More Bull or The Real Thing?

In answer to the question, the last time I had any dealings or looked into the issue of taping a call, the rule was it is fine as long as one party to the conversation is aware it's being taped. I think you get into problems where you're recording the communications of others without their knowledge.

Saniflush · « **Reply #27 on:** November 10, 2010, 10:29:02 AM »

Quote from: Snaggletiger on November 10, 2010, 10:25:20 AM

In answer to the question, the last time I had any dealings or looked into the issue of taping a call, the rule was it is fine as long as one party to the conversation is aware it's being taped. I think you get into problems where you're recording the communications of others without their knowledge.

Wouldn't the person recording the conversation be one party?

Buzz Killington · « **Reply #28 on:** November 10, 2010, 10:30:25 AM »

Quote from: Saniflush on November 10, 2010, 10:29:02 AM

Wouldn't the person recording the conversation be one party?

Yes, but whatever REC member found out about it is now the second party.

Snaggletiger · « **Reply #29 on:** November 10, 2010, 10:30:56 AM »

To clarify, I can record you and vice-versa withou the other's knowledge. I can't record you hitting on a 13 year old girl scout.

AWK · « **Reply #30 on:** November 10, 2010, 10:32:51 AM »

Quote from: Snaggletiger on November 10, 2010, 10:30:56 AM

To clarify, I can record you and vice-versa withou the other's knowledge. I can't record you hitting on a 13 year old girl scout.

As long as you aren't a government official or doing it under the orders of a government official, it doesn't matter.

AUChizad · « **Reply #31 on:** November 10, 2010, 10:38:05 AM »

djsimp · « **Reply #32 on:** November 10, 2010, 10:42:32 AM »

In this link, you can read the article from Chris Low and watch the video of Joe Schad on ESPN. Basically, these so called recorded conversations are legit, that is if they really exist.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5786315

AUChizad · « **Reply #33 on:** November 10, 2010, 10:48:20 AM »

Quote from: djsimp41 on November 10, 2010, 10:42:32 AM

In this link, you can read the article from Chris Low and watch the video of Joe Schad on ESPN. Basically, these so called recorded conversations are legit, that is if they really exist.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5786315

Quote

Sources told ESPN.com the man who said he was representing the Newtons was Kenny Rogers, who played in the 1980s for Mississippi State alongside Bond.

"I'm not going to entertain something that took place not three months, not six months, not a year but two years ago," Cam Newton said. "I'm not going to sit up here and say anything about it, whether I did or did not do it, because I don't want to beat a dead horse talking about it. It's not going to affect me any way, shape or fashion."

Ain't that some bullshit? Michael Moore-style taking shit completely out of context and juxtaposing them in such a way that they appear related.

Cam's comments about "Not saying whether he did or didn't do it" was in the context of plagiarizing a college paper, NOT the pay-for-play shit...

Hobo · « **Reply #34 on:** November 10, 2010, 10:50:07 AM »

"More than a scholarship" could mean a lot of things no proof of money.

"The Money being too much" could mean a lot as well. Maybe it is travel, maybe it is something else.

Vague statements, sounds bad, but in a court of law it wouldn't hold water. Of course this is the court of public opinion and the NCAA.

AUChizad · « **Reply #35 on:** November 10, 2010, 10:50:15 AM »

Anyone have Schad's email?

Tiger Wench · « **Reply #36 on:** November 10, 2010, 10:51:51 AM »

AGAIN... where has any "news outlet" reported the words "THERE ARE TAPES"??? What have I missed? If there were tapes - actual recordings - no WAY does Cam play this season. If there are tapes - actual recordings - then why wouldn't those have been turned over in January? That would pretty much be concrete proof right there of impropriety.

Saniflush · « **Reply #37 on:** November 10, 2010, 10:54:03 AM »

Quote from: Tiger Wench on November 10, 2010, 10:51:51 AM

If there are tapes - actual recordings - then why wouldn't those have been turned over in January?

Cause they probably had not been recorded yet.

Townhallsavoy · « **Reply #38 on:** November 10, 2010, 10:54:50 AM »

Quote from: Tiger Wench on November 10, 2010, 10:51:51 AM

AGAIN... where has any "news outlet" reported the words "THERE ARE TAPES"??? What have I missed? If there were tapes - actual recordings - no WAY does Cam play this season. If there are tapes - actual recordings - then why wouldn't those have been turned over in January? That would pretty much be concrete proof right there of impropriety.

I heard a news update on Jox this morning with Joe Schad saying out loud, "There are tapes that have the Newtons admitting...blahblahblah."

So besides that, pretty much nothing.

Hobo · « **Reply #39 on:** November 10, 2010, 10:55:52 AM »

Quote from: Saniflush on November 10, 2010, 10:54:03 AM

Cause they probably had not been recorded yet.

Will Cam's smile come through on tape?