http://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/university-releases-additional-ncaa-correspondence/
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has posted more correspondence sent to and received from the NCAA and its Committee on Infractions in conjunction with responding to public records requests. Those items can be found here, here, here, here, here, here and here.
https://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/files/2017/04/04.14.2017-Letter-from-Greg-Sankey.pdf
"Moreover, regarding my role as Chair of the COI, the NCAA Division I Board of Directors approved my appointment to this role pursuant to Bylaw 19.3.1. Regarding case-specific conflicts of interest, the membership anticipated that concern in Bylaw 19.3.4. My conference affiliation within a peer review model does not create a direct conflict or the appearance of partiality. Although a party in the infractions process may raise a conflict of interest concern, there is no requirement that a COI member directly refute allegations of the appearance of partiality. However, I reaffirm the panel's and my commitment to fairly decide this case. Misstatements of fact (e.g., that the panel directed the enforcement staff to change allegations, that the panel is somehow conflicted or that I previously investigated a Southeastern Conference institution on an academic matter) included in some of these letters do not change this commitment to impartiality. The panel, including me, will hear and decide this case based on the case record and the membership's bylaws. The COI will hear the case in August. Based on anticipated hearing dates of August 16 and 17, 2017, the parties' responses to the second amended notice of allegations (ANOA) will be due May 16, 2017, which results in roughly a two-month extension, exceeding the institution's 30-day extension request. The enforcement staff's procedural documents will be due July 17, 2017. The parties should conduct Ms. Crowder's interview over the next several weeks in order to meet that schedule. There will be no further delays, and the case will be heard on this schedule. Finally, Bylaw 19.01.3 requires that all infractions-related information remain confidential throughout the infractions process. The panel will continue to monitor the parties' compliance with this requirement and, if necessary, address any failures at the upcoming infractions hearing. Again, the panel will hear and decide this case within the infractions process, based on the case record. The panel will not decide this case by public comment on confidential or incomplete information."
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has posted more correspondence sent to and received from the NCAA and its Committee on Infractions in conjunction with responding to public records requests. Those items can be found here, here, here, here, here, here and here.
https://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/files/2017/04/04.14.2017-Letter-from-Greg-Sankey.pdf
"Moreover, regarding my role as Chair of the COI, the NCAA Division I Board of Directors approved my appointment to this role pursuant to Bylaw 19.3.1. Regarding case-specific conflicts of interest, the membership anticipated that concern in Bylaw 19.3.4. My conference affiliation within a peer review model does not create a direct conflict or the appearance of partiality. Although a party in the infractions process may raise a conflict of interest concern, there is no requirement that a COI member directly refute allegations of the appearance of partiality. However, I reaffirm the panel's and my commitment to fairly decide this case. Misstatements of fact (e.g., that the panel directed the enforcement staff to change allegations, that the panel is somehow conflicted or that I previously investigated a Southeastern Conference institution on an academic matter) included in some of these letters do not change this commitment to impartiality. The panel, including me, will hear and decide this case based on the case record and the membership's bylaws. The COI will hear the case in August. Based on anticipated hearing dates of August 16 and 17, 2017, the parties' responses to the second amended notice of allegations (ANOA) will be due May 16, 2017, which results in roughly a two-month extension, exceeding the institution's 30-day extension request. The enforcement staff's procedural documents will be due July 17, 2017. The parties should conduct Ms. Crowder's interview over the next several weeks in order to meet that schedule. There will be no further delays, and the case will be heard on this schedule. Finally, Bylaw 19.01.3 requires that all infractions-related information remain confidential throughout the infractions process. The panel will continue to monitor the parties' compliance with this requirement and, if necessary, address any failures at the upcoming infractions hearing. Again, the panel will hear and decide this case within the infractions process, based on the case record. The panel will not decide this case by public comment on confidential or incomplete information."
Last edited:
