As a private institution, Miami is not required to release documents such as its Notice of Allegations from the NCAA or its motion to dismiss the case. Still, ESPN’s Outside the Lines was able to obtain the university’s letter to the Committee on Infractions asking that the case be thrown out.
Among the improper acts (Miami’s words, not ours) the university alleges are:
- The NCAA enforcement staff created the concept of “self-corroboration” as an appropriate evidentiary standard, as many of the allegations leveled against the University are based on the testimony of one man (a convicted felon) and were never supported by any other witness or documentation.
- Throughout the approximate 2′/2-year investigation, the enforcement staff’s impermissible conduct, constant turnover, inexperienced investigators and overall mismanagement caused multiple unconscionable delays in a process which could have been concluded in much less time.
- As already acknowledged by the NCAA, the intentional use of impermissible investigative tactics by members of the enforcement staff, with the approval of NCAA executives, including the compensation of an outside attorney to solicit information from witnesses, incredibly violated clear and defined policies and is further evidence of an all-out approach to prove the most salacious allegations rather than discover what actually transpired at the University.
- Perhaps most distressing and unconscionable, on multiple occasions, members of thee enforcement staff intentionally misled the University by withholding key information, failing to inform the University of scheduled interviews and, most egregiously, lying to the University and its outside counsel.
That last point is, by its own admission, the most damaging accusation made by the university. As we’ve noted before, the amount of information the NCAA would potentially have to toss aside (in addition to the depositions conducted by Nevin Shapiro’s attorney, Maria Elena Perez) could result in a conversation of whether the NCAA should proceed with the case at all.
My edumacated guess is still that the case will proceed toward a COI hearing, though that entire process could very well be delayed by the university’s motion and its potential legitimacy.