BITB fires shot over Currie's bow, and basically calls Currie a huge POS

[sonofdaxjones]

Geezus Rain . . . you become more of a drama queen little bitch with every post.  

And yeah, no crap, the compliance department thought they had good reason to report this incident to the NCAA, thanks Captain rough ridin' Obvious.   Doesn't mean I have to agree with it.    

I am sure Frank appreciates the fact that he's dealing with a hyper reactive compliance staff who is going to go running to the NCAA on every little thing that had nothing to do with him or his staff, nor with any boosters of any level of significance.   Just some dumb college chick working behind the counter at Dillards.

[Poster formerly known as jthutch]

Never said it had to be a booster . . . but there's a huge difference between some dumbass clerk at a department store giving some discounts as oppossed to Jack Vanier handing out pre-paid $1000 Visa cards . . . which is a hell of a great idea IMO.

Here's the deal on the "snitch", anybody can call up the NCAA and say anything, so what. 

  Yes but if the NCAA investigates and find that the Athletic dept knew about it and the department store can show reciepts etc... to collaborate it's claim then the whole department looks bad. 

To me this is setting up nice.  We turn ourselves in for something petty our preseason all american non the less.  Now we can start the real paying of player/recruits and the NCAA won't even think twice.  "What they are handing out gift cards, no way, they turn in there best players for stupid things, we will leave this one alone."

Okay, well I am big believer in pre-emptive reporting to get out ahead of the real cheating.   Looking at the recruiting, you really think we're trying very hard on the recruiting front??

  Maybe we are setting up to scuttle the the ship and start over.  This was the first move to get the NCAA off our tail.  Next spring we will suddenly be mentioned with multiple 4 and 5 star recruits.

[MakeItRain]

Geezus Rain . . . you become more of a drama queen little bitch with every post.   

And yeah, not crap, the compliance department thought they had good reason to report this incident to the NCAA, thanks Captain rough ridin' Obvious.   Doesn't mean I have to agree with it.   

So you are bitching just to bitch, I should have known better, you win this round :takesbait: reel'd me in

[sonofdaxjones]

Geezus Rain . . . you become more of a drama queen little bitch with every post.   

And yeah, not crap, the compliance department thought they had good reason to report this incident to the NCAA, thanks Captain rough ridin' Obvious.   Doesn't mean I have to agree with it.   

So you are bitching just to bitch, I should have known better, you win this round :takesbait: reel'd me in

To bad Captain Compliance.

[sonofdaxjones]

BITB:

K-State should never have told the NCAA, K-State blew it.

[steve dave]

BITB:

K-State should never have told the NCAA, K-State blew it.

BITB!

[sys]

You have no idea what you're talking about.  Just stop.  When an employee of a store works with "customers" to get them free crap, it's theft.  The whole bunch of them are stealing from the store.

trim, would it not matter if the customers conspired with the store employee, or if they were just buying something, and the employee was like "hey want a free merchandise, it's on the house?" and threw a merchandise into the bag.


i ask in the abstract, not re. the pullen/kelly occurrence.

[CNS]

You have no idea what you're talking about.  Just stop.  When an employee of a store works with "customers" to get them free crap, it's theft.  The whole bunch of them are stealing from the store.

trim, would it not matter if the customers conspired with the store employee, or if they were just buying something, and the employee was like "hey want a free merchandise, it's on the house?" and through a merchandise into the bag.


i ask in the abstract, not re. the pullen/kelly occurrence.

Was wondering this too.  Is the clerk not a store representative who could be reasonably considered to have either knowledge or authority to cut a deal?

[06wildcat]

You have no idea what you're talking about.  Just stop.  When an employee of a store works with "customers" to get them free crap, it's theft.  The whole bunch of them are stealing from the store.

trim, would it not matter if the customers conspired with the store employee, or if they were just buying something, and the employee was like "hey want a free merchandise, it's on the house?" and through a merchandise into the bag.


i ask in the abstract, not re. the pullen/kelly occurrence.

Was wondering this too.  Is the clerk not a store representative who could be reasonably considered to have either knowledge or authority to cut a deal?

