July 21,2006 .iUL 2 4worldonline.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com/.../03/25/a6.pdf · 2009. 3....

p.o. Box 6222

Indianapolis, Indiana 46206

Telephone: 317/917·6222

Shipping/Overnight Address:

1802 Alonzo Watford Sr. Drive

Indianapolis, Indiana 46202

www.ncaa.org

RECEIVED July 21,2006

.iUL 2 4 2006

OFFICE OF THE Cr;/\!'J(~FJ".l,Or~ THE Uf~!\/Ef~3~TY OF ~~\N3j.~S

CONFIDENTIALNIA FEDERAL EXPRESS

Chancellor Robert Hemenway University of Kansas 1450 Jayhawk Boulevard Lawrence, Kansas 66045

RE: Case summary, University of Kansas, Case No. M241.

Dear Chancellor Hemenway:

Enclosed is the case summary regarding the University of Kansas' infractions case that recently was forwarded to the NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions.

Please contact this office if you have any questions.

~(J[-~mas C. Hasty Director of Enforcement

TCH:ksm

Enclosure

cc: Mr. Shepard C. Cooper Mr. Jim Elworth Mr. Rick Evrard Mr. Don Green Mr. Lew Perkins Mr. Kevin L. Weiberg NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions

Nat onal Collegiate Athletic Assoc ation

An association of over 1,200 members serving the student-athlete Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer

Appendix 6

ENFORCEMENT STAFF CASE SUMMARY

Case No. M241 - University of Kansas

July 21, 2006

Case Chronology

• Summer of 200 I - Al Bohl was hired as the director of athletics. At this time, Bohl promoted Janelle Martin, associate athletics director for compliance, to associate athletics director/senior woman administrator with responsibilities in compliance, as well as women's basketball, women's volleyball, women's tennis, women's swimming and diving, men's and women's golf, men's swimming and diving, and rowing. Martin took the added responsibilities of senior woman administrator with the understanding that an additional person would be hired for the compliance office.

• July 200 I - Ted Leland, director of athletics at Stanford University, who was previously contacted by the athletics department to conduct a review of its operations, provided the institution a written assessment report. This report suggested that resources needed to be reallocated to other areas such as compliance because compliance was understaffed for 500 plus student-athletes. At this time, no additional staff members were added to the compliance office.

• Fall of 200 I - Martin informed Bohl that the compliance office needed additional staff. Bohl allegedly told Martin, "Compliance doesn't sell tickets." At this time, no additional staff members were added to the compliance office.

• March 2002 - The compliance auditor position became vacant due to the staff member's departure and was not filled again until December 2002, a time lapse of 10 months.

• April 2002 - Don Green, faculty athletics representative, discussed with Bohl the fact that the compliance office was understaffed. At this time, no additional staff members were added to the compliance office nor was the vacant compliance auditor position filled.

• November 2002 - Don Davis, representative of the institution's athletics interests, introduced himself to J.R. Giddens and Darnell Jackson, prospective student-athletes being recruited by the men's basketball staff. Around this time, Giddens signed a National Letter of Intent with the institution.

• April to May 2003 - The football staff learned that several two-year college prospective student-athletes who were expected to enroll at the institution in the fall of 2003 would not be eligible for competition that season due to academic deficiencies. Around this time, the student support services staff contacted the compliance office to determine whether it was permissible to provide services to these prospects while they were on

Appendix 6

CASE SUMMARY Case No. M24l July 20, 2006

campus but not enrolled in institutional courses. The student support services staff did not receive a response from the compliance office.

• May to June 2003 - Several two-year college prospective student-athletes -- including John McCoy, Johnny Urrutia and Monroe Weekley -- moved to the institution's campus and enrolled in Brigham Young University correspondence courses with the intent to fulfill academic deficiencies and gain NCAA eligibility.

• June 2003 - Lew Perkins was hired as the director of athletics, succeeding BoW. On his first day on the job, Perkins was informed of possibly serious NCAA violations. Perkins subsequently contacted the law firm of Bond, Schoeneck & King to request a compliance review and investigation of possible NCAA rules violations. Perkins then informed the NCAA enforcement services staff that the institution would begin a review of possible violations.

• July 2003 - Football coaching staff members -- including Clint Bowen, assistant football coach, and John Papuchis, graduate assistant football coach -- arranged for Jama Crady, a local high school teacher, to proctor correspondence course exams for the two-year college prospective student-athletes, including McCoy, Urrutia ana Weekley.

• August 2003 - Football training camp began. At this time, several of the two-year college prospective student-athletes had not yet completed their correspondence courses.

• August 2003 - Crady provided Papuchis some correspondence course exams for the twoyear college prospective student-athletes. Crady did so because she was unable to proctor the exams due to her vacation plans. At this time, the prospects were pressed for time to complete the correspondence courses and gain NCAA eligibility. Papuchis allegedly provided one of the exams to McCoy and permitted the young man to complete the exam without a proctor. McCoy subsequently passed the course, gained NCAA eligibility and competed on the football team.

• August 2003 - Mike Bums, graduate assistant football coach, allegedly obtained correspondence course exams for Urrutia and Weekley. He allegedly provided the exams to Urrutia and Weekley and assisted the young men in the completion of the exams by providing them answers. Weekley subsequently passed the course, gained NCAA eligibility and competed on the football team. Urrutia failed the course and did not enroll at the institution.

• Fall of 2003 - Weekley reported to the faculty athletics representative that he received improper assistance in the completion of his correspondence course exams as well as items of clothing from an assistant football coach. The institution then began an independent inquiry into the matters.

2

Appendix 6

CASE SUMMARY Case No. M241 July 20, 2006

• Fall of 2003 - Davis initially violated NCAA legislation when he provided automobile transportation to Jackson, Jackson's family members and Giddens' mother to various basketball games. Jackson was a prospective student-athlete at the time who signed a National Letter of Intent with the institution in November 2003. Giddens was an enrolled student-athlete at the institution. Davis continued providing similar extra benefits to these individuals through the summer of 2004.

• Summer of 2004 - Jackson enrolled at the institution.

• December 2004 - Davis made special arrangements for Jackson's mother to purchase his son's 1996 Chevrolet S-l O.

• February 2005 - Davis provided Jackson's mother a loan to purchase a 1995 Honda Passport.

• June 2005 - An anonymous source reported information to the enforcement staff indicating that Davis provided extra benefits to Giddens. Shortly thereafter, the institution visited with the enforcement staff at the national office and submitted a selfreport. This report indicated that various NCAA violations occurred during the summer of 2003 when the two-year college prospective student-athletes were on campus completing correspondence courses. The report also contained NCAA violations that occurred within the men's and women's basketball programs. During this meeting, the enforcement staff provided the institution the information related to Giddens and requested an inquiry. Subsequently, the institution interviewed Davis. The enforcement staff later joined the institution on this inquiry.

• July 1, 2005 - The enforcement staff issued a notice of inquiry to the institution.

• November 9,2005 - The institution submitted a self-report of violations involving Davis' provision of extra benefits to Jackson and his family members and requested Jackson's reinstatement.

• February 16, 2006 - The enforcement staff issued a notice of allegations to the institution, Bums and Papuchis. In this letter, the parties were informed that a hearing to discuss these matters was tentatively scheduled for the weekend of June 9-10, 2006, and that the parties' responses to the notice of allegations were due by April 18, 2006.

• March 16, 2006 - The institution requested that due to conflicts that Chancellor Robert E. Hemenway had with the projected June hearing dates, the hearing be conducted August 13,2006.

3

Appendix 6


• March 28, 2006 - The NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions granted the institution's request and scheduled the hearing for August 13.

• April 10, 2006 - The NCAA Division I Committee changed the deadline for the parties' responses to June 30, 2006, due to the altered hearing date.

• June 6, 2006 - The enforcement staff contacted Bums to determine whether he would submit a response to the notice of allegations or attend the August 13 hearing in Baltimore, Maryland. At this time, Bums indicated that he was undecided as to whether he would submit a response but stated that he would not attend the hearing.

• June 30, 2006 - The institution, Bums and Papuchis submitted their responses to the notice of allegations.

• July 5, 2006 - The enforcement staff contacted Bums' attorney to arrange a prehearing conference. Bums' attorney indicated that the conference was not needed, as Bums preferred to limit his participation to his response.

• July 10, 2006 - The enforcement staff and Papuchis conducted a prehearing conference.

• July 11, 2006 - The enforcement staff and the institution conducted a prehearing conference.

All student-athlete eligibility issues have been resolved. Regarding John McCoy, football student-athlete allegedly involved in academic fraud outlined in Allegation No.1, the institution has declared McCoy ineligible and has not yet sought his reinstatement.

