The CheckerBoard

Picture of Pat's Statement

Thanks for posting the photo. It was big enough for me to read when I clicked on it. +1

This should provide some real clarity.

SMH....so Summitt says in one affidavit that she was forced out and another affidavit she says she wasn't? This is nuts.

Anyway..ball is in your court Debby.

Like I said in the original thread. Merging the 2 was going to be tough and someone had to be the bad guy.

I'm with watauga. A sworn affidavit in a lawsuit wasn't true? Couldn't that be perjury? Can she withdraw a sworn affidavit that's already been filed with the court?

Need some help from the posting attorneys!

OK, the KNS says Pat released the statement. They also have a response from Jennings' attorney.

And the KNS has a UT Press Release on the matter......

Again, Jennings attorney is litigating through the media to force UT into a settlement to make this go away.

I really blame Jennings and her attorney for bringing Pat into this.

BTW, I really liked Pat's comments warmly endorsing Holly Warlick in her statement.

Pat is pure class, the best example of a VFL, and an appropriate face plate for UT Athletics. She should be able to rest in her dignified career and accomplishments. However, her supposed friend and co-worker is pulling her into this muck for a few bucks she can extort from UT.

Drop the suit Debby!

Debbie Jennings appears to be creating a situation by going to Hart and interjecting herself into a situation that may or may not have been based on a statement that Summitt supposedly made to her. I don't know what Hart did or did not say to Summitt but it is becoming clear that Jennings was insubordinate and stepped over the line. As a friend and a professional she should have advised Pat to approach Hart herself. I am having less and less sympathy for Jennings.

Funny man +1. Or perhaps she was looking back to see if she was looking back to see if she was looking back at me...or something like that.

I posted most of this in another thread, didn't see there were 2 bigger threads above it, so I'll post it again. I have no dog in this fight, until a response is filed there really is no point in taking sides. I am simply trying to disseminate accurate information.

First, those of you saying Jennings did this for purely personal reasons are right, but that's what lawyers do. There are ethical rules that prohibit Jennings' lawyer from giving a crap about Pat Summit or her reputation. They've got to do everything they can to win the case. Debby Jennings may not have had any say in the release of that affidavit, and if she and Summit are friends, she probably feels bad about it.

Second, there is a legitimate reason for the affidavit according to Jennings and it makes perfect sense.

Apparently, Jennings sent some nasty emails to Dave Hart after hearing what Pat said she told Jennings about her conversation with Hart.

Jennings' lawyer expects the AD's lawyers to respond to their complaint and allege that Jennings was a huge pain in the butt and Hart fired her for being a pain. The AD will then file with their response a bunch of angry emails that Jennings sent to Hart about Pat Summit.

Evidence of being a huge pain in the butt to their boss for no reason tends to cause problems for people claiming discrimination. Most jurors realize that if they get sassy with their boss, they could get fired. Jennings' attorney has to explain that she wasn't just being a pain or risk losing the case.

So seeing this speed bump on the horizon, the lawyer has Pat interviewed so that he can explain why Jennings was firing off these half-cocked emails. She was doing so because it was her belief at the time that Pat was being forced out of the head coaching position, because that's what Pat told her.

In an affidavit, the attorney questions the witness. It is similar to an in-court statement. The attorney questioning her stopped short of the full story because it doesn't help his case. He only needed to explain why Jennings was being a jerk to Hart over email. Everything beyond that is sheer media frenzy.

Thirdly, The actual content of the affidavit DOES ALLOW room for exactly what Pat said today, and it was not mutually exclusive with her press conference as so many assume, and it certainly created the understanding that what was in the affidavit was not the full story.

The most likely scenario is that Hart assumed Summit was retiring and brought up her plans for retirement. She probably hadn't made the decision yet, resented the assumption, and told Jennings about the conversation. Jennings fires off some nasty emails to Hart, Hart realizes he's offended an employee or that he's in a delicate situation and tries to clear things up with Pat. Pat later decides on her own to retire, and then she never has to go public with Hart being a jerk in order to keep her job.