Depends on the store depends on the deal.

Your average clerk at a large corporate place has very little responsibility beyond ringing up a sale. Hell most places require a manager to issue refunds. Mom and pop stores are a little different and will often offer free stuff/big discounts on a whim.

[EMAWgeddon]

Due to my post as an alumni club leader, I just got this e-mail from the Alumni Association.

TOP FIVE THINGS ALUMNI, FANS AND FRIENDS OF KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY SHOULD KNOW:

5. AM I A BOOSTER?
As an alum, fan or friend of Kansas State University, you are considered a booster. K-State is responsible for the actions of its boosters. Once a booster … Always a booster.

4. WHAT IS AN EXTRA BENEFIT?
You may not provide any type of extra benefit to a prospective or enrolled student-athlete, or their family or friends. Examples include, but are not limited to: cash, gifts, loans or co-signing loans, use of a vehicle, free or reduced housing, concert or sporting event tickets.

3. CAN A BOOSTER RECRUIT?
As a booster, you may not be involved in recruiting a prospective student-athlete. A prospective student-athlete is a student who has started classes for the ninth grade.

2. WHO CAN A BOOSTER EMPLOY?
You may not employ or arrange for the employment of a prospective student-athlete until after he or she has signed a National Letter of Intent and has completed their senior year of high school. You may employ a current student-athlete provided he or she has registered the job with the K-State Compliance Office.

1. ALWAYS ASK BEFORE YOU ACT!

[Trim]

You have no idea what you're talking about.  Just stop.  When an employee of a store works with "customers" to get them free crap, it's theft.  The whole bunch of them are stealing from the store.

trim, would it not matter if the customers conspired with the store employee, or if they were just buying something, and the employee was like "hey want a free merchandise, it's on the house?" and threw a merchandise into the bag.


i ask in the abstract, not re. the pullen/kelly occurrence.

1) Your alternate scenario would be relatively rare, and almost certainly not what happened in the instant case.

2) Your alt scenario would be a harder case with which to prosecute the customers.  It'd be fact-based on how dumb/naive the customers are and how obvious it was that the $9/hour p/t sales associate didn't have authority to be throwing in freebies.  How many freebies would be pretty important too.  An extra shirt when purchasing a suit - plausible that's a store giveaway.  10 shirts for the price of one - customer probably can't claim stupidity.

[Ira Hayes]

 The manager there hates everyone; she is a bitter old woman.  She wouldn't discriminate between KSU ballers, squawks, students, anybody. 

If she had a boyfriend this would all go away.  

Any volunteers?

[sys]

It'd be fact-based on how dumb/naive the customers are.

you'd have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the customer was intelligent?  good luck with that, in the state of kansas.

 

[Trim]

It'd be fact-based on how dumb/naive the customers are.

you'd have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the customer was intelligent?  good luck with that, in the state of kansas.

 

 

Certainly not intelligent.  Just functional enough to know that Dillard's probably isn't running an official yet unadvertised buy one get ten free sale.

[deputy dawg]

Kietz is full of sh1t.  First, it doesn't meet the elements of a theft charge to be prosecuted in Kansas.  That should tell you a lot.

Of course it fits the elements.  I've prosecuted it.

I doubt it was a jury trial.  Prosecutors get bogus pleas all the time.  Your defendant was a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!), which of course, you relied upon to get your plea.

Kietz is full of sh1t.  First, it doesn't meet the elements of a theft charge to be prosecuted in Kansas.  That should tell you a lot.

Of course it fits the elements.  I've prosecuted it.

I doubt it was a jury trial.  Prosecutors get bogus pleas all the time.  Your defendant was a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!), which of course, you relied upon to get your plea.

You have no idea what you're talking about.  Just stop.  When an employee of a store works with "customers" to get them free cac, it's theft.  The whole bunch of them are stealing from the store.