4

Appendix 6

Individuals Who May Be Mentioned During the Hearing

Case No. M241 -University of Kansas

Anderson, Dana - representative of the institution's athletics interests.

Bohl, AI- fonner director of athletics.

Bowen, Clint - assistant football coach.

Bright, Janice - prospective women's basketball student-athlete.

Burns, Mike - graduate assistant football coach.

Buskirk, Paul- associate athletics director for student-athlete support services.

Case, Jeremy - men's basketball student-athlete.

Collins, Anthony - football student-athlete.

Crady, Jama -local high school teacher.

Davis, Don - representative of the institution's athletics interests.

Dixon, Tyrone - assistant football coach.

Eatman, Tim - assistant women's basketball coach.

Edwards, Joan - representative of the institution's athletics interests.

Frederick, Bob - fonner director of athletics.

Giddens, Diana - J.R. Giddens' mother.

Giddens, J.R. - men's basketball student-athlete.

Jackson, Darnell - men's basketball student-athlete.

Jackson, Evan - Jackson's brother.

Jackson, Shawn - Jackson's mother.

Jackson, Yvonne - Jackson's grandmother.

Johnson, Albert - Jackson's AAU coach.

Appendix 6

Individuals Who May Be Mentioned Case No. M218 Page No.2

Jones, Chuck - prospective football student-athlete.

Konzem, Richard - senior associate athletics director.

Littrell, Seth - graduate assistant football coach.

Mangino, Mark - head football coach.

Martin, Janelle - associate athletics director for compliance.

McCoy, John - prospective football student-athlete.

Mims, Zach - prospective football student-athlete.

Morgan, Bernard - representative of the institution's athletics interests.

Norwood, Michael- academic counselor.

Papuchis, John - graduate assistant football coach.

Patton, Nick - prospective football student-athlete.

Prater, Nate - prospective football student-athlete.

Running, Mitch - graduate assistant football coach.

Simmons, Shelton - prospective football student-athlete.

Stewart, Rodrick - men's basketball student-athlete.

Toomey, Gabriel- prospective football student-athlete.

Urrutia, Johnny - prospective football student-athlete.

Weekley, Monroe - football student-athlete.

JAT:ksm

Appendix 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Case No. M241 - University ofKansas

A. Case Chronology 1

B. Allegations 1-1

1. Academic Fraud - John Papuchis 1-1

a. Overview 1-1

b. Remaining Issue 1-1

Do Papuchis' actions constitute academic fraud as outlined in Allegation No.1?

2. Academic Fraud - Mike Bums 2-1

a. Overview 2-1


Do Bums' actions constitute academic fraud, as outlined in Allegation No.2?

3. Assistance for Transfer Student-Athletes 3-1

a. Overview 3-2


Did prospective student-athletes receive training table meals and nutritional supplements, as outlined in Allegation No. 3-d?

4. Impermissible Gifts for a Prospective Student-Athlete 4-1

Overview 4-1

5. Impermissible Contact by Graduate Assistants with Prospective Student-Athletes .. 5-1

Overview 5-1

6. Impermissible Benefits to Prospective Student-Athlete/Student-Athlete 6-1

Overview 6-4

Appendix 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS Case No. M241 July 21, 2006 Page No.2

7. Impermissible Extra Benefits to Men's Basketball and Football Student-Athletes ... 7-1

Overview 7-2

8. Impermissible Graduation Gifts to Men's Basketball Student-Athletes 8-1

Overview 8-1

9. Impermissible Transportation to Prospective Student-Athlete 9-1

Overview 9-1

10. Multiple Secondary Violations 10-1

a. Overview 10-4


Should the committee consider the violations that occurred prior to June 1999?

11. Institutional Control 11-1

a. Overview 11-2

b. Remaining Issues 11-2

(1) Did the institution fail to provide NCAA rules education to representatives of its athletics interests, as outlined in Allegation No. l1-c?

(2) Do the facts in Allegation No. 11 constitute a lack of institutional control or a failure to monitor?

JAT:ksm

Appendix 6


Allegation No.1

1. [NCAA Bylaws 10.1 and 10.1-(b)]

It is alleged that in August 2003, John Papuchis, graduate assistant football coach, violated the principles of ethical conduct when he arranged academic fraud for a prospective football student-athlete involving the completion of the prospect's exam for a correspondence course offered by Brigham Young University (Brigham Young).

Specifically, in August 2003, Papuchis arranged to receive a Math 110 exam for John McCoy, prospective football student-athlete, from McCoy's registered proctor prior to McCoy's completion of the exam. Subsequently, Papuchis provided the exam to McCoy with the understanding that McCoy would complete the exam on his own without the presence of a proctor.

Overview: The enforcement staff and the institution are in substantial agreement as to the facts of this allegation and that major violations occurred. Papuchis does not agree with the facts or that he arranged academic fraud for McCoy.

Remaining Issue: Do Papuchis' actions constitute academic fraud, as outlined in Allegation No. I?

Background Information

During the summer of 2003, several prospective football student-athletes who transferred from two-year colleges, including McCoy, were present on the institution's campus prior to their enrollment in the institution's classes. During this time, most of these prospects were completing correspondence courses offered by Brigham Young in an attempt to fulfill their two-year college academic deficiencies and gain acceptance into the institution, while at the same time meeting NCAA eligibility requirements.

During that summer, Papuchis and Clint Bowen, assistant football coach, contacted Jama Crady, a local high school teacher and former swimming student-athlete at the institution, and arranged for her to proctor the prospects' exams. [Note: Crady was one of several local teachers contacted to serve as a proctor. Crady was specifically contacted because she was friends with Bowen.] This occurred because the prospects were involved in fall football camp, where practice occurred two times a day, and needed a proctor who was available in the evenings and on the weekends. The institution's testing center was open only during the day on weekdays and often conflicted with the prospects' schedules.

1-1

Appendix 6


Thoughout the completion of the correspondence courses, the prospects were prompted online by Brigham Young's Web site to contact Brigham Young and order their exams. Brigham Young then sent the exams directly to Crady because she was the registered proctor. When Crady received the exams, she typically contacted the graduate assistant football coaches to notify them that she had received the exams and to arrange times for the prospects to complete them. The prospects then went to Crady's high school, where Crady administered the exam. Once the prospect finished the exam, he returned it to Crady and she mailed it back to Brigham Young.

On one occasion in August, Crady's previously scheduled vacation occurred during a weekend when some of the prospects needed to have their exams proctored. This time period was described as a "pressure" or "crunch" time because some of the prospects needed to complete their final exams and finish the courses in order to be admitted to the institution and meet NCAA eligibility requirements. Therefore, Crady provided the exams to Papuchis so that he could administer them to the prospects. Instead, Papuchis allegedly provided one of the exams to McCoy and permitted him to do what he wanted with the exam, including completing the exam without a proctor.

Position of Institution: The institution believes Papuchis' actions constitute academic fraud.

Position of Involved Parties: Papuchis does not believe his actions constitute academic fraud.

Position of Enforcement Staff and Reasons for Position: The enforcement staff believes that Papuchis' actions constitute academic fraud. In support of this position, the enforcement staff relies primarily on the following:

• Papuchis' testimony indicating that in August 2003, he obtained some of the prospects' Brigham Young exams from Crady and that one of the exams was for McCoy. He also stated that he provided the exam to McCoy knowing that McCoy should have completed the exam with a proctor.

• McCoy's testimony indicating that in August 2003, he might have obtained a Brigham Young math correspondence course exam from Papuchis. He also stated that he, not Crady, might have mailed that exam back to Brigham Young.

• Crady's testimony indicating that in August 2003, she provided some of the prospects' Brigham Young exams to Papuchis, and that she explained to Papuchis how to administer the exams.

1-2

Appendix 6


Relevant Infonnation Reported/Obtained:

• Papuchis reported that in the spring of 2003, the football staff realized the possibility that several of the prospective football student-athletes who transferred from two-year colleges were not going to be eligible for competition due to academic deficiencies. He stated that he felt "indirect" pressure from some of the football coaches to make sure the prospects got enrolled in courses that would fulfill those deficiencies and to monitor their academic progress. Therefore, he "kept an eye" on some of the prospects to make sure they were studying and getting their course work done.

Papuchis reported that during the summer of 2003, he, along with Bowen was involved in arranging for Crady to serve as a proctor for the prospects completing the correspondence courses. He stated that on one weekend in August, Crady was not available to proctor the prospects' exams. Therefore, Crady provided Papuchis at least one, and possibly three, packets of exams for prospects. Specifically, Papuchis recalled that Crady handed him the packets in the parking lot in front of the football complex. Papuchis initially reported during his April 8, 2004, interview with the institution that he could not recall specifically who the exams were for, but thought one was for McCoy. He later changed his testimony during an October 27, 2005, interview with the institution and the enforcement staff and said he guessed the exams were for either Shelton Simmons or Monroe Weekley, other prospects completing Brigham Young correspondence courses during the summer of 2003. As seen in Papuchis' response to the notice of allegations, he acknowledged that he provided a packet to McCoy.

