Judge orders USF to release Leavitt notes (Per Greg's Blog)

[Bull-by-Marriage]

Is Leavitt trying to hold onto the "nothing happened" argument? We all know that "something" happened, no where as near as bm reported and no as near what jl said. I'm going to ckeck out the court dockets to find out the next time jimmy will be at Edgecomb courthouse so I can go heckle him. Ask him if his case is going to collapse mid-way through to hearing.

"We all know..."

Do we really?

Are you unequivocally stating that NOTHING happened in that locker room at halftime of the 'Cuse game? Nothing? What about the discrepancies in leavitt's statements with those that SUPPORT him? I would think that you would've met with them prior to them being questioned to get your stories straight. How do you explain those? This will be quite entertaining watching you tap dance around the truth as you do so often. Again, I ask. Are you stating that NOTHING  happened in that locker room at halftime?

Everything...and I mean everything you claim to be factual is in fact nothing more than hearsay which is contradicted by other witnesses.  There are no discrepancies....none.

1:    So, you are NOT stating that NOTHING happened in that locker room at halftime of the 'Cuse game?  This will be quite entertaining watching you tap dance around the truth as you do so often. So, are you doing the tap like an Irish River dance?

2:    How is it that everything anyone else says is heasay, yet YOU know what happened. Were YOU in the locker room that day? If so, did YOU see the ENTIRE interaction between leavitt and Joel? If YOU were there and YOU did see, then who are YOU?

3: I KNOW that you won't answer any of the questions, as you are too afraid to say who you really are. IDGAFWYA, I just find it quite amusing that you claim to KNOW, what happened.

Simple question for you...

How do YOU know what happened in the locker room?

Waiting...

You're right, I don't KNOW. Now, how do YOU KNOW? This is fun, you must be an attorney, or someone that was directly involved, because you sure as hell won't answer a straight forward question. For your viewing pleasure: The same questions that I asked before that you failed to answer. Let's see you dance around this one. 

1:    So, you are NOT stating that NOTHING happened in that locker room at halftime of the 'Cuse game?  This will be quite entertaining watching you tap dance around the truth as you do so often. So, are you doing the tap like an Irish River dance?

2:    How is it that everything anyone else says is heasay, yet YOU know what happened. Were YOU in the locker room that day? If so, did YOU see the ENTIRE interaction between leavitt and Joel? If YOU were there and YOU did see, then who are YOU?

3: I KNOW that you won't answer any of the questions, as you are too afraid to say who you really are. IDGAFWYA, I just find it quite amusing that you claim to KNOW, what happened.

The music starts, and the tapping begins in 3, 2, 1.....

Wow!  You should go on "Dancing With The Stars" with that act!

I'm not the one claiming something happened, YOU are.

Please provide proof of your claim.

I've admitted that I don't know what happened. Now, how do you know what happened. Prove to me and the rest of the board that you were there. It is fact that to actually know for certain whatever happened or didn't onw would have to physically be in the room, and view the entire interaction. So, can you prove that you were in the room, and witnessed the entire interaction, or are you just full of pure unadulterated hyperbole like the rest of us that weren't actually in the room, and didn't actually see the entire interaction?

I've painted whoever you are into a corner.

LOL!  No, YOU painted yourself in a corner.

YOU claimed something just had to have happened.  YOU have now admitted YOU don't know whether anything happened at all.

YOU are very confused.

You're right, I've painted myself into a corner, however, I've just walked right through the paint by admitting that I was not there. Will you admit that you weren't there, or are you going to provide evidence that proves that you were there and witnessed the entire interaction? Your lack of answers is quite amusing.

[Southshore26]

Last time I looked it was XCJL suing USF... that would mean that it's on XCJL to prove what did or didn't happen... not USF. So what say you Jim... errrrr Mizzou... what proof do you have that nothing happened?

[IncrediBULL]

Is Leavitt trying to hold onto the "nothing happened" argument? We all know that "something" happened, no where as near as bm reported and no as near what jl said. I'm going to ckeck out the court dockets to find out the next time jimmy will be at Edgecomb courthouse so I can go heckle him. Ask him if his case is going to collapse mid-way through to hearing.

"We all know..."

Do we really?