I'm fairly sure that this has nothing to do with boosters, ku snitches, etc.  An employee tried to give the players the same hook-up she probably gives non-playing friends.  She got busted and law enforcement was involved.  The manager there hates everyone; she is a bitter old woman.  She wouldn't discriminate between KSU ballers, squawks, students, anybody.  KSU was brought into the fold and made the call, rightly or wrongly, that they'd rather self-report then let the thing play out and catch whatever consequences the NCAA could bring should they later find out, which between the prospect of charges (which are public) and small-town-everyone-talks Manhattan, were probably pretty good.

Just to be clear...you state that you could convict Kelly and Pullen of theft based on the public reports of the violation.  Or, do you want to use inside info to tell everyone what a dumbass they are?  If you believe that a jury would convict Pullen and Kelly of theft based on publicly available info, you'd get your ass plugged faster than a $5 whore at aTailhook convention.

[Benja]

It'd be fact-based on how dumb/naive the customers are.

you'd have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the customer was intelligent?  good luck with that, in the state of kansas.

 

 

Certainly not intelligent.  Just functional enough to know that Dillard's probably isn't running an official yet unadvertised buy one get ten free sale.

So Curt and Pulls can plead insanity?

[sys]

Certainly not intelligent.  Just functional enough to know that Dillard's probably isn't running an official yet unadvertised buy one get ten free sale.

i thought of another one:  if the state could prove that a customer is a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!), could they prosecute him for conspiracy to defraud or to commit theft, or something, if when he's trying to buy a car, and the salesman is like "ok, so don't tell my manager, but i'm going to give you the undercoating and the lx package for free", the customer:  a) doesn't inform the manager, and b) accepts the proffered additions?

[sys]

btw, if pullen and kelly get charged with anything, i'll offer to defend.  i'm very confident i can get them acquitted.

[CHONGS]

btw, if pullen and kelly get charged with anything, i'll offer to defend.  i'm very confident i can get them acquitted.

You won't be the first person to successfully defend Jake this year!

[Dugout DickStone]

Wait, I can recruit 8th graders!?

I'll take it from here 'Te.

[sys]

You won't be the first person to successfully defend Jake this year!

 

[sonofdaxjones]

Compliance doesn't sell tickets . . .

Why can't our people remember that?   

[Trim]

Just to be clear...you state that you could convict Kelly and Pullen of theft based on the public reports of the violation.  Or, do you want to use inside info to tell everyone what a dumbass they are?  If you believe that a jury would convict Pullen and Kelly of theft based on publicly available info, you'd get your ass plugged faster than a $5 whore at aTailhook convention.

I'm not sure what you're talking about anymore, but if you ever find yourself in a similar predicament, hire sys to rep you using the tard defense.  You should be fine.

[deputy dawg]

Just to be clear...you state that you could convict Kelly and Pullen of theft based on the public reports of the violation.  Or, do you want to use inside info to tell everyone what a dumbass they are?  If you believe that a jury would convict Pullen and Kelly of theft based on publicly available info, you'd get your ass plugged faster than a $5 whore at aTailhook convention.

I'm not sure what you're talking about anymore, but if you ever find yourself in a similar predicament, hire sys to rep you using the tard defense.  You should be fine.

Simple version:  You wouldn't be able to convict Pullen or Kelly based on the story made available to the public.

[Trim]

Just to be clear...you state that you could convict Kelly and Pullen of theft based on the public reports of the violation.  Or, do you want to use inside info to tell everyone what a dumbass they are?  If you believe that a jury would convict Pullen and Kelly of theft based on publicly available info, you'd get your ass plugged faster than a $5 whore at aTailhook convention.

I'm not sure what you're talking about anymore, but if you ever find yourself in a similar predicament, hire sys to rep you using the tard defense.  You should be fine.

Simple version:  You wouldn't be able to convict Pullen or Kelly based on the story made available to the public.

Uh, yeah.  Lawyers don't use press releases for evidence.  Of course, all non-tards know how to read a KSU press release about anything and can apply common sense (and in my/this case, apply the real world) and figure out what happened.

You still have a day and a half to finish off your Christmas shopping by wandering around malls waiting for a clerk to randomly give you a bunch of free crap and walk out blissfully knowing you didn't steal.