Ole Miss asked Mississippi State to question Dan Mullen regarding alleged NCAA violations
Ole Miss put in two requests to interview an interesting source regarding the notice of allegations the NCAA filed against it: Mississippi State head coach Dan Mullen.
The evidence comes in a footnote in the document’s introduction on Page 3 of the 124 used to respond to the NCAA’s notice of allegations:
Further, when evidence led to the University requesting that [Institution 10] help with a limited interview of [Student-Athlete 39’s] coach, [College Head Coach 1], [Institution 10] rejected the request outright. Prior to submitting this response, the University sought permission from the Committee to interview both [Student-Athlete 39] and [College Head Coach 1], but the Committee denied that relief.
Student-Athlete 39 is Leo Lewis, a linebacker from Mississippi State. Ole Miss included a screenshot of this tweet in its response to the notice of allegations:
Lewis sent it the night Ole Miss was informed that it was facing 21, and not 13, allegations from the NCAA. He was given limited immunity to speak to the NCAA about whether or not violations occurred during his recruitment. That would make “Institution 10” Mississippi State, given this statement which is also in the document:
“[Student-Athlete 39], a former University recruit and current [Institution 10] student athlete. And that would make “College Head Coach 1” Mullen.
One of Ole Miss’ main defenses against the allegations is that Lewis’ three interviews with the NCAA had holes in them that the school was unable to effectively investigate in its own right:
In addition to [Student-Athlete 39’s] inconsistencies, the lack of corroboration, and the contradictory objective evidence, the denial of these allegations is based, in part, on the lack of any timely, meaningful ability to probe [Student-Athlete 39’s] story or his credibility
In the document, the school claims it wasn’t made aware of Lewis’ first interview and that it was barred from the third. In the second, all of Ole Miss’ questions to Lewis went unanswered on advice of Lewis’ legal counsel.
Ole Miss would directly attempt to discredit Lewis’ testimony in further details later in its response.
It’s obvious why the Bulldogs wouldn’t be so inclined to help their in-state rivals here, but it seemed like Ole Miss thought it best to ask anyway. And if nothing else, the school can claim further unfairness and use that to poke more holes in Lewis’ testimon