During his April 8 interview, Papuchis stated, "I believe she (Crady) had went out of town for a weekend and when the tests were going to come and we (the graduate assistant football coaches) went and picked them up and had them (the prospects) take them." He stated that the prospects took the exams in a meeting room in the Wagnon StudentAthlete Center. However, during his August 25 interview, Papuchis reported, "I just handed 'em (the prospects) the test and went on about my business." Regarding what the prospects did with the exams, Papuchis said: "I didn't know what they were gonna do with 'em. I didn't wanna know what they were gonna do with 'em to be 100 percent honest."

During his August 25 interview, Papuchis reported that while he knew the exams needed to be proctored, he did not arrange a proctor for the prospects, nor did he know who, if anyone, proctored the exam. Papuchis said he provided the exams to the prospects because, "I didn't know what to do at that point. I said I -- this is too much for me. don't have the authority over these kids. I didn't wanna have to deal with it. So I handed 'em the tests and was just, like, whatever. You do what you, what you do. And kinda was, like, if you choose to take it unproctored, that's kinda on you. I didn't tell 'em to do it that way. I didn't tell lama to bring the test over and that she had to do it that way. 1-

1-3

I

Appendix 6


at that point wanted nothing to do with it anymore because I saw that was probably something that wasn't good." When questioned further about the reason he provided the exams to the prospects, Papuchis reported: "I didn't know what to do with 'em (the exams) because if they didn't take 'em at that time, they weren't gonna be eligible. And as a GA, I wasn't gonna put myself in the one that said I was the one that put my foot down and said this isn't happening. That's not my role. I don't get paid enough to do that. So that may have been a poor decision, and I'm open and willing to say that that probably was. But it wasn't my intent of doing anything wrong. It was more with the intent of this is a little bit over my head, and I don't know what to do at that point." Papuchis noted that he did not receive any NCAA rules education from the institution.

• McCoy transferred from Victor Valley Community College, a two-year college, to the institution in the fall of 2003. McCoy reported that he enrolled in three Brigham Young correspondence courses, one being Math 110, prior to his enrollment during the summer of 2003 because he needed the academic credits in order to be admitted to the institution and to meet NCAA eligibility requirements.

McCoy initially reported during an April 13, 2004, interview with the institution that Crady proctored all of his exams. He initially reported this as well during a January 26, 2006, interview with the institution and the enforcement staff. However, when McCoy was asked whether he received any of his exams from anyone other than Crady, he replied saying, "I think I might've gotten one from 'em...maybe JP (Papuchis)." McCoy said he could not recall the circumstances surrounding this occasion, but recalled that he, rather than Crady, mailed one of his math exams back to Brigham Young. [Note: Under Brigham Young policies, Crady would administer the exam to McCoy, McCoy would complete the exam in Crady's presence, McCoy would then return his completed exam to Crady and Crady would mail it back to Brigham Young.] McCoy recalled that he received the exam from Papuchis when the football team was involved in football camp, which occurred in August, and that he was under pressure to finish the course. When McCoy was asked whether receiving the exam from Papuchis was academic fraud, McCoy replied saying: "1, I'm not real -- I wasn't real clear on how everything was supposed to go. All I knew is you're supposed to have a proctor and it was supposed to be closed book."

McCoy earned a B in the math course. He subsequently enrolled at the institution in the fall of 2003 and competed during the 2003 football season.

• Crady was interviewed by the institution April 9, 2004, but refused to participate in an interview with the enforcement staff.

Crady reported that during the summer of 2003, she was a registered proctor for four prospective football student-athletes, one of them being McCoy. She reported that she

1-4

Appendix 6


typically proctored the exams at her high school, but that on one occasion during the first week of August, she provided two or three exams to Papuchis because she needed to leave for an out-of-town trip and would not be able to administer them to the prospects. Crady reported that she explained to Papuchis how she had previously administered the exams to the prospects and that he told her they would give the exams to the prospects in the same manner. Crady said she was not sure how the exams were administered to the prospects. Specifically, she reported: "That's why I think we needed to - that's why I think they went ahead and actually gave the tests. And I don't know who ended up administering it. I didn't even ask. I don't know if they took it to the Testing Center."

Refuting Information

It is stated in Papuchis' response that he did not know that McCoy would take the exam on his own without the presence of a proctor. As previously discussed, Papuchis reported during his first interview with the institution that after he provided McCoy the exam, the graduate assistant football coaches had him complete the exam in the Wagnon Student-Athlete Center. Since Papuchis changed this testimony during a subsequent interview and stated that he did not know what McCoy did with the exam, the enforcement staff believes that Papuchis' testimony is not credible. Further, as previously discussed, Papuchis' testimony indicates that he knew it was wrong for him to provide the exam to McCoy and that he knew McCoy's exam needed to be proctored. When considering that Papuchis' testimony regarding how the prospects completed the exams is not credible and that he knew to some degree that his provision of the exams to the prospects was wrong, the enforcement staff believes Papuchis knew the prospects would not have their exams proctored and that this was inappropriate.

Additional Matters that Relate to the Allegation:

The fact that Crady provided McCoy's exam to Papuchis is not disputed, nor is the fact that Papuchis then provided the exam to McCoy. This set of facts demonstrates that Brigham Young test administration procedures were breached two times. First, Crady was not permitted to provide exams to Papuchis; she was only permitted to provide exams to the students enrolled in the courses (the prospects). Second, Papuchis was not permitted to provide exams to the prospects because he was not registered as their proctor. Not only did Papuchis improperly arrange for the prospects' receipt of the exams, he also failed to maintain the integrity of the completion of the exams when he allowed the exams to be completed without a proctor. According to NCAA legislation, those actions constitute academic fraud.

Similarly, in the Nicholls State University case (May 10, 2005), the NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions determined that academic fraud occurred when a coach, who was not the proctor, provided a Brigham Young correspondence course exam to a student-athlete and permitted the student-athlete to complete the exam without a proctor.

1-5

Appendix 6


Allegation No.2

2. [NCAA Bylaws 10.1 and 10.1-(b)]

It is alleged that in August 2003, Mike Burns, graduate assistant football coach, violated the principles of ethical conduct when he arranged academic fraud for two prospective football student-athletes involving the completion of the prospects' exams for correspondence courses offered by Brigham Young University.

Specifically, in August 2003, Burns assisted prospective football student-athletes Johnny Urrutia and Monroe Weekley in the completion of their Geography Geology 101 exam. Burns provided Urrutia and Weekley answers to questions for their exams while they completed them in his dorm room during fall football camp.

Overview: The enforcement staff and the institution are in substantial agreement as to the facts of this allegation and that major violations occurred. Burns does not agree with the facts or that he arranged academic fraud for Urrutia and Weekley.

I Remaining Issue: Do Burns' actions constitute academic fraud, as outlined in Allegation No.2?


During the summer of 2003, several prospective football student-athletes who transferred from two-year colleges, including Urrutia and Weekley, were present on the institution's campus prior to their enrollment in the institution's classes. During this time, most of these prospects were completing correspondence courses offered by Brigham Young University (Brigham Young) in an attempt to fulfill their two-year college academic deficiencies and gain acceptance into the institution, while at the same time meeting NCAA eligibility requirements.

During that summer, some football coaching staff members contacted Jama Crady, a local high school teacher and former swimming student-athlete at the institution, and arranged for her to proctor the prospects' exams. This occurred because the prospects were involved in fall football camp, where practice occurred two times a day, and needed a proctor who was available in the evenings and on the weekends. The institution's testing center was open only during the day on weekdays and often conflicted with the prospects' schedules.

Throughout the completion of the correspondence courses, the prospects were prompted online by Brigham Young's Web site to contact Brigham Young and order their exams. Brigham Young then sent the exams directly to Crady because she was the registered proctor. When Crady received the exams, she typically contacted the graduate assistant football coaches to

2-1

Appendix 6


notify them that she had received the exams and to arrange times for the prospects to complete them. The prospects then went to Crady's high school, where Crady administered the exam. Once the prospect finished the exam, he returned it to Crady and she mailed it back to Brigham Young.

On one occasion in August, Crady's previously scheduled vacation occurred during a weekend when some of the prospects needed to have their exams proctored. This time period was described as a "pressure" or "crunch" time because some of the prospects needed to complete their final exams and finish the courses in order to be admitted to the institution and to meet NCAA eligibility requirements. Therefore, Crady provided John Papuchis, a graduate assistant football coach, the prospects' exams so that they could complete them during that week she was gone. Ultimately, as described below, the exams allegedly wound up in Urrutia's and Weekley's hands.