Are you unequivocally stating that NOTHING happened in that locker room at halftime of the 'Cuse game? Nothing? What about the discrepancies in leavitt's statements with those that SUPPORT him? I would think that you would've met with them prior to them being questioned to get your stories straight. How do you explain those? This will be quite entertaining watching you tap dance around the truth as you do so often. Again, I ask. Are you stating that NOTHING  happened in that locker room at halftime?

Everything...and I mean everything you claim to be factual is in fact nothing more than hearsay which is contradicted by other witnesses.  There are no discrepancies....none.

Yep.  It is hard to imagine the guy who goes apeshit on the sidelines, who comes out with a bloody nose on at lest 3 documented occasions, that he might actually lose it with a player and overstep his bounds.  And also that the player is not the one who went public with it.  That when he was first confronted, was embarassed and denied it, but now that more witnesses have come forward admitted it happened (with nothing to gain from it, assuming Leavitt kept his job as the most powerful man in the building). 

It may be hearsay as we were not there, but there appears to be enough there to see that where there is smoke, there is probably fire. 

And nothing is contradicted, but some guys said they didn't see anything.  They did not say that "I was right next to miller and nothing happened".  And most were in fear themselves of being kicked off of the team.  I suspect that when they get on the stand, and under oath, they will probably be more willing to share info.

I don't blame Leavitt for trying to get a proper settlement from USF.  If I had that much on the line, I would do so too.  But in the court of public opinion, even from long time supporters, the guy stepped over the line, USF acted quickly and properly, and he will not get the remainder of his contract.   He better just hope he can force at least a little piece of the pie fro himself, and then move on to a career as a D coach in the NFL. 

So coaches that are animated on the sideline abuse their players?  Is that your proof?!  Wow!

There sure must be a lot of college football players getting the crap beat out of them all across the nation and everyone is silent about it.

I've seen a lot of animated coaches in my lifetime. None that come out with blood dripping down their noses after half time, on multiple occasions.  Also, none who came out self induced head to helmet butting action, on the particular day in question.

"Animated" is a bit of a wimpy word to describe his behavior.

[IncrediBULL]

Last time I looked it was XCJL suing USF... that would mean that it's on XCJL to prove what did or didn't happen... not USF. So what say you Jim... errrrr Mizzou... what proof do you have that nothing happened?

Exactly.  No one on this board has to prove anything.  Leavitt was fired. There was just cause per their investigation.  There seems to be a ton of evidence that would allow even an outisder to conclude that something happened.  Now it is up to the lawyers, witnesses, and jury to sort it out (if it gets that far).

And for Mizzou saying we don't know anything because we were not there.  That is somewhat true, but most people use evidence to draw conclusions.  For example, I have never been to Japan, but I have seen pictures, and I have friends who have been there so using their hearsay I have concluded that Japan does in fact exist.

Along those same lines, I believe that an incident occured, Leavitt was fired, and that there appears to be probable cause.  Again, none of these effect me, and I cannot prove on my own that they did as I didn't witness them, but just as I have to believe from the papers that Leavitt was in fact fired, I also have to believe that an incident occured and it was not a complete fabrication of the news.  Otherwise, he would also be suing the paper.

[mikebeau]

The only thing really surprising to me is that looks like it is going to drag out for another year or two.  I really expected that Leavitt's attorneys would be trying to wrap this up in time for Leavitt to be hired again.  Of course, there is still another couple of months before he needs to be back on the market, but I can't believe that the Leavitt team dragging this out helps his ability to get another job.

What did you not understand about the article, DB?  It's USF that is dragging this out, not Leavitt or his attorneys.  It's USF that refuse to settle or negotiate.

if USF offered a settlement Leavitt would be stupid to refuse.  this case will take another 2 years at least. 

Then why isn't USF offering?

Perhaps it's USF that is stupid?

the desperation for a settlement .  great insight to Leavitts mind

[thebouncer1898]

"We all know..."

Do we really?

According to you, you are the only one that knows.

We are all observers from the outside, and you claim to have all of this "info" and we are all misguided by what we have read (and the formed an opinion on).

Why dont you, the informed, give us, the uninformed, some insight into how you know all this "info" so maybe you can have some credibility.

Right now, we would all like to believe any amount of what you say but you have only told us that our opinions are all wrong because yours are correct.

