NCAA investigating Manziel

[Immortal13]

Why not? Cause there was no proof against him? Isn't that the boat we're in with Johnny? LOL hilarious how you contradict yourself so much. Although you're right. Johnny hasn't been brought up on anything by the NCAA and you're left listening to and believing hack journalism that you claim is shady.

 

http://www.sportspickle.com/2013/03/johnny-manziel-signs-5-year-150-million-deal-with-dallas-cowboys-because-he-can-do-whatever-he-wants

 

Johnny signs with the Cowboys cause he wants to.

No, because he didn't do anything wrong. The police released George Zimmerman because the evidence at the scene backed up his story. That is not the case with Johnny Manziel. The evidence that has come out so far points to his guilt. Again, common sense.

 

Didn't click on your link, sorry :)

[Lhornfan]

http://lastwordonsports.com/2013/08/14/espn-breaking-basic-journalism-rules-on-johnny-manziel/

ESPN Breaking Basic Journalism Rules on Johnny Manziel

Hard to take the guy serious when he uses "tu" instead of Texas. The article is worthless because of the bias.

[bordertown]

Nope. Your point? Does that make anything he said less true?

I believe it is his opinions, nothing more, but believe on.

[DaveTV1]

With apologies to Hank, Jr, maybe Johnny Football is Just Carrying on a Family Tradition:

 

http://deadspin.com/the-long-con-how-the-manziels-conquered-america-1040593220?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_twitter&utm_source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow

The Houston Chronicle had a good story on him too. I'm not a digital subscriber, but I have the copy in front of me in their City and State page B1 and B4 written by John Tedesco. It was printed a day earlier than the Dead Spin article, and I wonder if Timothy Burke could be sued for plagarism, because the articles are very similar. Some of it is verbatim.

[DaveTV1]

I think Johnny has put the NCAA and A&M in a spot. Right now he's in limbo with the NCAA with his eligibility. If they give him a 4 game suspension, that knocks him out of the biggest College Football game that will be played in Texas this year. Don't kid yourselves Longhorn and OU fans, nothing is as big as the Alabama vs. A&M game this year. I'm saying if the NCAA finds him guilty of taking money for autographs. Would the NCAA jeopardize one of the biggest games to be played in 2013 ? If they rule too slow, that game will be lost. If they rule too fast and say a two game suspension for the Rice and Sam Houston games some will be saying that's not enough, especially in Alabama. I see too many probabilities in this case. I do have a gut feeling that he will play against the Tide.

[JohnnyFootball]

No, because he didn't do anything wrong. The police released George Zimmerman because the evidence at the scene backed up his story. That is not the case with Johnny Manziel. The evidence that has come out so far points to his guilt. Again, common sense.

 

Didn't click on your link, sorry :)

 

Evidence?

 

What evidence would that be? Oh, right. There is none. Unless you're gullible enough to count hearsay as evidence, of course. Wouldn't surprise me.

Hard to take the guy serious when he uses "tu" instead of Texas. The article is worthless because of the bias.

You're right. No article has ever been written without bias.

[Coach Rab]

The Houston Chronicle had a good story on him too. I'm not a digital subscriber, but I have the copy in front of me in their City and State page B1 and B4 written by John Tedesco. It was printed a day earlier than the Dead Spin article, and I wonder if Timothy Burke could be sued for plagarism, because the articles are very similar. Some of it is verbatim.

 

Deadspin sited their sources and used a lot of direct quotes... could be the same sources as the Chronicle.

[franksnbeans]

 

Evidence?

 

What evidence would that be? Oh, right. There is none. Unless you're gullible enough to count hearsay as evidence, of course. Wouldn't surprise me.

 

It's not hearsay. Multiple sources claim to have first hand knowledge that Johnny took money for signing autographs. At least a half dozen people corroborate the fact that he signed the items. And then there are the videos that corroborate the statements. That is all evidence. I think it's funny you keep bending over backwards to support Johnny and say there is no evidence. Of course there is. Extremely damning evidence.

 

Evidence =

 

The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

[franksnbeans]

 

So nobody is coming forth and there is no offical investigation going on from the NCAA. Hmmmm....

You don't believe that.

[Immortal13]

Evidence?

 

 

There's a video with Johnny Foosball making incriminating statements. Keep pretending it doesn't exist :)

[sawemoff]

 

So nobody is coming forth and there is no offical investigation going on from the NCAA. Hmmmm....