Position of Institution: The institution agrees that Bums' actions constitute academic fraud.

Position of Involved Parties: Bums does not agree that his actions constitute academic fraud.

Position of Enforcement Staff and Reasons for Position: The enforcement staff believes Bums' actions constitute academic fraud. In support of this position, the enforcement staff relies on the following:

• Testimony of Urrutia, indicating that Bums provided him answers to his Geography 101 exam.

• Testimony of Weekley, indicating that Bums provided him answers to his Geography 101 exam.

• Testimony of Crady, indicating that she never proctored an exam for Urruita.

• Documents supposedly completed by Crady indicating that she proctored both Urrutia's and Weekley's midterm geography exams on days when she reported she was out of town on vacation.

• Testimony of Bums, indicating that Urrutia and Weekley studied for their correspondence courses in his dorm room during football camp. Bums' testimony also indicated that he was personally concerned about the academic success of the prospects, especially Weekley, during the summer of2003.

2-2

Appendix 6


Relevant Infonnation Reported/Obtained:

• Urrutia was interviewed by the institution July 27, 2004. The enforcement staff attempted to locate Urrutia for an interview. Urruita's family members infonned the enforcement staff that Urrutia had severed all ties with his family; therefore, the enforcement staff was unable to locate him for an interview. The enforcement staff relies on Urrutia's statements to the institution July 27.

Urrutia transferred from Mt. San Antonio College, a two-year college, to the institution in the fall of2003. Urrutia reported that he enrolled in two Brigham Young correspondence courses, Geography 101 and Humanities 101, prior to his enrollment during the summer of 2003 because he needed the academic credits in order to be admitted to the institution and to meet NCAA eligibility requirements.

Urrutia reported that he initially completed the midtenn exams for the geography and humanities courses under proctored supervision at the institution's testing center, and that he failed these exams. He indicated that when Bums discovered that he had failed the exams, he provided him assistance in retaking these midtenn exams as well as the final exams for the courses.

Specifically, Urrutia reported that during football camp in August, Bums received the exams from Crady. Bums then told Urrutia to meet him in his donn room in Oliver Hall, the residence hall that housed the football student-athletes and graduate assistants during camp, in order to complete the exams. He stated that he went to Bums' donn room and Bums provided him answers to the exam questions. Urrutia explained that each exam contained approximately 100 questions. [Note: During the August football camp, all football student-athletes were housed in Oliver Hall. The graduate assistant football coaches lived in the residence hall as well during the camp in order to monitor the student-athletes' rooms.]

Urrutia reported that he took the exams on separate occasions in Bums' donn room. He stated that on some of those occasions, other prospective football student-athletes enrolled in Brigham Young correspondence courses, including Weekley and Zach Mims, were also in Bums' donn room receiving answers for their exams from Bums. As seen below, Weekley corroborates Urrutia's testimony.

Urrutia reported that he knew it was wrong for him to receive the described assistance from Bums, but that he was only interested in securing his eligibility.

Brigham Young provided the institution the examination coversheets that pertain to Urrutia's completion of exams for the Geography 101 course (see Exhibit 2-2 in the institution's response). These documents indicate that Mary Murphy, a proctor at the

2-3

Appendix 6


institution's testing center, proctored Urrutia's midtenn exam on July 25, 2003, and that he received a failing grade on the exam. (This corroborates Urrutia's testimony that he failed the midterm exam.) .Also, the documents indicate that Crady proctored Urrutia's retake of the midterm exam on August 7, 2003, but does not indicate a grade. (This corroborates Urrutia's testimony that he retook the midtenn exam.) While the documents indicate that Crady proctored this exam during the first week of August, according to Crady's testimony, she was not available to proctor exams at that time because she was out of town on vacation. Additionally, as seen below, Crady reported that she did not proctor any exams for Urrutia. Furthennore, according to Urrutia's and Crady's testimony, it appears as though the documents indicating that Crady proctored Urrutia's exam is fraudulent.

[Note: Murphy was interviewed by the institution. Her testimony indicated that Urrutia's completion of the midterm exam was in accordance with Brigham Young policies and that academic fraud did not occur.]

While Urrutia reported that Burns assisted him in the completion of his midtenn and final exams for the geography and humanities courses, the enforcement staff found insufficient evidence to prove such for the geography final exam. However, the enforcement staff believes Urrutia is credible.

Ultimately, Urrutia failed the geography course. He did not enroll at the institution. The enforcement staff found no infonnation indicating that Urrutia subsequently enrolled at an NCAA member institution to compete in athletics.

• Weekley transferred from Community College of Beaver County, a two-year college, to the institution in the fall of 2003. Weekley reported that he enrolled in three Brigham Young correspondence courses, one being Geography 101, prior to his enrollment during the summer of 2003 because he needed the academic credits in order to be admitted to the institution and to meet NCAA eligibility requirements.

Weekley reported that one day during football camp in August, Burns told him to come up to his donn room in Oliver Hall in order to complete what he recalled was either his midterm or final exam for Geography 101. He stated that later that evening, when the other student-athletes were in bed, he and Urrutia went to Burns' room, where they completed their geography exams. Specifically, Burns handed each of them a packet that contained either the midtenn or the final exam for the geography course. He stated that while in Burns' room, he sat at one end of a table, Urrutia sat at the other end of the table and Burns sat in between the two of them (see Exhibit 2-3 in the institution's response for Weekley's illustration of the room). Weekley reported that he and Urrutia read off questions that appeared on the exam. Burns then looked up the answers in the textbook and provided it to Weekley and Urrutia. (As previously discussed, Urrutia corroborates

2-4

Appendix 6


Weekley's testimony.) He stated that they worked on the exam, which consisted of approximately 100 questions, for about three to four hours. Weekley indicated that after they completed the exam, they returned it to Burns. It was Weekley's understanding that Burns received his exam from Crady.

Weekley reported that he knew it was wrong for Burns to assist him in completing his exam, but said he just wanted to finish the course to be eligible for the football season.

Brigham Young provided the enforcement staff the examination cover sheets that pertain to Weekley's completion of exams for the Geography 101 course (Attachment A). These documents indicate that Crady proctored Weekley's midterm exam August 4, 2003, and that he received a D on the exam. While the documents indicate Crady proctored this exam during the first week of August, according to Crady's testimony, Crady was not available to proctor exams during that week because she was out of town on vacation. These documents also indicate that Crady proctored Weekley's final exam August 15, 2003, and that he received a D- on the exam.

Weekley earned a C- in the geography course. He subsequently enrolled at the institution in the fall of 2003 and competed during the 2003 football season. After the 2004 spring semester, Weekley left the institution. Subsequently, he transferred to two other Division I NCAA member institutions but did not compete in athletics. Since leaving the institution at the conclusion of the 2004 spring semester, Weekley has not competed. He has no time remaining on his five-year clock.

• Mims was interviewed by the institution April 24 and July 29, 2004. Mims refused to participate in an interview with the enforcement staff. At the time he refused to cooperate, Mims was not enrolled at an NCAA member institution. Currently, he is not eligible to participate in athletics at an NCAA member institution because his five-year clock has expired.

While Urruita reported that Burns provided answers to Mims as well, Mims denied that Burns provided him assistance in completing any of his exams during the summer 0 2003. However, he reported that he was in Burns' dorm room in Oliver Hall during football camp on one occasion to study for his geography course. When he was asked whether Urrutia or Weekley were in Burns' room when he was studying, Mims said no, that it was only him and Burns. Due to Mims' testimony, the enforcement staff did not allege his involvement in academic fraud due to insufficient evidence.

• Crady was interviewed by the institution April 9, 2004, but refused to participate in interview with the enforcement staff.

2-5

Appendix 6


Crady reported that during the summer of 2003, she was a registered proctor for four prospective football student-athletes, two of them being Mims and Weekley, but that she did not proctor any exams for Urrutia. She stated that she was supposed to proctor an exam for Urrutia, but that she ultimately did not because he had left the team. Crady reported that she typically proctored the exams at her high school, but that on one occasion, she provided some of the exams to John Papuchis, graduate assistant football coach, because she needed to leave for an out-of-town trip and would not be able to administer them to the prospects. Crady thought this trip was during the first week of August. Crady was not sure who if anyone proctored those exams. When Crady was asked how many exams she provided to Papuchis and whose exams they were, she replied: "I think two or three. I don't remember. lt wasn't for all four of the guys." She guessed that the exams were for John McCoy and Shelton Simmons.

