UNC Athletics Scandal: UNC releases response to NOA-3

[swood1000]

No, the enforcement staff is the prosecutor. They can urge sanctions but they can't apply sanctions. They made the original charge, then the defendant (UNC) gave its defense, and now the prosecutor gets to reply to that defense and try to blow holes in it. In a month (mid-August) they will both go before the the judge/jury (COI panel) to argue their cases in person. Then the panel will consider the case for a month or two (or three) and deliver its judgment including sanctions. Then UNC appeals to the Infractions Appeals Committee.

Unfortunately for UNC, they will not have an opportunity to respond in writing to the enforcement staff’s reply due July 17 because the COI hearing is scheduled for August 16 and 17, and the COI rules say that “written material must be received by the hearing panel at least 30 days prior to the date the panel considers the case, unless good cause is shown for a later submission.”

[OldPhiKap]

Unfortunately for UNC, they will not have an opportunity to respond in writing to the enforcement staff’s reply due July 17 because the COI hearing is scheduled for August 16 and 17, and the COI rules say that “written material must be received by the hearing panel at least 30 days prior to the date the panel considers the case, unless good cause is shown for a later submission.”

Guess who will likely file for a continuance of the hearing because of "material misstatements" by enforcement staff "to which response is necessary."

I would almost bank on it.

[Pghdukie]

And they will ask for 120 days. When given 30, Cheats will argue that they have not been given ample time. Regardless, this will drag on and on.

[-jk]

And they will ask for 120 days. When given 30, Cheats will argue that they have not been given ample time. Regardless, this will drag on and on.

And then they'll skate.

Alas...

-jk

[WiJoe]

And then they'll skate.

Alas...

-jk

ouch. what a disgusting thought. Not the first time.

[Henderson]

In your will, you'll need to provide a link to this thread so your grandchildren can speculate on UNC-CH's likelihood of being punished after both you and your children are dead and gone. Roy IV will be denying any wrongdoing while signing Huckleberry Hound memorabilia for the Debbie Crowder Athletes Kan Reed Founashun.

[Trinity_93]

...that the stated position of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is that for twenty years fake classes administered by a secretary were "generally available" to all students. Their defense is that everyone was in on the fraud. Doesn't that make everyone from that period culpable and worthy of our scorn, not to mention sanctions from UNC itself? After all, the school has an Honor Code:

"As a condition of joining the Carolina community, Carolina students pledge “not to lie, cheat, or steal” and to hold themselves, as members of the Carolina community, to a high standard of academic and non-academic conduct while both on and off Carolina’s campus. This commitment to academic integrity, ethical behavior, personal responsibility and civil discourse exemplifies the “Carolina Way”, and this commitment is codified in both the University's Honor Code and in other University student conduct-related policies." https://studentconduct.unc.edu/

Don't let anyone tell you a UNC degree from that period is OK if it doesn't have AFAM paper classes listed on it. If everyone knew, everyone cheated.

Unless of course, everyone didn't know...

[swood1000]

Guess who will likely file for a continuance of the hearing because of "material misstatements" by enforcement staff "to which response is necessary."

I would almost bank on it.

UNC tried submitting more written material after receiving the enforcement staff reply during the NOA-2 proceedings. The chief officer concluded that the institution had not met the good cause standard and denied the request. However, he approved “the institution submitting up to a 10-page targeted and synthesized submission by close of business on Wednesday, October 19, 2016.” The enforcement staff and other parties would then have until October 21 to respond.

Greg Sankey, in his April 14, 2017 letter, said “There will be no further delays, and the case will be heard on this schedule.”

[devildeac]

UNC tried submitting more written material after receiving the enforcement staff reply during the NOA-2 proceedings. The chief officer concluded that the institution had not met the good cause standard and denied the request. However, he approved “the institution submitting up to a 10-page targeted and synthesized submission by close of business on Wednesday, October 19, 2016.” The enforcement staff and other parties would then have until October 21 to respond.

Greg Sankey, in his April 14, 2017 letter, said “There will be no further delays, and the case will be heard on this schedule.”

Unfair!

Arbitrary!

Predetermined outcome!

Collusion!

(came the bleats from the lying/cheating sheep)

[OldPhiKap]

Unfair!

Arbitrary!

Predetermined outcome!

Collusion!

(came the bleats from the lying/cheating sheep)

Come and see the violence inherent in the system!

Help, help, I'm being repressed!!!

[Pghdukie]

And let's not forget that another paper dumb is on the horizon.

[chrishoke]

And let's not forget that another paper dumb is on the horizon.

HUH?

[Tommac]

HUH?

I think he meant dump.

[devildeac]

I think he meant dump.

I think s/he meant paper class .

If s/he had meant dump, s/he'd have posted something about the Nose Dome.

[Indoor66]

I think s/he meant paper class .

If s/he had meant dump, s/he'd have posted something about the Nose Dome.

Or "hump."

[Henderson]

Come and see the violence inherent in the system!

Help, help, I'm being repressed!!!

Dennis, there's some lovely filth down here!

[PackMan97]

And let's not forget that another paper dumb is on the horizon.

Is Jay Bilas going to write another editorial?

[LastRowFan]

Enforcement staff reply due in two weeks — Monday, July 17.

And when we will see it? UNC has to redact it and release it, right? Will we see it before the hearing in August?

[Indoor66]

And when we will see it? UNC has to redact it and release it, right? Will we see it before the hearing in August?

A more realistic time frame might relate to Thanksgiving.😡👿😠

[swood1000]

And when we will see it? UNC has to redact it and release it, right? Will we see it before the hearing in August?

The NCAA replied to UNC's NOA-2 defense on September 19, 2016. UNC released the redacted version on October 25. So on this schedule, no, we won't see it prior to the hearing in August.