they tried to get around the 4-year limit for a contract for Tommy Tubberville by trying to give him a 10-year contract with the Foundation. They got over-ruled on that real quick and told the limit applied to the Foundation too.
I wondered why they didn't have the phones setup this way from the beggining
Why doesn't every school cover themselves by doing it this way? I'm guessing there is some sort of precedent or rule about this. Otherwise schools would just officially pay coaches for breathing/holding down the carpet and everything else they do is paid for by private funds or on their own dime so it could always be classified a private or out of the scope of work.
"Coach, how many in home visits did you make?"
"As an official representative of XYZ university, 1." (12 while selling hair care products or on mission trips)
Also, I guess their booster club would need to turn over all receipts for the last 5 years proving no state funds went towards his cell phone?
Why doesn't every school cover themselves by doing it this way? I'm guessing there is some sort of precedent or rule about this. Otherwise schools would just officially pay coaches for breathing/holding down the carpet and everything else they do is paid for by private funds or on their own dime so it could always be classified a private or out of the scope of work.
"Coach, how many in home visits did you make?"
"As an official representative of XYZ university, 1." (12 while selling hair care products or on mission trips)
Also, I guess their booster club would need to turn over all receipts for the last 5 years proving no state funds went towards his cell phone?
It is my understanding that if State business is conducted on a non-State funded phone or other electronic device (even personal devices) then those State business related call records must be maintained by and made available by the agency that employs the individual in question.
It all comes down to
the money, or funding. It depends on who paid for it, a private entity or a state/govt entity.
the money, or funding. It depends on who paid for it, a private entity or a state/govt entity.
As I recall, the AG's opinion is that this device would still be subject to Mississippi Records Act due to the reasons I listed above. That's why ole miss turned over the records in the first place. This signals that OM may now be willing to challenge that opinion in court. It's almost certainly a delay tactic.
Why are they just now saying this? Wouldn't this be the first thing they told him when he requested them?
The device was either used as a state employee's primary work phone, or it was used specifically to circumvent records request. Has to be one or the other, and neither answer should be acceptable to anyone in MS. Serious question...how much more shady, uncooperative, unprofessional, and embarrassing behavior from TSUN before some adults (IHL, Governor, etc.) are forced to intervene?
This may be why the Black Bears believe they can redact the personal calls. It's a private phone, used by a State employee to conduct State business. Turn over the business related calls but redact the personal calls.
I don't think that will fly, but the Ethics Commission may have to rule again.
I don't think that will fly, but the Ethics Commission may have to rule again.
This is wrong. I actually attended a state training on this very recently. It comes down to the nature of call/email/whatever on the device. If it is a private call on a state phone, it is arguably NOT subject to the request. I actually think this interpretation may be correct. In other words, every time Governor Bryant calls his wife on his state cell (I'm simply assuming he has one), the Governor can redact that call before releasing the records.
It also works the other way. A public call on a private cell phone IS discoverable under such request. Obviously, the whole purpose of the law is transparency in how our government works, not to go after people's personal sex call records. HOWEVER, it is ludicrous to suggest that escort calls for recruits is NOT official state business. Of course it is. Recruiting is part of the football coach's business. However, this is WHY it was so damn important to peg Freeze as an escort loving fool...the plot thickens.
My understanding is that Freeze's phone records were originally revealed through Nutt's attorney as part of discovery, not under a public records request. Of course, Freeze either accidentally or perhaps intentionally (under a conspiracy theory) neglected to redact the phone call to the escort service.
It also works the other way. A public call on a private cell phone IS discoverable under such request. Obviously, the whole purpose of the law is transparency in how our government works, not to go after people's personal sex call records. HOWEVER, it is ludicrous to suggest that escort calls for recruits is NOT official state business. Of course it is. Recruiting is part of the football coach's business. However, this is WHY it was so damn important to peg Freeze as an escort loving fool...the plot thickens.
My understanding is that Freeze's phone records were originally revealed through Nutt's attorney as part of discovery, not under a public records request. Of course, Freeze either accidentally or perhaps intentionally (under a conspiracy theory) neglected to redact the phone call to the escort service.
No but NCAA can tell them to produce the #s for their investigators to look over. Of course...if they don't their "exemplary cooperation" may take a hit.
Last edited:
No, the original phone records were requested as public records before the lawsuit was even filed. Mars wanted to match up calls with reporters to tweets and articles that were written, and then he cited a lot of that in the Complaint.
That actually makes better sense. I was trying to figure out why Freeze was allowed to redact his "personal calls".....he was allowed to redact them because they aren't subject to the request, because they were personal. Why did he accidentally forget to redact ONE call?
Edited to Add: Although it should be, this is not a black and white issue. Keep in mind the person who was educating our group was the head of the Ethics Commission in Mississippi. The question about personal phone calls was specifically asked...
Edited to Add: Although it should be, this is not a black and white issue. Keep in mind the person who was educating our group was the head of the Ethics Commission in Mississippi. The question about personal phone calls was specifically asked...
Last edited:
Well Pat, just add another line to the list you have of how they've screwed this thing up. This one is really incredible.
If I were Hugh Freeze hearing this defense now, I would have my lawyer drawing up the papers. So, their argument now, is that they leaked his personal information that cost him his job and millions upon millions of dollars, in a request they could have stonewalled and actually denied?
They are still digging. No bottom in sight.
They are still digging. No bottom in sight.
Reasonable doubt about the honesty of all parties involved = no redaction. Mars is going to fight that as hard and as long as it takes IMO...
Mars just basically scared the dumb bastards so bad they just started giving him **** indiscriminately. Now that's funny...i don't care who you are.
Yep. The Ethics Commission has already ruled that if state business has been conducted, no matter who pays the phone bill, the record of that call or text message is subject to Public Records Requests.
http://www.ethics.state.ms.us/ethic...cords_R-13-023/$FILE/R-13-023.pdf?OpenElement
http://www.ethics.state.ms.us/ethic...cords_R-13-023/$FILE/R-13-023.pdf?OpenElement
Why dont the investigative journalists contact the escort services?
No stone unturned and all...
No stone unturned and all...