Miller's Family Now Getting Lawyer Full Story On ABC Tonight

[Alcobull]

school didn't call him a liar, it pretty much said he was a student athlete bullied into changing a story by a man who abused his power

but yeah, maybe he wants to sue to prove he didn't do it and keep his cred

or to protect himself from nutcases

or, as mentioned, to guide him during the civil suit he will most likely be dragged into

[macphisto]

The Millers can sue several different entities.  They can sue USF.  The can sue McMurphy.  They could even sue Leavitt, though USF might be liable for his conduct while coaching.

If he feels that USF took this too far and used him to fulfill an ulterior motive (ie. firing Leavitt) then he does have a basis for bringing suit against USF.  Paul Miller could also sue McMurphy if he felt he distorted his words and caused this to happen through distortion.  Leavitt could have the same cause to sue McMurphy.

[Matt]

as for the PDF...

it was pretty easy to tell Miller was Player A.  If it wasnt the actual report itself all you had to do was go to the back where they named Player A's father and Player A's high school coach.

[slick1ru2]

A university official investigation proved enough for them to claim breach of contract. So basically, Leavitt struck him, and its been proven. He can sue for all the pain and suffering. Leavitt is a millionaire. Would not want to be either Leavitt or Miller right now.

Please rephrase your statement. Not anywhere in the investigation does it say it was proven Leavitt struck him.

Half or less of the people interviewed had totally different accounts of the incident. Steming from the differences in the statements, the investigators concluded that Leavitt struck Miller. But no where does it state that that was 100% proven.

It was just there best outcome of the interviews.

From the report's conclusions:

5. In the course of Coach Leavitt’s travels about the locker room, he approached Student

Athlete A, who was seated in his locker. Leavitt yelled at Student Athlete A. Leavitt then

placed his hand on the player’s throat and slapped him twice in the cheek. These actions were

personally observed by several Student Athletes who had the clearest line of sight to the event.

Despite Coach Leavitt and Student Athlete A’s denial that any inappropriate contact had taken

place, the reviewers find it more likely that contact did, in fact, occur to the face and throat/neck

area of Student Athlete A. This report was substantiated by multiple reports from credible direct

eye witnesses whose recollection was corroborated.

[Triple B]

Personally I hope its to sue DUImig for defamation of character.  

And let's not forget that Mr Miller said his original comments were taken out of context by a certain "crackerjack" reporter ...

[slick1ru2]

USF is supposed to be providing a safe environment for its student athletes and having a coach physically accosting players makes them liable. They did the background checks, they hired him, they should know what he is doing with students at all times.

[Big_Hairy_Bull]

A university official investigation proved enough for them to claim breach of contract. So basically, Leavitt struck him, and its been proven. He can sue for all the pain and suffering. Leavitt is a millionaire. Would not want to be either Leavitt or Miller right now.

Please rephrase your statement. Not anywhere in the investigation does it say it was proven Leavitt struck him.

Half or less of the people interviewed had totally different accounts of the incident. Steming from the differences in the statements, the investigators concluded that Leavitt struck Miller. But no where does it state that that was 100% proven.

It was just there best outcome of the interviews.

From the report's conclusions:

5. In the course of Coach Leavitt’s travels about the locker room, he approached Student

Athlete A, who was seated in his locker. Leavitt yelled at Student Athlete A. Leavitt then

placed his hand on the player’s throat and slapped him twice in the cheek. These actions were

personally observed by several Student Athletes who had the clearest line of sight to the event.

Despite Coach Leavitt and Student Athlete A’s denial that any inappropriate contact had taken

place, the reviewers find it more likely that contact did, in fact, occur to the face and throat/neck

area of Student Athlete A. This report was substantiated by multiple reports from credible direct

eye witnesses whose recollection was corroborated.

Read the bold. "More than likely"  Not "DID"

[USF_Grouper]

A university official investigation proved enough for them to claim breach of contract. So basically, Leavitt struck him, and its been proven. He can sue for all the pain and suffering. Leavitt is a millionaire. Would not want to be either Leavitt or Miller right now.

Please rephrase your statement. Not anywhere in the investigation does it say it was proven Leavitt struck him.

Half or less of the people interviewed had totally different accounts of the incident. Steming from the differences in the statements, the investigators concluded that Leavitt struck Miller. But no where does it state that that was 100% proven.

It was just there best outcome of the interviews.

Probably most daming, the interviewers concluded that Leavitt was not completely truthful.  Made statements that contradicted other statements.  In the end, it was clear that he was not being completely upfront and honest.  To me, that is reason enough to fire him.

[Matt]

Personally I hope its to sue DUImig for defamation of character.  

And let's not forget that Mr Miller said his original comments were taken out of context by a certain "crackerjack" reporter ...

that depends on what brett has on tape from mr miller.

?

i would guess that brett knows this game better than most and knows how to use it for what he wants to use it for.

i doubt brett put himself in a situation to get sued.  he will always make sure he has atleast one solid piece of evidence (whether its a fact or just proof that he was told something by the person he said he was told by)

[Matt]

Probably most daming, the interviewers concluded that Leavitt was not completely truthful.  Made statements that contradicted other statements.  In the end, it was clear that he was not being completely upfront and honest.  To me, that is reason enough to fire him.

and this my friend...is what EVERYONE is forgetting...

sure, there was 3 for hitting and 3 for didnt see anything and 100 for not in the room...but NO ONE denied some of the words that leavitt used when addressing him and the manner in which he addressed him.

but leavitt's story was a complete 180 from that account.  he claims to of asked "what is wrong" which come on...i dont need to read a report to know that at halftime of just giving up a 16-0 lead with a bowl bid on the line that leavitt walked into the locker room...saw a kid with his head in his hands and asked "what is wrong"  especially to a kid that missed an assignment and also caused a 15 yard penality.