• Simmons reported that he enrolled in Brigham Young courses over the summer of 2003. He stated that Crady proctored his exams and that he completed the course work on his own. According to Simmons' testimony, the enforcement staff believes that Crady's recollection that one of the exams she provided to Papuchis was for Simmons is incorrect.

• Bums reported that in the spring of 2003, the football staff realized the possibility that several of the prospective football student-athletes who transferred from two-year colleges were not going to be eligible for competition due to academic deficiencies. He said it was a shock to the staff that it was possible the prospects would not be eligible because the staff was planning on their immediate impact. Bums reported that personally, he was concerned about the eligibility of these student-athletes and took it upon himself to help them plan study sessions and monitor their study activities. Bums reported: "You know, so, you know, we (the graduate assistant football coaches) took it upon ourselves to kinda say hey, the coaches want these guys eligible. They wanna get eligible. We want 'em eligible. Let's, you know, do everything we can in our power, you know, without cheating to get these guys eligible." He stated that while the football coaches did not direct the graduate assistant football coaches to take on such responsibilities, he informed those coaches who wanted to know about the prospects' academic progress.

Bums reported that he personally felt that summer was "extremely stressfu1." He stated: "I'm working long hours and not getting much sleep, and I'm trying to make an impression on coaches that I'm hoping they're gonna take me to another place or whatever, you, try to get another job somewhere, not as a GA but as a full-time coach. So, it was extremely stressful for me. As far as the student-athletes (prospects), I mean I think that people were kind of concerned ...And, 00, I just remember like looking at the defense and saying man, we're in trouble if these guys don't get eligible."

2-6

Appendix 6


Bums specifically said he took a personal interest in Weekley because both he and Weekley were from the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, area, and he wanted Weekley to be successful. He stated that he kept track of Weekley, "Because] knew he couldn't keep track of himself. And I didn't think that he would have a chance on his own. You know, it was just kinda me trying to help a guy out. You know, like hey, if you really wanna play football at the University of Kansas, this is what you need to do. These are what courses you need to pass. Here's your time frame. So, you know, we better figure out something that we're gonna do. Like, I mean, it was getting to the point where, you know, he had quite a bit of work in a short amount of time, you know." Bums reported that it came down to "crunch time" for Weekley in that he needed to fulfill a science requirement in a period of about two weeks during the time when football camp was ongoing.

Bums reported that after football camp began in August, some of the prospects were still finishing up course work for their correspondence courses. He stated that after practice ended for the day and after lights out in Oliver Hall, he permitted some of the prospects to study for the courses in his dorm room. Bums specifically said Weekley and Urrutia were two of about four prospects he permitted to study in his dorm room. He stated that while the prospects were in his room studying, he was not in the room the entire time. Burns indicated that he often left the room for various reasons. However, he recalled that sometimes he would quiz the prospects for midtenn and final exams by asking questions from previous homework assignments.

Bums denied that he assisted any of the prospects, including Urrutia and Weekley, with their Brigham Young correspondence course exams. He stated: III did want to help them, and I helped them study for tests, like I said, but I never once helped 'em with an exam. I've never seen one of those exams. ] mean, I really haven't. I've never seen a BYU exam." Bums also denied having any knowledge that Crady provided some of the prospects exams to Papuchis.

Bums noted that he did not receive any NCAA rules education from the institution.

• Papuchis reported that he received at least one and possibly three exams from Crady. He denied that he provided any of these exams to Burns, but confirmed that he provided the exams to the prospects, whose names he could not recall. Papuchis initially reported during an April 8, 2004, interview with the institution that the graduate assistant football coaches had the prospects take the exams in a meeting room in the Wagnon StudentAthlete Center. Papuchis later changed his testimony during an August 24, 2005, interview with the institution and the enforcement staff, and reported that after he provided the exams to the prospects, he did not know what they did with them.

2-7

Appendix 6


Allegation No.3

3. [NCAA Bylaws 13.2.1 and 13.2.7]

It is alleged that during the summer of 2003, athletics department staff members provided impermissible assistance to seven prospective football student-athletes who lived on the institution's campus in order to workout and complete online correspondence courses prior to their enrollment. Specifically:

a. During the summer of 2003, student-athlete support services staff members and football coaching staff members permitted prospective football student-athletes Chuck Jones, John McCoy, Zach Mims, Shelton Simmons, Gabriel Toomey, Johnny Urrutia and Monroe Weekley to use student-athlete support services' facilities and the graduate assistant football coaches' office to study for and complete course work for their correspondence courses. Additionally, the same staff members permitted the prospects to use computers located in the studentathlete support services' facilities and in the graduate assistant football coaches' office to complete their course work. [NCAA Bylaws 13.2.1 and 13.2.7]

b. During the summer of2003, John Papuchis, graduate assistant football coach, and Clint Bowen, assistant football coach, arranged for Jama Crady, a local high school teacher, to serve as a proctor for Jones, McCoy, Mims, Simmons, Toomey, Urrutia and Weekley. Specifically, Papuchis and Bowen contacted Crady to determine whether she would be willing to serve as a proctor for the prospects. Additionally, Papuchis scheduled exam times with Crady on behalf of the prospects. [Bylaw 13 .2.1]

c. During the summer of 2003, graduate assistant football coach Mike Burns, Papuchis and Crady provided impermissible transportation for some of the prospects between the institution's campus and Crady's high school on several occasions. [Bylaw 13.2.1]

d. During the summer of 2003, Jones and Weekley, and possibly other prospects living on the institution's campus, received training table meals along with the football student-athletes. Additionally, Weekley, and possibly other prospects working out with the strength and conditioning coaches, received nutritional supplements after completing voluntary summer workout sessions. [Bylaw 13.2.1]

3-1

Appendix 6

CASE SUMMARY Case No. M241 July 21,2006

Overview: The enforcement staff and the institution are in substantial agreement as to the facts of subparagraphs a, band c and that violations occurred. The institution previously self-reported similar violations. The institution does not agree there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the violations outlined in Allegation No. 3-d occurred.

Remaining Issue: Did prospective student-athletes receive training table meals and nutritional supplements, as outlined in Allegation No. 3-d?


Around May 2003, the student-athlete support services staff and the football staff became aware that several prospective football student-athletes who transferred from two-year colleges did not meet graduation requirements at their two-year colleges, and as a result, would not be admitted to the institution in the fall and would not meet NCAA eligibility requirements. Therefore, the football staff encouraged the prospects to move to the institution's campus in order to enroll in summer courses to fill their academic deficiencies.

When it became apparent that the prospects would be moving to campus and enrolling in the correspondence courses, the student-athlete support services staff contacted the compliance staff in order to determine what the athletics department could and could not do for the prospects. Unfortunately, the compliance staffdid not answer the staffs request, and the staff did not follow up with the compliance office to receive an answer. Instead, the student-athlete support services staff operated under the assumption that the only thing they could not do for the prospects was provide them tutoring assistance or proctors for the exams. Similarly, the football staff did not contact the compliance office to determine what they could or could not do for the prospects while they lived on campus and, instead, relied on assistance from the student-athlete support services staff

As previously discussed in Allegation Nos. 1 and 2, Clint Bowen, assistant football coach, and Papuchis were involved in arranging a proctor for the prospects' exams. Bowen initially contacted several individuals, most of whom were friends who were local teachers. Crady was one of those individuals and she agreed to provide proctoring assistance. Crady was asked to proctor the exams because, due to their summer schedule, the prospects needed a proctor who could be flexible in regard to scheduling the completion of exams. There were other proctors available at the institution's testing center, but their hours of operation were limited and typically did not meet the prospects' schedules. Additionally, Mark Mangino, head football coach, and Paul Buskirk, associate athletics director for student-athlete support services, were aware that Crady was contacted to proctor the exams. None of these individuals were aware that the arrangement of a proctor for the prospects was impermissible, and all felt that Crady would be a good, legitimate proctor due to her teaching background.

3-2

Appendix 6


Papuchis, Crady and Burns, each said they provided a ride to some of the prospects at one time or another from campus to Crady's high school so that the prospects could complete the exams in Crady's presence. Each of the prospects named corroborated this testimony and indicated that they received rides from these individuals. Papuchis, Crady and Burns each reported that they did not know it was impermissible to provide rides to the prospects.

A discussion of the training table meals and nutritional supplements is outlined below.

The enforcement staff notes that it was determined that the prospects' on-campus living arrangements were permissible.

Position of Institution: The institution does not agree there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the violations occurred.

Position of Enforcement Staff and Reasons for Position: The enforcement staff believes some prospects received training table meals and nutritional supplements, as outlined in Allegation No. 3-d. In support of this position, the enforcement staff relies on the following:

• Testimony of Jones, indicating that he received a free lunch each day at the Burge Union after summer workouts.

