Just when you thought that Andy Oliver was suing the world, he adds his future Alma Mater to the fold. As a site that has been dedicated to the coverage of the ongoing Andy Oliver affair, SportsAgentBlog.com had received first word that Oklahoma State University is now one of the Defendants on the second amended Complaint filed by Oliver's attorneys. Let's jump right into the relevant paragraphs of the newly filed Complaint in relation to OSU:
61. Under the Defendant OSU's Student Code of Conduct, the Plaintiff had a right to the following: "Accused students have the right to: 1. a written notice of the alleged violation(s); 2. have no code violation assumed until proven; 3. a timely hearing; 4. be accompanied by an advisera€¦ 5. review the evidence; 6. question his/her accuser, either directly or indirectly, at the discretion of the hearing panel chair; 7. question witnessesa€¦; 8. present material witnesses; 9. waive his/her right to a formal hearing and have the matter resolved informally; 10. a written notification of the outcome of the hearing; 11. an avenue for appeal from a formal hearing." OSU Student Code of Conduct Rule IV(B).
62. a€¦there was not written notice provided of what he was alleged to have done wrong, he was presumed guilty rather than innocent, there was no hearing, no advisor, no opportunity to review evidencea€¦
63. Instead, the Defendant OSU did the followinga€¦
Basically says that OSU violated the anti-contact rule and illegally used confidential attorney-client privileged information.
64. In Gestapo-like fashion, the Defendants OSU & NCAA interviewed the Plaintiff without an attorney presenta€¦which additionally violated the anti-contact rulea€¦
A Jewish judge (do they have any in Erie County, Ohio?) would eat that up.
61. Under the Defendant OSU's Student Code of Conduct, the Plaintiff had a right to the following: "Accused students have the right to: 1. a written notice of the alleged violation(s); 2. have no code violation assumed until proven; 3. a timely hearing; 4. be accompanied by an advisera€¦ 5. review the evidence; 6. question his/her accuser, either directly or indirectly, at the discretion of the hearing panel chair; 7. question witnessesa€¦; 8. present material witnesses; 9. waive his/her right to a formal hearing and have the matter resolved informally; 10. a written notification of the outcome of the hearing; 11. an avenue for appeal from a formal hearing." OSU Student Code of Conduct Rule IV(B).
62. a€¦there was not written notice provided of what he was alleged to have done wrong, he was presumed guilty rather than innocent, there was no hearing, no advisor, no opportunity to review evidencea€¦
63. Instead, the Defendant OSU did the followinga€¦
Basically says that OSU violated the anti-contact rule and illegally used confidential attorney-client privileged information.
64. In Gestapo-like fashion, the Defendants OSU & NCAA interviewed the Plaintiff without an attorney presenta€¦which additionally violated the anti-contact rulea€¦
A Jewish judge (do they have any in Erie County, Ohio?) would eat that up.
Original Story:
