Reggie Bush Reaches Settlement
Well, it looks like we wont be getting a deposition out of Reggie. According to the article he had reached a settlement with LLoyd Lake. I imagine we will be hearing from the NCAA shortly in regards to their USC verdict.
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ys-bushcase042110
Settlements don't always mean the person is guilty; but, in this case, Reggie has to know that it certainly implies it. Right?
I believe his first settlement implied guilt, this was only delaying the inevitable.
I just hope the NCAA is reading this thread.
April 21st, 2010 at 10:50 AM ^
Quick note: Having prepared many, many litigation settlement documents, every one I've seen, except for one*, included an express clause stating that the Defendant does not admit guilt or that any/all of the charges in Plaintiff's claim are true. I know- the court of public opinion is a lot different, but just thought I'd toss in my $.02.
* That one wasn't prepared by me/my firm, and we specifically amended it to include the "not admitting guilt/veracity of claim(s)" language before we asked our client to sign it.
April 21st, 2010 at 11:42 AM ^
I figured there would be some clause in there to not admitting guilt, the defendant is just cutting a deal.
But that's what I was getting at, settlements don't necessarily mean anyone is guilty or at fault, it just means that one party thought it was in his/her best interest to avoid court.
My thing is, in this scenario specifically (probably in most scenarios), the perception would be that he's guilty.
April 21st, 2010 at 12:51 PM ^
i've seen many as well and have never seen one that didn't include a clause specifying that the settling defendant admitted no guilt or liability.
April 21st, 2010 at 12:40 PM ^
If the NCAA has people reading this thread, then that's why they need to expand the basketball tournament--it costs a lot of money to constantly search the 'net for up to date criticism of a public body, filter that info, analyze the info, and make recommendations.
is actually interested enough in this story to try and help iron out some of the wrinkles?? I mean, sure, the NCAA essentially owes the NFL no obligations and doesn't answer to them at all... but I don't think it takes a PhD to realize that Goodell and co. REALLY REALLY WANT this story to go away.
High profile player, Super Bowl winning team full of good stories and public interest intent, blah blah blah... In light of the ongoing and most recent struggles to clean up the NFL's image, does anyone think there may have been some phone calls from the commish's office to try and keep this thing underwater? I'm not saying I believe it per se, but it's not unthinkable.
Although it is the offseason, and after the draft is as good a time as any to lay down the law.
I'm not sure the NFL cares one way or the other. The ongoing narrative has always been whether or not USC will get their comeuppance (and to a lesser extent, whether Bush will get his). No one seems to be thinking about this in terms of the NFL.
I would not be shocked if the money to pay Lloyd Lake came from elsewhere... it would be a smart move to pay off Lloyd to get rid of that pesky deposition... just saying.
How big of a difference will this really have on the NCAA results? Obviously no one knows for sure, but the NCAA seemingly had enough without Bush's deposition before. Does this really change much besides probably move up the NCAA's announcement?
I'm just curious if any pressure was applied to Bush by the USC Athletics Department. No, they don't really have any leverage over him, but I wouldn't be shocked if they were desperately asking Bush to shut this whole thing down for their program's sake.
April 21st, 2010 at 10:03 AM ^
I'd buy this more than the NFL putting pressure on Bush. Though you're right, I'm not sure how much pressure they could really apply beyond asking/hassling him. As arrogant as USC is, they're not stupid, and obviously want this over and done with as quickly and painlessly as possible.
April 21st, 2010 at 12:27 PM ^
USC has exactly zero leverage over a former player. Any pressure they could apply through embarrassing information would likely also reflect negatively on USC. Oh, and that negative info could be used to harm USC in the form of tangible sanctions by the NCAA. It's just a calculated decision by Bush and his lawyers--pay something now to prevent a potentially much higher payout later.
April 21st, 2010 at 11:39 AM ^
hey ron mexico, way ahead of ya!
April 21st, 2010 at 12:59 PM ^
In the original deposition thread, I posted that I thought he would settle so that he didn't have to testify. I wouldn't even be surprised if the money came from a USC booster. Since Bush no longer goes there, it wouldn't be illegal now.
The NCAA seems to favor programs like USC and OSU, choosing to stick to things like due process and "beyond a reasonable doubt" in their cases, while putting less powerful schools on probabtion with flimsy "evidence" and denying them any semblence of due process or reasonable doubt.
SSDD.