• Testimony of Weekley, indicating that he received a free lunch each day at the Burge Union after summer workouts. Weekley also reported that he received nutritional supplements after his summer workouts.

• Testimony of various prospective student-athletes and football student-athletes who worked out on campus over the summer of 2003, sometimes indicating that the prospects received a training table meal and nutritional supplements and other times indicating that it was possible or probable that the prospects received a meal and supplements.

• George Matsakis, director of football operations, reported that it was possible that some of the prospects received a training table meal.

• Chris Dawson, head strength and conditioning coach, reported that it was possible that some of the prospects could have taken nutritional supplements.

Relevant Information Reported/Obtained:

• Jones reported that when he lived on the institution's campus during the summer of 2003, he received a free lunch at the Burge Union after workouts. He stated: "I mean, all 1 know is that we ate once a day. 1didn't know if that was legal or not, but none of us did. So, you know, and this is a bunch of fat guys, we ain't gonna tum down no food, you

3-3

Appendix 6


know, especially free." Jones reported that the meal was for all football student-athletes who were enrolled in summer school and for the prospects who were living on campus, working out and completing correspondence courses. He stated that sometimes a graduate assistant football coach or strength and conditioning coach would try to make them pay for their meal, but that most of the time, he only had to sign a receipt indicating that he got a meal and got it for free.

• Weekley reported that when he lived on the institution's campus during the summer of 2003, he received a free lunch at the Burge Union after workouts. He stated: "We all grabbed them chickens, chicken fingers on Friday and just load up the refrigerator. So, like, that was our big, special day." Weekley reported that the meal was for all football student-athletes and prospects who participated in summer workouts. It was Weekley's recollection that a coach, possibly Dawson told everyone who participated in the workouts that they should go over to the Burge Union and get something to eat. Weekley reported that over at the Burge Union, Matsakis had a list of players who got a meal and that he signed his name to the list each day.

Regarding the nutritional supplements, Weekley reported that after the meal at the Burge Union, Dawson had the players return to the weight room where they would drink a protein shake and eat some trail mix. He stated that Dawson had a list of players he thought needed to gain weight, including Weekley, and that those players received a shake and handful of trail mix.

Additionally, the institution and the enforcement staff both believed Weekley to be a credible witness regarding his allegations of his involvement in academic frau4 with a graduate assistant football coach (Allegation No.2) and his receipt of impermissible benefits from an assistant football coach (Allegation No.4).

• Brandon Perkins, a football student-athlete over the summer of 2003, reported that, regarding the nutritional supplements: "I think everybody got a little bit of, uh, the trail mix and stufflike that. I think it was just there for the grabbing, you know, most of the time and, and the shakes and stuff like that so ...they (the prospects) may have picked it up some days and some days they didn't."

• McCoy reported that he did not receive nutritional supplements. When asked whether the other prospects received the supplements, McCoy stated, "I'm sure some of 'em (the prospects) had to either gain weight or lose weight, so probably."

• Darren Rus, a football student-athlete over the summer of 2003, reported that he was "pretty sure" the prospects received nutritional supplements.

3-4

Appendix 6


• David Ochoa, a football student-athlete over the summer of 2003, reported that he could not recall whether the prospects received nutritional supplements. When asked whether he would be surprised if some prospects reported that they had received supplements, Ochoa said: "Probably not, no .. .I'm sure if the strength coaches felt that they needed to, I'm sure that they would get whatever they needed."

• Travis Dambach, a football student-athlete over the summer of 2003, reported that he did not specifically recall seeing the prospects get nutritional supplements. He stated: "I can't remember them saying that it was only scholarship players that could go over there, so I think it was, you know, something open for everybody. So if they told him it was open to everybody, I'm sure they probably went over there... "

• Jerome Kemp, a football student-athlete over the summer of 2003, reported that any athlete could get nutritional supplements from the strength and conditioning coaches' office and that he was sure Simmons was encouraged to have supplements because he needed to gain weight. [Note: When Simmons was interviewed, he denied that he received nutritional supplements.] He stated: "People go in and out (of the office) and so I'm pretty sure probably everybody on the team has been in there getting', you know, nutrition shakes or, or, you know, trail mix at one time so.. .if they (the prospects) were workin' out, they were part of the team .. .if you're here and you're supposed be in and you're going to be either on the roster, it, it's just like, you know, uh, if you're, if you've committed here and then but you're not officially on scholarship, yet it doesn't matter if you're not officially on scholarship. It doesn't matter if you're a walk-on. It doesn't matter if you're a scholarship player. If you're here working out, you're part of the team."

Regarding training table meals, Kemp reported that he sawall of the prospects in the Burge Union eating a meal. He specifically had the same recollection that Weekley had regarding chicken fingers being offered on Fridays.

• Jonathan Lamb, a football student-athlete over the summer of 2003, reported that, regarding training table meals: "Oh, it probably would have been possible (for the prospects to get a meal). I mean, they back, back then I don't remember if we had to sign up or not. Urn, but it was, I, it probably would have been possible. "

• Johnny Beck, a football student-athlete over the summer of 2003, reported that it was a good possibility that the prospects received the training table meals.

• Matsakis was in charge of compiling the list of players who should have been recipients of the training table meals during the summer. He reported that it was possible that some of the prospects received a training table meal over the summer of 2003. However, he stated that he did not put any of their names on the list to receive a training table meal, and was certain he or any other coaches told the prospects they could not receive a meal.

3-5

Appendix 6


As noted in Allegation No. ll-d, it is the enforcement staffs position that Matsakis and others on the football staff did not adequately monitor which players received training table meals.

• Dawson reported that it was possible that a prospect could have taken nutritional supplements from his office. However, he knew that it was not permissible to provide prospects nutritional supplements and said he did not do such. As noted in Allegation No. ll-d, it is the enforcement staffs position that Dawson and others on the strength and conditioning staff did not adequately monitor the nutritional supplements.

Additional Matters that Relate to the Allegation:

The enforcement staff notes that the NCAA has processed violations involving student-athletes or prospects obtaining impermissible benefits without the knowledge of institutional staff members. A common violation occurs when student-athletes obtain an institution's long-distance telephone code and place calls. In its response on Page No. 3-2, the institution states that it believes, "It is more likely that Jones and Weekley bypassed the operational systems in place and secured meals and supplements improperly and without authorization from or knowledge of the people in charge ofthose functions." Even if that was the case, based on NCAA case precedent, it is the enforcement staffs position that Jones' and Weekley's independent obtainment of the meals and supplements would be considered NCAA violations. Furthermore, the enforcement staff believes the institution has an obligation to monitor training table meals and nutritional supplements.

Additional Information Regarding Allegation No.3

• Mangino reported that he was aware that the named prospects were moving to the institution's campus during the summer of 2003 to complete correspondence courses and work out. He stated that the Brigham Young University (Brigham Young) correspondence courses were foreign to him; therefore, he spoke frequently with Buskirk about the legitimacy of the courses. Mangino said he also was aware that Crady had been contacted to serve as a proctor. He discussed Crady's background with Buskirk, and since she had a background in education, he had no reason to believe that any fraudulent activity, with respect to the prospects' exams, would occur.

Mangino reported that he did not contact the compliance office to inform the staff that the prospects were living on the institution's campus or to seek assistance about how NCAA rules applied to the prospects. He stated that his main concern at that time was that the courses the prospects were completing were legitimate and that the prospects did not get into trouble with the law and damage the reputation of the football program or the institution.

3-6

Appendix 6


Mangino said he was not aware that the prospects were receiving impermissible rides to Crady's high school to complete their exams. He also said he was not aware that the prospects received training table meals or nutritional supplements.

• Buskirk reported that around May 2003, his staff learned that several of the two-year college football prospects would not graduate from their two-year colleges and would not be eligible for competition in the fall. He stated that the summer of 2003 became a stressful time for him and his staff because Mangino was adamant about having the prospects live on campus in order to complete summer workouts and to take courses to fill their academic deficiencies. He stated, "Here comes this demand from an intimidating and occasionally verbally abusive head football coach saying they will get it done and they will get it done on our campus, boom." Buskirk stated that this was the first time in his experience that incoming student-athletes moved to campus prior to enrollment to complete courses; therefore, he contacted the compliance office in an effort to receive assistance in determining what the student-athlete support services staff could or could not do for the prospects. However, he said his inquiry went unanswered but that he did not follow up with the staff about his questions because he did not have faith that the compliance staff would get him answers quickly or accurately. Buskirk reported that he knew it was not permissible for his staff to provide the prospects tutoring assistance or proctors for their exams but assumed that it was permissible for the prospects to use the student-athlete support services facilities.