I like how you'll only answer questions, with either a non-answer or another question to attempt to take the heat off of you, but when someone asks you a question directly, you cant give anyone an answer.

None of us are asking for your name, address, SSN, kidney and 1st born; just a little background so where we can believe anything that you say.

Everyone but you admits that we weren't there. That would lead us to believe that you were there, but you haven't come out and said that. We all said we read the documents and formed individual opinions as to what really happened in the locker room; and by what happened, I mean there was some sort of inappropriate conduct, or there wasn't. All you tell us is that we were wrong and you know the truth.

C'mon Man! (or lady)

Let us know how you know, what you claim to know. Maybe you are his wife, or mom, or ex-wife. Hell, maybe you are his maid and stumbled upon documents that haven't been made public while scrubbing his ******.

Just tell us something, anything, that could give you credibility because, to say that your endless drivel is monotonous would be the understatement of the century.

[Bull-by-Marriage]

Is Leavitt trying to hold onto the "nothing happened" argument? We all know that "something" happened, no where as near as bm reported and no as near what jl said. I'm going to ckeck out the court dockets to find out the next time jimmy will be at Edgecomb courthouse so I can go heckle him. Ask him if his case is going to collapse mid-way through to hearing.

"We all know..."

Do we really?

Are you unequivocally stating that NOTHING happened in that locker room at halftime of the 'Cuse game? Nothing? What about the discrepancies in leavitt's statements with those that SUPPORT him? I would think that you would've met with them prior to them being questioned to get your stories straight. How do you explain those? This will be quite entertaining watching you tap dance around the truth as you do so often. Again, I ask. Are you stating that NOTHING  happened in that locker room at halftime?

Everything...and I mean everything you claim to be factual is in fact nothing more than hearsay which is contradicted by other witnesses.  There are no discrepancies....none.

1:    So, you are NOT stating that NOTHING happened in that locker room at halftime of the 'Cuse game?  This will be quite entertaining watching you tap dance around the truth as you do so often. So, are you doing the tap like an Irish River dance?

2:    How is it that everything anyone else says is heasay, yet YOU know what happened. Were YOU in the locker room that day? If so, did YOU see the ENTIRE interaction between leavitt and Joel? If YOU were there and YOU did see, then who are YOU?

3: I KNOW that you won't answer any of the questions, as you are too afraid to say who you really are. IDGAFWYA, I just find it quite amusing that you claim to KNOW, what happened.

Simple question for you...

How do YOU know what happened in the locker room?

Waiting...

You're right, I don't KNOW. Now, how do YOU KNOW? This is fun, you must be an attorney, or someone that was directly involved, because you sure as hell won't answer a straight forward question. For your viewing pleasure: The same questions that I asked before that you failed to answer. Let's see you dance around this one. 

1:    So, you are NOT stating that NOTHING happened in that locker room at halftime of the 'Cuse game?  This will be quite entertaining watching you tap dance around the truth as you do so often. So, are you doing the tap like an Irish River dance?

2:    How is it that everything anyone else says is heasay, yet YOU know what happened. Were YOU in the locker room that day? If so, did YOU see the ENTIRE interaction between leavitt and Joel? If YOU were there and YOU did see, then who are YOU?

3: I KNOW that you won't answer any of the questions, as you are too afraid to say who you really are. IDGAFWYA, I just find it quite amusing that you claim to KNOW, what happened.

The music starts, and the tapping begins in 3, 2, 1.....

Wow!  You should go on "Dancing With The Stars" with that act!

I'm not the one claiming something happened, YOU are.

Please provide proof of your claim.

I've admitted that I don't know what happened. Now, how do you know what happened. Prove to me and the rest of the board that you were there. It is fact that to actually know for certain whatever happened or didn't onw would have to physically be in the room, and view the entire interaction. So, can you prove that you were in the room, and witnessed the entire interaction, or are you just full of pure unadulterated hyperbole like the rest of us that weren't actually in the room, and didn't actually see the entire interaction?

I've painted whoever you are into a corner.

LOL!  No, YOU painted yourself in a corner.

YOU claimed something just had to have happened.  YOU have now admitted YOU don't know whether anything happened at all.

YOU are very confused.

