In a major case, if the trial is short the verdict is guilty 99.9999999% of the time.
That is all.
In a major case, if the trial is short the verdict is guilty 99.9999999% of the time.
That is all.
I have watched almost every court drama show on tv for the past 20 years.... Guilty.
Perry Mason approves of this post.
My bet is that the hearing was short as there was no significant defense offered, when you're guilty and the basic damning facts are laid out it doesn't take much time to beg for mercy.
It wasn't a trial or criminal case, correct. But...these hearing mirror a court trial to some degree. A prosecution (NCAA investigators) present their case, findings, and supporting documentation (to the point of bringing in a witness). Then the defense (Ole Miss) presents their counter. So to some degree this is very much like a trial minus a jury and devoid of court precedent and/or law. Now, they had, what, 21 allegations to review at level 1 then a multitude of level 2 and 3. Even if UM accepts the majority of these it still has to be presented. This would all take AT LEAST a day to a day and a half. If the defense wanted to present a counter argument or defense of any kind on 3-4 of the major allegations that should take a solid day AT LEAST.
The fact that we haven't heard of the defense presenting any witnesses or rebuttal of their own is very damning. I will stick by my original statement and say 2 days (and it was actually early on the second day) is NOT A GOOD LOOK for UNM.
These guys agree.
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/i...Ar_GxXhu2Sxr6M
Have we gotten Goebels Godfrey's take on it yet?
The ole "open and shut case" as they say.
It helps to remember that in their response to the NCAA, OM agreed with several of the allegations. One would expect those to go quickly. How long does it take to say "Yeah, we agree- you caught us doing that. Just, please don't punish us too hard! Exemplary cooperation and stuff!"