re: Manziel recommendation from NCAA on Wednesday

quote:

---

Aggy created the tangible evidence standard. Unheard of to any legal system in the world. You have to have "tangible" evidence. A lack of which they use interchangeably with no evidence.

---

I think what everyone means is there is no witness testimony and no other evidence that money changed hands. Only innuendo that money MAY HAVE changed hands in a similar circumstance, so it must have occurred in this one. In other words, no tangible evidence. This is not just an "aggy" thing either.

quote:

---

This is like the OJ case where wannabe legal eagles kept saying the case is circumstantial, like that has any meaning. Anything other than eye witness testimony is circumstantial. DNA evidence, which is considered incredibly reliable by the public, is circumstantial. A label does not weaken the case. At some point the NCAA will weigh what it has. To criticize it for not having what it is incapable of compelling people to give them is stupid.

---

I am no wannabe, sir. Circumstantial evidence can be used if it is credible and leads one to believe that only one conclusion could be reached based on the information available. Example, if the grass is wet and it hasn't rained in a week, the wet grass is circumstantial evidence that somebody ran the sprinklers. If a turtle is on top of a fencepost, after expert testimony from an expert in turtle behavior stating that turtles can't jump or climb a fence post, the mere fact that the turtle is on the fence is circumstantial evidence that someone put the turtle on the fence.

In this case, the fact that JFF signed a bunch of stuff MAY BE circumstantial evidence that he was paid, but it also may be excused because he thought it was for charity, or that he did it out of the goodness of his heart. The amount of signing he did does not lead solely to the conclusion that he was paid, without more evidence. So, yeah, it's circumstantial evidence, but not reliable on it's own. So, Eff you.