Good thing both A&M and Manziel hired lawyers for nothing!

[Immortal13]

as I understand it

Well that settles it :)

[sawemoff]

 

That would be dumb on both parties to Not do that.

Yeah because paying for expensive services when you don't need them isn't dumb?

 

If this is 100% not an issue and just media talk like Aggies think, there wouldn't be a need for a lawyer, unless the Manziels wanted to sue someone for libel, but that's a reach.

[JohnnyFootball]

It's not hearsay. Multiple sources claim to have first hand knowledge that Johnny took money for signing autographs. At least a half dozen people corroborate the fact that he signed the items. And then there are the videos that corroborate the statements. That is all evidence. I think it's funny you keep bending over backwards to support Johnny and say there is no evidence. Of course there is. Extremely damning evidence.

 

Evidence =

 

The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Lmao!!

 

"It's not hearsay.... Multiple sources claim"

 

That's exactly what hearsay is. I don't even have to say anything. You disprove your own posts now! LOL!!

 

Where's this video you speak of? Oh you've only heard (yet again) someone say they saw it? Did you know that gullible is being taken out of the dictionary? And yet again, it's nothing but hearsay.

 

So I've yet to see one piece of evidence against Johnny, just as I said before. You've yet to see anything either. So stop making a fool of yourself and quit while you're only a little behind. Or heck, you may enjoy embarrassing yourself. You DO claim to be a backwater redneck and proud of it hahaha

[JohnnyFootball]

There's a video with Johnny Foosball making incriminating statements. Keep pretending it doesn't exist :)

You claim it exists. Burden of proof is on you. Let's see it.

 

Oh, you can't show me? Hrm. Well, we're at a bit of a problem here for you then aren't we? :)

Good thing both A&M and Manziel hired lawyers for nothing!

Someone prints libel and he shouldn't hire a lawyer? Okay...

[franksnbeans]

Lmao!!

 

"It's not hearsay.... Multiple sources claim"

 

That's exactly what hearsay is. I don't even have to say anything. You disprove your own posts now! LOL!!

 

Where's this video you speak of? Oh you've only heard (yet again) someone say they saw it? Did you know that gullible is being taken out of the dictionary? And yet again, it's nothing but hearsay.

 

So I've yet to see one piece of evidence against Johnny, just as I said before. You've yet to see anything either. So stop making a fool of yourself and quit while you're only a little behind. Or heck, you may enjoy embarrassing yourself. You DO claim to be a backwater redneck and proud of it hahaha

Ok. genius. That's not the definition of hearsay. At least that's not the way I learned it in law school or how I've come to know it while practicing law for the past 10 years.

 

Sources claim first hand knowledge. If it were in a court of law it would be admissible testimony from an eyewitness.

 

If they claim they "were told" Johnny took money. Or claim they "had heard" Johnny took money then that is hearsay.

 

So, I'm wondering who exactly has embarrassed themselves here. You continue to claim there is no evidence and yet I explained to you the meaning of the word evidence. And, there is clearly evidence in this case.

 

Any other legal principles you want to argue about?

 

Damn right I'm backwater and proud. I'm also educated and informed. So deal with it.

[Coach Rab]

Ok. genius. That's not the definition of hearsay. At least that's not the way I learned it in law school or how I've come to know it while practicing law for the past 10 years.

 

Sources claim first hand knowledge. If it were in a court of law it would be admissible testimony from an eyewitness.

 

If they claim they "were told" Johnny took money. Or claim they "had heard" Johnny took money then that is hearsay.

 

So, I'm wondering who exactly has embarrassed themselves here. You continue to claim there is no evidence and yet I explained to you the meaning of the word evidence. And, there is clearly evidence in this case.

 

Any other legal principles you want to argue about?

 

Damn right I'm backwater and proud. I'm also educated and informed. So deal with it.

 

Like i said earlier... he calls the LSU convicted players "rapist" which isn't what they were convicted on, then screams the word "libel" at us like he knows how to use it properly.

[franksnbeans]

Wow! Some people are going to support little Johnny no matter what - just continue to make excuses for him and say "you can't prove anything."

 

Well, that's not the issue. At least it's not the issue I have been commenting on.