Buskirk reported that since the prospects were not yet admitted to the institution, they were not yet able to enroll in the institution's summer courses. Therefore, various football coaches suggested that the prospects enroll in correspondence courses, including those offered by Brigham Young, that could be completed while the prospects lived on campus. After Buskirk researched the Brigham Young Web site and contacted the institution to receive additional information about the correspondence courses, he felt satisfied that the courses were legitimate and would be transferable to the institution.

• JaneIle Martin, associate athletics director for compliance, reported that she was not aware that several football prospects moved to the institution's campus and were completing correspondence course exams during the summer of 2003. She could not recall whether the student-athlete support services staff or the football staff contacted her to inquire whether prospects could have access to the student-athlete support services facilities.

The enforcement staff directs the committee's attention to Page Nos. 3-1 to 3-18 of the institution's response for additional information.

3-7

Appendix 6


Allegation No.4

4. [NCAA Bylaws 13.2.1, 13.2.2-(b) and 16.11.2.1]

It is alleged that in spring of 2003, Tyrone Dixon, assistant football coach, provided impermissible gifts of clothing to Monroe Weekley, prospective football student-athlete, while Weekley was being recruited by the institution. Additionally, Dixon provided other impermissible articles of clothing to Weekley subsequent to Weekly's enrollment at the institution in the fall of 2003. Specifically:

a. During the spring of 2003 and during an in-home visit to Weekley's home in Aliquippa, Pennsylvania, Dixon provided Weekley a rain jacket, sweatshirt and baseball cap, all bearing the institution's name. [NCAA Bylaws 13.2.1 and 13.2.2-(b)]

b. In August 2003 and after Weekley enrolled at the institution, Dixon provided Weekley approximately 16 casual collared shirts that Dixon personally owned and had previously worn so that Wetkley could be in compliance with the football team's dress code. [Bylaw 16.11.2.1]

Overview: The enforcement staff and the institution are in substantial agreement as to the facts of this allegation and that secondary violations occurred. The institution previously self-reported these violations.

I Remaining Issue(s): None.

The enforcement staff directs the committee's attention to Page Nos. 4-1 to 4-6 of the institution's response for a complete review of information.

4-1

Appendix 6


Allegation No.5

5. [NCAA Bylaws 11.7.2.2 and 13.1.2.3]

It is alleged that November 23, 2003, and December 12,2004, graduate assistant football coaches had impennissible off-campus contact with prospective football student-athletes while they transported the prospects from the institution's campus to the prospects' homes subsequent to their official paid visits. Specifically, November 23, Mitch Running, graduate assistant football coach, transported Nick Patton, prospective football studentathlete, from campus to Patton's home in Winfield, Kansas. Additionally, December 12, Seth Littrell, graduate assistant football coach, transported Nate Prater, prospective football student-athlete, from campus to Prater's home in Omaha, Nebraska.


IRemaining Issue(s): None.

The enforcement staff directs the committee's attention to Page Nos. 5-1 to 5-6 of the institution's response for a complete review of infonnation.

5-1

Appendix 6


Allegation No.6

6. [NCAA Bylaws 13.2.1, 13.2.2-(b), 13.2.2-(d), 13.2.2-(h), 13.6.4, 13.7.2.4, 16.11.2.1, 16.11.2.3-(a) and 16.1l.2.3-(c)]

It is alleged that from 2003 through 2005, Don Davis, a representative of the institution's athletics interests, provided Darnell Jackson, a prospective men's basketball studentathlete, and Jackson's family improper benefits while Jackson was enrolled in high school and was being recruited by the institution. Additionally, Davis continued to provide improper benefits to Jackson and his family subsequent to Jackson's enrollment at the institution in the fall of2004. Specifically:

a. While Jackson was a prospective men's basketball student-athlete being recruited by the institution, Davis provided Jackson and Jackson's family impermissible automobile transportation to the institution's men's basketball contests, impermissible gifts, impermissible lodging and impermissible automobile transportation to enroll at the institution. Specifically:

(1) In 2003 and 2004, Davis drove Jackson from Jackson's home in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, to the institution's campus on at least six occasions to watch men's basketball contests. The round-trip distance between Oklahoma City and the institution's campus is 636 miles; therefore, the total mileage for the six trips is 3,816 miles. The total value of the rides is approximately $534. Additionally, in the summer of 2004, Davis drove Jackson's mother, Shawn Jackson, and grandmother, Yvonne Jackson, from Jackson's home to Tulsa, Oklahoma, a total distance of approximately 196 miles, to watch Jackson participate in a summer all-star contest. The total value of this ride is approximately $28. [NCAA Bylaw 13.2.1]

(2) In 2003 and 2004, Davis drove Jackson's younger brother, Evan Jackson, to restaurants in Oklahoma City on multiple occasions and purchased him meals at those restaurants. Additionally, Davis drove Jackson's brother to movies and junior high football games in Oklahoma City on several occasions and paid his admission into the movies and games. [Bylaw 13.2.1]

(3) In March 2004, Davis drove Jackson and Albert Johnson, Jackson's Amateur Athletics Union (AAU) coach, from Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, to S1. Louis, Missouri, a total round-trip distance of approximately 1,000 miles, so that Jackson and Johnson could accompany Davis at the

6-1

Appendix 6


institution's NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Championship Regional Semifinal and Regional Final contests March 26 and 28. The total value of this ride is approximately $140. Additionally, Davis provided meals and hotel accommodations to Jackson in conjunction with the trip. The total value of these benefits is approximately $89. Further, the institution provided Jackson a complimentary admission for the NCAA championship contests. [Bylaws 13.2.1, 13.2.2-(h) and 13.7.2.4]

(4) In June 2004 and upon Jackson's graduation from high school, Davis purchased three shirts and three pairs of shorts from Burlington Coat Factory in Oklahoma City for Jackson, a total benefit of approximately $120. [Bylaws 13.2.1 and 13.2.2-(b)]

(5) In 2003 and 2004 and on at least three to five occasions, Davis permitted Jackson to spend the night at his home in Oklahoma City, a total benefit of approximately $200. [Bylaws 13.2.1 and 13.2.2-(h)]

(6) In June 2004, Davis drove Jackson and Jackson's mother from Oklahoma City to the institution's campus, a total round-trip distance of approximately 318 miles, for Jackson's initial enrollment. The total value of this one-way ride is approximately $45. Additionally, Davis drove Jackson's mother back to Oklahoma City, an additional 318 miles. The total value of this ride is an additional $45. [Bylaws 13.2.1 and 13.6.4]

b. Subsequent to Jackson's enrollment at the institution, Davis provided Jackson and Jackson's family impermissible gifts, impermissible assistance in purchasing two vehicles, cash, impermissible automobile transportation and the use of his vehicle. Additionally, Davis provided multiple meals to Jackson and his family members and permitted Jackson's mother to use his vehicle to attend the institution's men's basketball contests. Specifically:

(1) In December 2004, Davis made special arrangements for Jackson's mother to purchase his son's 1996 Chevrolet S-l 0 pickup truck, for Jackson's use, for $2,500, with the agreement that Jackson's mother would pay $500 as a down payment and then pay Davis $150 a month, no interest, to payoff the remaining balance of the purchase price. [NCAA Bylaws 16.11.2.1 and 16.11.2.3-(c)]

(2) In February 2005, Davis provided Jackson's mother a loan of $2,400 in order for her to purchase a 1995 Honda Passport, with a purchase price of $4,900, for Jackson. Jackson's mother traded in the 1996 Chevrolet S-10

6-2

Appendix 6


(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

pickup truck for $2,500 and needed Davis' assistance in order to pay the remaining $2,400 ofthe purchase price. [Bylaw 16.11.2.3-(a)]

In 2004 and 2005 and on multiple occasions, Davis provided Jackson's family members automobile transportation. Specifically:

a. Davis drove Jackson's mother from Jackson's home to the institution's campus on at least seven occasions, a total round-trip distance of approximately 4,452 miles, to watch Jackson's men's basketball contests. The total value of these rides is approximately $623. Additionally, Davis permitted Jackson's mother to use his vehicle to drive from Oklahoma City to the institution's campus on at least two occasions to attend Jackson's men's basketball contests. [Bylaw 16.11.2.1]

b. Davis drove Jackson's younger brother, Evan Jackson, from Jackson's home to the institution's campus on at least one occasion, a total round-trip distance of approximately 636 miles, in order to visit Jackson. The total value of this ride is approximately $89. [Bylaw 16.11.2.1]

On at least 12 to 15 occasions in 2004 and 2005, Davis purchased meals for Jackson and/or Jackson's family after Jackson's men's basketball contests, an approximate value of $120. [Bylaw 16.11.2.1]

On multiple occasions in 2004 and 2005, Davis purchased groceries and toiletries for Jackson, an approximate value of $1 00. [Bylaw 16.11.2.1]

In November 2004, Davis purchased a WaI-Mart gift card with a value of $100 for Jackson as a birthday gift. [Bylaw 16.11.2.1]

On at least five occasions in 2004 and 2005, Davis provided Jackson cash, typically in the amount of $5 on each occasion, for a total of $25. [Bylaw 16.11.2.1]

At the time of Jackson's initial enrollment in June 2004, Davis purchased a fan for Jackson for the purpose of cooling his dormitory room, a total benefit of approximately $20. [Bylaw 16.11.2.1]

On at least five occasions in 2004 and 2005, Davis permitted Jackson to use his vehicle to drive locally in and around Oklahoma City, an approximate value of$17.50. [Bylaw 16.11.2.3-(c)]

6-3

Appendix 6


Overview: The enforcement staff and the institution are in substantial agreement as to the facts of this allegation and that violations occurred. The institution previously self-reported these violations.

