RE: This is a BAD look for kU
Posted on: April 11, 2018 at 12:16:39 CT
Phoggy08 KU
Posts:
541
Member For:
12.07 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
You're cute. And apparently lazy as you didn't even bother to read the superseding indictment.
The superseding indictment — which names multiple other NCAA Division I schools — expands the scope of previously filed wire fraud conspiracy allegations against Jim Gatto and two associates, Merl Code and Christian Dawkins, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York announced on Tuesday.
In short, a parent of one of the KU athletes received at least $90,000 from Gatto’s global athletic apparel company in exchange for signing with KU, the indictment alleges.
The guardian of the second KU athlete received enough money from Gatto’s company to convince him to get “out from under” an illicit payment deal already set up with a rival apparel company to sign with one of the other company’s sponsored schools. That athlete then committed to KU, the indictment says.
The indictment does not accuse KU of wrongdoing. The parent and guardian are described as “scheme participants” but are not charged with crimes in the indictment.
The indictment does not allege that any KU coaches were involved.
If KU was involved, specifically their coaches, the University, etc, this would not be a superceding indictment, that would result in all new charges in a separate indictment.
From the indictment and why KU made the statement of being a "victim":
"43. The payments described herein were designed to be concealed, including from the NCAA and officials at the University of Kansas, in order for the scheme to succeed and for the student-athletes to receive athletic scholarships from the University of Kansas. In particular, and as a part of the scheme, scheme participants, including, among others, James Gatto, a/k/a "Jim," the defendant, CC-3, Parent-3, and Guardian-1, made intended to make, or caused or intended to cause others to make false certifications to the University of Kansas and the NCAA about the existence of the payments and the known violations of NCAA rules."
So, at this time the University can claim to be a victim. Now could this turn into the coaches knowing or being willing participants? Yes. But those odds seem slim.
Reasoning is as such: If KU's coaches knew and were involved, there is no way that we would have sat Preston or played Silvio (both players are the ones believed to be the ones whose parents/guardians were paid). Especially since Silvio came on board after the FBI announced they were investigating Addidas.
So, unless the FBI makes new charges, or releases new information stating otherwise, KU IS a victim in this.
If I had to make a guess, I'd say that your smile "since 4:30 yesterday" won't last long. KU, as of today, is not considered to be complicit. No stripping of banners or wins, firing of coaches, etc. We're still you're daddy, have "scoreboard" over MU, and will always have a history that only a few other bluebloods can match.
Edited by Phoggy08 at 12:18:53 on 04/11/18