 

I don't believe the NCAA will be able to compile enough evidence to suspend Johnny this season. Due to their lack of subpoena power, they may never come up with enough evidence to suspend little Johnny. But, there is little question in my mind that he took money to sign autographs. Based on the people coming forward, based on the video, based on the number of autographs he signed, and everything else we've heard it seems pretty clear the guy took the money. If it were a civil case where the standard was preponderance of the evidence, little Johnny would lose. Plain and simple.

 

However, this is the NCAA and not a courtroom. So, I don't think he will miss a down this year. In fact, I don't want him to. The season will be much more entertaining if he plays. Plus, I think it's a stupid rule.

 

What I find funny are the people either trying to act like he didn't do it or trying to hide behind the "you can't prove anything" slogan. Hilarious. Oh, and little surprise those are Aggie fans. Hmmm. Well, of course, you are going to support little Johnny.

 

Whatever. Have at it.

[Immortal13]

Lmao!!

"It's not hearsay.... Multiple sources claim"

That's exactly what hearsay is. I don't even have to say anything.

Wow, that's one of the dumbest things I've ever read. You might want to look up the definition.

 

That aggy education is really paying off for you....lmao!!

[bordertown]

So I've yet to see one piece of evidence against Johnny, just as I said before. You've yet to see anything either. So stop making a fool of yourself and quit while you're only a little behind. Or heck, you may enjoy embarrassing yourself. You DO claim to be a backwater redneck and proud of it hahaha

I see you are doing a little Stevie Wonder act.

[BayouBengal]

Oh they apologized after raping a girl? That makes it all better. Upstanding individuals they have there!!*

 

*This is what BayouBengal ACTUALLY believes.

That's one more step in the right direction than little J.

[JohnnyFootball]

Ok. genius. That's not the definition of hearsay. At least that's not the way I learned it in law school or how I've come to know it while practicing law for the past 10 years.

 

Sources claim first hand knowledge. If it were in a court of law it would be admissible testimony from an eyewitness.

 

If they claim they "were told" Johnny took money. Or claim they "had heard" Johnny took money then that is hearsay.

 

So, I'm wondering who exactly has embarrassed themselves here. You continue to claim there is no evidence and yet I explained to you the meaning of the word evidence. And, there is clearly evidence in this case.

 

Any other legal principles you want to argue about?

 

Damn right I'm backwater and proud. I'm also educated and informed. So deal with it.

So wait. You heard this from the mouth of these guys that they know? Or did you hear from Joe Schad that he heard them say that? Boom. You lose.

 

If there were evidence, Johnny would not be playing. Instead, there is only you reading ESPN saying that they heard someone say that they gave money. Nothing more. Show me a sound clip of the guy saying he took money. Show me a video. Show me SOMETHING other than "Well ESPN says they heard a guy say". You must not practice law that well if your definition of evidence is that.

Wow, that's one of the dumbest things I've ever read. You might want to look up the definition.

 

That aggy education is really paying off for you....lmao!!

I explained in the above post. Even you should be able to get it with your education from.... Oh wait. Lmao!!

[franksnbeans]

Keep riding little Johnny's jock.

You are right. I didn't see little Johnny take the money with my own eyes. LOL

 

I guess he's squeaky clean.

[JohnnyFootball]

 

Like i said earlier... he calls the LSU convicted players "rapist" which isn't what they were convicted on, then screams the word "libel" at us like he knows how to use it properly.

 

BATON ROUGE, LA (WAFB) -

A former high school star football player, who had committed to LSU but was arrested on a sexual assault charge last year, pleaded guilty to a lesser charge Friday morning.

Former Redemptorist High running back Jeremy Hill, 19, pleaded guilty to carnal knowledge of a juvenile.

http://www.wafb.com/...o-lesser-charge

 

CARNAL KNOWLEDGE, crim. law. This phrase is used to signify a sexual connexion; as, rape is the carnal knowledge of a woman, &c. See Rape.

A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier. Published 1856.

 

Sorry. He is a rapist. Just cause he plead to a cheaper charge doesn't mean it isn't true. No libel.

[JohnnyFootball]

Keep riding little Johnny's jock.

 

You are right. I didn't see little Johnny take the money with my own eyes. LOL

 

I guess he's squeaky clean.

Nope. But you saw ESPN say that they heard someone say he took money.

 

GUILTY