IRemaining Issue(s): None. Brief Biography of Don Davis

Davis is a 1980 graduate of the institution. He became a representative of the institution's athletics interests in 1988 when he contributed funds to the institution and promoted the institution's athletics interests. Additionally, Davis has been a season-ticket holder for men's basketball since 2002, and was a member of and contributed to the institution's Williams Educational Fund, the university's athletics fund-raising organization. To the institution's knowledge, Davis did not establish any relationships with the members of the men's basketball staff.

Relationship with Darnell Jackson, men's basketball student-athlete

Davis reported that he first met Jackson, then a prospective student-athlete, during Jackson's junior year at a high school basketball game that lR. Giddens, then a prospective student-athlete, was playing in and Jackson was watching. During this time, Davis also had been following the progress of Giddens, who later signed a National Letter of Intent with the institution. Jackson and Giddens competed against each other on occasion, and each of their high schools were in close proximity to Davis' home in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

According to Davis, he knew of the Jackson family because he had seen a local United Way announcement that featured Jackson's mother, Shawn. Davis learned from the announcement that Jackson's father had been murdered while Jackson was in eighth grade. Davis reported that Jackson's background matched Davis' rather closely, as Davis also lost his father when he was young. After seeing the announcement, Davis was prompted to pursue a relationship with the young man. Davis said he made a decision to become the male figure in Jackson's life and did so with the involvement of Jackson's mother. Throughout their relationship, Davis discussed with Jackson his Christian fellowship and desire to help shape the lives of younger people. It is the institution's position that Davis' intentions were based on benevolent reasons.

After Jackson enrolled at the institution, Davis continued his mentorship with Jackson. Prior to Jackson, Davis did not provide any benefits to student-athletes.

The enforcement staff directs the committee's attention to Page Nos. 6-] to 6-2] of the institution's response for a complete review of information.

6-4

Appendix 6


Allegation No.7

7. [NCAA Bylaws 16.11.2.1 and 16.11.2.3-(c)]

It is alleged that from 2003 through 2005, Don Davis, a representative of the institution's athletics interests, provided lR. Giddens, men's basketball student-athlete, and Giddens' family improper benefits while Giddens was enrolled at the institution. Additionally, Davis provided impermissible meals to Jeremy Case, men's basketball student-athlete; Anthony Collins, football student-athlete; and Rodrick Stewart, men's basketball studentathlete, while they were enrolled at the institution. Specifically:

a. During the 2003-04 and 2004-05 academic years and on at least four occasions, Davis drove Gidden's mother to Giddens' basketball contests. These rides were from Gidden's home in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, to Texas Christian University (2003-04), a total round-trip distance of approximately 400 miles; to the University of Missouri, Columbia (2004-05), a total round-trip distance of approximately 946 miles; and to the institution's campus on two occasions, a total round-trip distance of approximately 1,272 miles. The total value of the rides is approximately $367. [NCAA Bylaw 16.11.2.1]

b. During the summer of 2005 and on at least two occasions, Davis drove Giddens from Giddens' home in Oklahoma City to Wichita, Kansas, a total distance of approximately 322 miles, so that Giddens could see a doctor for a leg injury. The total value of the rides is approximately $45. Additionally, Davis purchased Giddens ice cream on at least two occasions. Furthermore, during the summer of 2005 and after Giddens decided to transfer from the institution, Davis used his vehicle on one occasion to transport Giddens and Giddens' belongings from campus back to his home, a total distance of approximately 318 miles. The total value of the ride is approximately $45. [Bylaw 16.11.2.3-(c)]

c. During the summer of 2005, Davis permitted Giddens to use his vehicle on one occasion. Specifically, Davis permitted Giddens to drive his vehicle, which had a manual transmission, within the general locale of Davis' home while Davis attempted to teach Giddens to use a stick shift. [Bylaw 16.11.2.3-(c)]

d. During the summer of 2004, Davis purchased a meal for Case at a restaurant near campus with an approximate value of $25. Additionally, during the summer of 2005, Davis purchased meals for Case and Stewart at a restaurant near campus with an approximate value of $7 each. Furthermore, Davis drove Stewart from campus to the restaurant. Finally, Davis purchased a meal for Collins at a

7-1

Appendix 6


restaurant III Oklahoma City with an approximate value of $10. [Bylaw 16.1 1.2.1]

Overview: The enforcement staff and the institution are in substantial agreement as to the facts of this allegation and that violations occurred. Additionally, the enforcement staff and the institution agree that the violations outlined in subparagraphs c and d are secondary.



7-2

Appendix 6


Allegation No.8

8. [NCAA Bylaw 16.11.2.1]

It is alleged that from May 2000 the 1987 88 through the 2003-04 academic years, at least two thfee representatives of the institution's athletics interests provided gifts, including cash, to graduating men's basketball student-athletes who had exhausted their eligibility. Specifically, Dana Anderson, and Joan Edwards and Bernard Morgan, representatives of the institution's athletics interests, provided multiple men's basketball student-athletes gifts, including, but not limited to, cash ranging from $25 to $400, lifetime memberships to the instimtion's alumni assoeiation and men's suits.




8-1

Appendix 6


Allegation No.9

9. [NCAA Bylaw 13.2.1]

It is alleged that during the faIl of 2002, Tim Eatman, assistant women's basketbalI coach, provided impennissible transportation to Janice Bright, prospective women's basketball student-athlete, when he drove her from Naismith Hall, an off-campus donnitory, to an on-campus testing facility for the purpose of taking a standardized test.

Overview: The enforcement staff and the institution are in substantial agreement as to the facts of this alIegation and that secondary violations occurred. The institution previously self-reported this violation.

IRemaining Issue(s): None.

The enforcement staff directs the committee's attention to Page Nos. 9-1 to 9-5 of the institution's response for a complete review of infonnation.

9-1

Appendix 6


Allegation No. 10

10. [NCAA Bylaws 13.1.2.1, 13.2.1, 13.6.2.2,13.7.2,13.7.5.1, 13.7.5.1.1, 13.7.5.5, 13.7.6, 13.8.2.1.1,13.9.1,16.02.2,16.5.2 and 17.12.8.1.2.1]

It is alleged that between the 1997-98 and 2002-03 academic years, athletics department staff members engaged in mUltiple secondary violations. Specifically:

a. In February 1999, Kelly Miller, volunteer women's soccer coach, had contact with prospective student-athletes when she attended two meals at off-campus establishments with the women's soccer coaching staff and prospective studentathletes during the prospects' official paid visit. [NCAA Bylaw 13.1.2.1]

b. In August 2000, Mike Bard, assistant baseball coach, recruited off campus on two separate occasions (August 1-2 and August 6-12) before passing the coaches' certification test on August 15. [Bylaw 13.1.2.1]

c. On July 16, 2000, Mark Farley, assistant football coach, provided a meal to two football prospective student-athletes at his home. The benefit to each prospect was $10.53. [Bylaw 13.2.1]

d. In the spring of 2002, Joe Holladay, assistant men's basketball coach, incorrectly reimbursed three prospective student-athletes for automobile transportation expenses to the institution's campus for their official paid visits at a mileage rate higher than was provided to institutional personnel. Holladay inadvertently used the rate of $0.31 per mile rather than the institutional rate of $0.30 per mile. The value of the benefit received was $6.22, $0.25 and $0.14. [Bylaw 13.6.2.2]

e. In November 2002, Bill Young, assistant football coach, inadvertently reimbursed a prospective student-athlete $43 for automobile transportation expenses to the institution's campus for his official paid visit. The prospect's junior college had actually transported the prospect to the campus, unbeknownst to Young. [Bylaw 13.6.2.2]

July 21,2006 .iUL 2 4worldonline.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com/.../03/25/a6.pdf · 2009. 3....

Documents

Transcript of July 21,2006 .iUL 2 4worldonline.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com/.../03/25/a6.pdf · 2009. 3....