You're right, I've painted myself into a corner, however, I've just walked right through the paint by admitting that I was not there. Will you admit that you weren't there, or are you going to provide evidence that proves that you were there and witnessed the entire interaction? Your lack of answers is quite amusing.

Mizzou, you've decided to return to the board, and argue with others. BUT, you never answered my question. It's a direct question, easy to answer, no way to wiggle out, closed ended. Now....

You're right, I've painted myself into a corner, however, I've just walked right through the paint by admitting that I was not there. Will you admit that you weren't there, or are you going to provide evidence that proves that you were there and witnessed the entire interaction? Your lack of answers is quite amusing.

[Southshore26]

Last time I looked it was XCJL suing USF... that would mean that it's on XCJL to prove what did or didn't happen... not USF. So what say you Jim... errrrr Mizzou... what proof do you have that nothing happened?

See, that is where your logic is flawed.  Leavitt is suing for breach of contract.  USF says they fired him for cause and don't have to pay out his contract.  It is incumbent upon USF to prove there was cause and Leavitt's attorneys to show there was no cause.  It's Leavitt's right to examine and challenge their evidence.

From my perspective it appears USF has a very weak case and that is why they are stonewalling.  The judge in the case appears to agree.

And that's where your logic is flawed.... you were fired because you repeatedly interfered with the investigation which violated your contract. Whether or not something happened in the locker room became immaterial at the point that you started interfering... You were fired for far more violations than what happened... or didn't happen in the locker room.

Oh.. and the USF wasn't stonewalling... they were just protecting themselves... If the Judge says to do it they're covered on any future lawsuits.... it's called being smart.  :

[IncrediBULL]

Last time I looked it was XCJL suing USF... that would mean that it's on XCJL to prove what did or didn't happen... not USF. So what say you Jim... errrrr Mizzou... what proof do you have that nothing happened?

See, that is where your logic is flawed.  Leavitt is suing for breach of contract.  USF says they fired him for cause and don't have to pay out his contract.  It is incumbent upon USF to prove there was cause and Leavitt's attorneys to show there was no cause.  It's Leavitt's right to examine and challenge their evidence.

From my perspective it appears USF has a very weak case and that is why they are stonewalling.  The judge in the case appears to agree.

You are full of it.  A Judge would never make a statement or have an open opinion of someone having a "weak case".  That is just stupid. 

The judge may make motions on whether or not to release info, and if there were no evidence of a crime in a criminal proceding (which this isn't its civil) they may throw out a case.  But that isn't the case here.  They have just allowed more info to be released.

[IncrediBULL]

Last time I looked it was XCJL suing USF... that would mean that it's on XCJL to prove what did or didn't happen... not USF. So what say you Jim... errrrr Mizzou... what proof do you have that nothing happened?

Exactly.  No one on this board has to prove anything.  Leavitt was fired. There was just cause per their investigation.  There seems to be a ton of evidence that would allow even an outisder to conclude that something happened.   Now it is up to the lawyers, witnesses, and jury to sort it out (if it gets that far).

And for Mizzou saying we don't know anything because we were not there.  That is somewhat true, but most people use evidence to draw conclusions.  For example, I have never been to Japan, but I have seen pictures, and I have friends who have been there so using their hearsay I have concluded that Japan does in fact exist.

Along those same lines, I believe that an incident occured, Leavitt was fired, and that there appears to be probable cause.   Again, none of these effect me, and I cannot prove on my own that they did as I didn't witness them, but just as I have to believe from the papers that Leavitt was in fact fired, I also have to believe that an incident occured and it was not a complete fabrication of the news.  Otherwise, he would also be suing the paper.

A "ton" of evidence?  Please share some of it with us.  You don't have to present the whole "ton" just a couple hundred pounds.

How about witnesses who said they directly saw what happened, and it happened.  How about the victim who said the same.

Leavitt's counter is that some people in the room "didn't see anything".  Well, I have been in traffic and an accident occured up in front of me.  It doesn't mean I was looking when it happened, or that I was in the direct line of site. But that also does not mean that the accident didn't happen.

Leavitts defense is weak.  It hinges on a few guys who did not say that it "didn't" happen.  But that they "didn't see it happen".  Very different lingo.

Leavitt will settle, for a small fraction.

Mizzou = Leavitt.