Damn they are so screwed. What the Three Stooges didn't mention in their little video must be really bad. Really, really bad.
Printable View
Damn they are so screwed. What the Three Stooges didn't mention in their little video must be really bad. Really, really bad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WinningIsRelentless
Vacant Waffle King in Gordo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Liverpooldawg
There used to be a boiled peanut shack in Eldridge.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg
Don't let them fool you, they either have it or have had it. They've already written their formal response to it, and won't be surprised if they have to start responding to another one. Everything else, like the dog and pony show, is just window dressing to try and save Freeze...shitbirds..
I have wondered this also. Taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boodawg
But they are, and bjork and co. refuse to let anyone review their hypothetical 'receipts'Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctorDawg
Damn right. That would mean anyone living and paying taxes in ms would be and are paying for this crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctorDawg
How much support would it take to get a referendum or something voted on for this matter?Quote:
Originally Posted by Boodawg
"Maybe this will finally motivate one of these said 'journalist' to do some actual investigative journalism".
Would be nice but I doubt it.
Exit 14 off I-22 next to the Key West InnQuote:
Originally Posted by WinningIsRelentless
Quote:
Originally Posted by RocketDawg
Yep talk about bfeQuote:
Originally Posted by InTheIttaBenaHotSun
RepQuote:
Originally Posted by starkvegasdawg34
I told y'all the day they released that video that it was a controlled message. I can assure you (100% assure you) that this is not endearing them with the NCAA.
What I don't understand is how they can claim they don't have it in their possession. Even if it's outside counsel if they are paying that firm to represent them tabs their interests then it's in their possession.
man beaver had the sawdust hash browns all the way and tried to get a clergy discount......Quote:
Originally Posted by WinningIsRelentless
starkvegasdawg34, you did call it exactly what these trasy mofos would do.
I want to know how all this defense , thats been going on for a while, is being paid for.....
What's the angle here?
Is to keep guys from transferring before Summer?
To build up their full defense before showing evidence?
I mean, they have release it at some point, so why not now?
What do they have to gain by releasing it?Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
What did they have to gain by that bizarre YouTube memo? Why tell the world they have the new NOA and then refuse to release it? Had they not done the YouTube deal, cbs wouldn't have even filed an FOIAQuote:
Originally Posted by Homedawg
The protection of the names of prominent boosters.
Delay, delay, delay is the thing when you are losing. They are delaying the inevitable as long as possible.
"We can't wait to tell our side of the story." (We're not ready to let you see the facts in black and white)Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
https://s3media.247sports.com/Upload.../6_4597782.jpg
Boosters were pissed at the lack of transparency and being lied to the first go round. That's why they did the video.
They don't want everything revealed at this point. That's why they won't release it the NOA right now.
To get ahead of it. Trust me it's not nearly as "good" as they made it sound. That was snipets!Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
When they refused the FOIA, I automatically assumed it was worse than implied and it sounded bad thenQuote:
Originally Posted by Homedawg
As long as it isn't out there, there is still a chance it can be changed. I expect that it's full of boosters and accusations against Freeze. It's interesting how they are defending Freeze so hard. It's almost like he knows something they don't want anyone else to know....
I guess they don't want to release it so they can continue to lie.
They're still trying to cut a better deal. The pending one is not good. They are hanging on a hopeless prayer.
Stewart Mandel: Billable hours winning the Ole Miss case.
This is not the end. This is not even the beginning of the end. But it perhaps the end of the beginning.
When I read your post, I immediately thought of Tool's "intolerance".Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Lambert
"...lie, cheat, steal". Seems fitting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adE3Ldy0TME
It's like a sunburn. The ole miss faithful is slowly getting cooked without realizing and eventually they're going to wake up in a world of pain.
They've always been pretty good at winning the press conference but they've set themselves up here about as poorly as they could've. I don't understand how this end game is going to help them unless they're actually arrogant enough to think they can threaten their way out of this one too.
Keep digging that hole in Oxford. The national media will really like this approach...****
THIS. ALL DAY LONG. EVERYDAY.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiderman
Someone ought to tweet this to finebaum! Maybe he'll stop being their puppet.Quote:
Originally Posted by DancingRabbit
This was discussed way back when they selectively released what emails they wanted to from the compliance department after Freeze's now infamous tweet. I think someone who had a legal background stated that the only legal ramifications to not responding to an FOIA in a timely manner was a fine of like $150. So, I wouldn't expect them to ever respond to any of them under those circumstances. They'll just continue the stall tactics as always, which hopefully will continue to bite them in the ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanDority
No.... damn..... way!Quote:
Originally Posted by Random Poster
Quote:
Originally Posted by HSVDawg
It's actually $100 per violation, and a violation could evolve as from one violation of $100 to many and several thousand dollars depending on how a violation(s) was interpreted. It would still be more feasible on the pentaly phase for OM to go that route, if the Confidentality Clause claim is bogus and they want to not abide by MS Law. For any penalty fine to be possibly accessed, it would have to originate with someone not receiving their requested document(s), and following through with the complaint procedures as stated in the MS Public Records Act. Otherwise, I don't see any action from State Government being instigated against OM. Does anybody even know the legality of this confidentality clause excuse for not releasing a copy of the NOA? It hasn't been challenged, to my knowledge, and until it is legally challenged, then whether it is a legal means ,or just smoke and mirrors, nobody outside OM and their Law Firm probably doesn't know.
CBS nor anyone else will bother to pursue it in the courts, but OM will lose in the court of public opinion and the media. Like Wolken said, we'll all see it in 80 days anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by yjnkdawg
They have enjoyed a sympathetic media in the past, but going forward no one of any stature will give them a break. The national guys are laughing at Bjork.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
Maybe because they think they can reduce or dismiss some the allegations and they don't want the information they didn't tell us, to be divulged to the public or media with the hope that they can make some of it disappear or be less of a violation with some type of negotiation with the NCAA. Not very feasible but, I wouldn't be surprised.
I believe I may have been the one who mentioned the fine way back when, and I'm no legal expert, but I did do some research on it. As I recall, I also made a case for continuing to pursue via legal channels because, though the fines are small, repeated abuse could eventually lead to a "contempt-of-court" charge, which could carry more hefty consequences.Quote:
Originally Posted by HSVDawg
Here's a post I made in April 2016:
Question for the lawyers or legal experts here RE: FOIA requests
I actually posted this on another thread, but am hoping this will get seen and answered by the right folks.
I've read a few posts about people complaining about the $100 fine due if a FOIA or similar state version is not met with compliance. The issue being, such a small fine is no deterrent, making it easy for Ole Miss to indefinitely avoid releasing the documents.
But I got to thinking what would or could occur if that did happen. So, this is what I'm thinking:
The thing to do is file the FOIA request, then when they fail to comply go to a judge, who would likely instruct Ole Miss or their law firm to comply with the FOIA request post-haste, and pay the $100 fine.
If there was still non-compliance, the requester could seek civil contempt charges against Ole Miss and their representation. That could then expose them to an additional, larger fine, not for the FOIA breach, but for Contempt of Court. Now you're also talking possible jail time until they comply. I don't think Ole Miss or their lawyers would want the media hit they would get from something like that, nor do I think they would want to risk leaving it in the hands of a judge to decide whether or not he will throw one of them in the pokey until they obeyed the court order.
Can you imagine if that happened? Is it possible from a legal POV?