Phil Just Got Served?

#352
#352
How big of a distraction could this potentially be? Could there be a need for an interim head coach while Fulmer deals with this if it is unable to be moved from during the season?
 
#356
#356
IPorange said:
How big of a distraction could this potentially be? Could there be a need for an interim head coach while Fulmer deals with this if it is unable to be moved from during the season?
Click to expand...
If this crap can't be continued to beyond the football season, I am feeling really bad about the capabilities of our fine university.
 
#363
#363
hatvol96 said:
I know him. He's a decent enough guy. He's certainly made some hay from his relationship with Fulmer. Used to be married to State Senator Jamie Woodson.
Click to expand...
If you were his attorney, what would be the one question you wouldn't want Fulmer to answer? Or is there a way for you to avoid Phil from answering any of them on the 25th?
 
#364
#364
TVOLS said:
It's possible that he did not see the subpoena. Someone could have stuck it in his papers when his head was turned. Who knows?
Click to expand...
I don't think that is the case. What would be more plausible to me would be some dude hands him a piece of paper that he thinks is a coupon for discounts at a local restaurant or whatever with all of the media hoopla going on. I believe the server made it appear that way intentionally.
 
#365
#365
Rasputin_Vol said:
If you were his attorney, what would be the one question you wouldn't want Fulmer to answer? Or is there a way for you to avoid Phil from answering any of them on the 25th?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't want him answering anything. That's the sure way to avoid trouble. If forced to come up with a single question that would be anathema, it would be anything related to any kind of immunity or favor he was given for providing the information to the 'AA. If the answer to that question is that the 'AA did immunize him, it would be a PR nightmare of Biblical proportions. TCHFCATUTK goes from being, at least in how he's portrayed by his supporters, a crusader for fair play to a self serving rat who ran to the principal to cleanse his own dirty hands.

I'd file multiple motions to quash the subpoena, most relating to the fact that the information they appear to want can be gained from other sources, thus rendering the deposition superfluous.
 
#367
#367
TVOLS said:
It's possible that he did not see the subpoena. Someone could have stuck it in his papers when his head was turned. Who knows?
Click to expand...
Forgot to mention, if he didn't receive the subpoena into his possesion then he wasn't legally "served" with it and it would be irrelevant.
 
#368
#368
JJ_Hickman_07 said:
Okay I'm still missing something. Did CPF rat on Bama about something and now its kind of a revenge thing or what?
Click to expand...
This particular issue has been spelled out in the first few pages in this thread and in all of Alabama's news media. Research should be easy.
 
#369
#369
JJ_Hickman_07 said:
Okay I'm still missing something. Did CPF rat on Bama about something and now its kind of a revenge thing or what?
Click to expand...
Yes, he ratted on Bama. He had meetings in Chattanooga (I faintly remember a meeting allegedly that occurred at the East Ridge Shoney's), recorded conversations, offered up other coaches and sold them out to corroborate his charges, and actively got involved in an NCAA investigation in other ways I'm sure.
 
#371
#371
Rasputin_Vol said:
Yes, he ratted on Bama. He had meetings in Chattanooga (I faintly remember a meeting allegedly that occurred at the East Ridge Shoney's), recorded conversations, offered up other coaches and sold them out to corroborate his charges, and actively got involved in an NCAA investigation in other ways I'm sure.
Click to expand...
Some of your observations makes me tend to faint as well... :whistling:
 
#372
#372
vestvol98 said:
I'm a lawyer for the cup of coffee that will buy me. What surprises me is that 1. They are suing for libel. If the NCAA resonably believed the truth of what they said about Mr. Smith then that is a defense. If Fulmer gets on the stand and says "yeah I told them" what had been reported about Smith. Then that is a defense for the NCAA. Even if it is not true if they had a reasonable basis to believe it that is a defense. Why would Smith want to take his depo. to have Fulmer say even I lied to the NCAA it still hurts their case.
2 Sometimes you take an adverse witnesses depo to nail down their testimony before trial, but in this case they have already tried this case. The case was remanded by the court of appeals. The NCAA did not call Fulmer as a witness.
3. For this to make sense they would have to prove that the NCAA knew Fulmer was lying or they had reason to know he was lying.
I'm a horrible typist so I'm sure there are errors.
Click to expand...

After 25 pages, I still think back to this post. I just don't understand what they hope to accomplish except to embarrass the coach.
 
#373
#373
hatvol96 said:
Arguably Bob Huggins' best friends in coaching are John Calipari, Charlie Spoonhour, and Kevin O'Neill, all of whom were at one point conference rivals of his. Bob Knight and Rick Barnes are exceptionally close. Cal and Eustachy are tight. It's not uncommon. However, being an informant tends to relieve one of that type of esprit de corps.
Click to expand...

If I were a NCAA coach in a major conference, I would not care if other coaches liked me or not. Seems to me the less I was liked the better, if that should mean I'm beating them too many times.
 
#374
#374
VolDad said:
After 25 pages, I still think back to this post. I just don't understand what they hope to accomplish except to embarrass the coach.
Click to expand...


On my limited knowledge, two things occur to me as possibilities:

1) Plaintiff hopes to show that the NCAA did not have the information it claimed to have regarding him when it libeled or defamed him. If CPF was indeed the source and they can show a significant difference between what the NCAA claims he told them, versus what he actually did tell them, then perhaps they can show that the NCAA did not have a reasonable basis to say whatever it did about Plaintiff.

Or

2) (and worse for CPF and UT), they might be trying to show that a deal for immunity was made for CPF and UT and that the deal was in bad faith, i.e. some political motivation behind it, rather than catching the true bad guys. If so, it would first be necessary to discover the details of the deal.
 
#375
#375
lawgator1 said:
On my limited knowledge, two things occur to me as possibilities:

1) Plaintiff hopes to show that the NCAA did not have the information it claimed to have regarding him when it libeled or defamed him. If CPF was indeed the source and they can show a significant difference between what the NCAA claims he told them, versus what he actually did tell them, then perhaps they can show that the NCAA did not have a reasonable basis to say whatever it did about Plaintiff.

Or

2) (and worse for CPF and UT), they might be trying to show that a deal for immunity was made for CPF and UT and that the deal was in bad faith, i.e. some political motivation behind it, rather than catching the true bad guys. If so, it would first be necessary to discover the details of the deal.
Click to expand...

I personally think they were just trying to embarrass Fulmer out of revenge, because they are pissed they got busted.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top