The Blind Side scandal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And the Tuohys haven't touched his salary or interfered in his professional career whatsoever. You're so blinded by rage you can't see the obvious facts.

I don't think they were necessarily after his money - they were after getting him to go to old Miss. They're jerks, I just don't know that he's going to recover anything from this lawsuit.

This was exactly their motivation. At first. Then they used him to get something money can’t buy - fame, adoration, notoriety.

I think the main outcome he’s seeking from this filing is (1) full accounting of what transpired from a money and business perspective of the conservatorship as the Tuohys have broken the law regarding annual filings with the court and (2) an injunction against the family to refrain from profiting on his name, image, and likeness.

I think he will get both.

Bingo! The fact that they continuously used his name to promote themselves is evident of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why people are defending the Tuohys when legal experts say there doesn’t appear to be a reason for it.

https://x.com/phil_lewis_/status/1692152975760785449?s=46&t=a6K0qHt7Ze4ws-p2MKUF8A

Everyone “defending” them here has said they might be jerks AND it was a mutually beneficial relationship. That’s just too much nuance for an Internet forum apparently.

Nothing mutually beneficial in the conservatorship. There was an extreme advantage to the Tuohys and they were terrible conservators. They didn’t even do their basic annual filing of finances. Even the Spears family had the sense to do the money filing.

They didn’t use it. So he can sue them for being jerks I guess? But he doesn’t seem to have suffered by playing for an incredible pro team and making millions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why people are defending the Tuohys when legal experts say there doesn’t appear to be a reason for it.

https://x.com/phil_lewis_/status/1692152975760785449?s=46&t=a6K0qHt7Ze4ws-p2MKUF8A

Everyone “defending” them here has said they might be jerks AND it was a mutually beneficial relationship. That’s just too much nuance for an Internet forum apparently.

Nothing mutually beneficial in the conservatorship. There was an extreme advantage to the Tuohys and they were terrible conservators. They didn’t even do their basic annual filing of finances. Even the Spears family had the sense to do the money filing.

They didn’t use it. So he can sue them for being jerks I guess? But he doesn’t seem to have suffered by playing for an incredible pro team and making millions.

You’re either being intentionally dense or flat out lying. Leigh Anne constantly talks about Michael and adoption. She talks more about Michael than her own bio son which is crazy because the Tuohy lawyer says they have been estranged for about 10 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why people are defending the Tuohys when legal experts say there doesn’t appear to be a reason for it.

https://x.com/phil_lewis_/status/1692152975760785449?s=46&t=a6K0qHt7Ze4ws-p2MKUF8A

Everyone “defending” them here has said they might be jerks AND it was a mutually beneficial relationship. That’s just too much nuance for an Internet forum apparently.

Nothing mutually beneficial in the conservatorship. There was an extreme advantage to the Tuohys and they were terrible conservators. They didn’t even do their basic annual filing of finances. Even the Spears family had the sense to do the money filing.

They didn’t use it. So he can sue them for being jerks I guess? But he doesn’t seem to have suffered by playing for an incredible pro team and making millions.

They’ve used his NIL constantly for the past 20 years to promote themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why people are defending the Tuohys when legal experts say there doesn’t appear to be a reason for it.

https://x.com/phil_lewis_/status/1692152975760785449?s=46&t=a6K0qHt7Ze4ws-p2MKUF8A

Everyone “defending” them here has said they might be jerks AND it was a mutually beneficial relationship. That’s just too much nuance for an Internet forum apparently.

Nothing mutually beneficial in the conservatorship. There was an extreme advantage to the Tuohys and they were terrible conservators. They didn’t even do their basic annual filing of finances. Even the Spears family had the sense to do the money filing.

They didn’t use it. So he can sue them for being jerks I guess? But he doesn’t seem to have suffered by playing for an incredible pro team and making millions.

They’ve used his NIL constantly for the past 20 years to promote themselves.

Is she not allowed to talk about her experience? She was there too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why people are defending the Tuohys when legal experts say there doesn’t appear to be a reason for it.

https://x.com/phil_lewis_/status/1692152975760785449?s=46&t=a6K0qHt7Ze4ws-p2MKUF8A

Everyone “defending” them here has said they might be jerks AND it was a mutually beneficial relationship. That’s just too much nuance for an Internet forum apparently.

Nothing mutually beneficial in the conservatorship. There was an extreme advantage to the Tuohys and they were terrible conservators. They didn’t even do their basic annual filing of finances. Even the Spears family had the sense to do the money filing.

They didn’t use it. So he can sue them for being jerks I guess? But he doesn’t seem to have suffered by playing for an incredible pro team and making millions.

They’ve used his NIL constantly for the past 20 years to promote themselves.

Is she not allowed to talk about her experience? She was there too.

The weird ass and unethical conservatorship they’ve had on him for nearly 20 years allows them to use his NIL.

But he’s within his right to ask the court to revoke it and further bar the family from using his NIL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why people are defending the Tuohys when legal experts say there doesn’t appear to be a reason for it.

https://x.com/phil_lewis_/status/1692152975760785449?s=46&t=a6K0qHt7Ze4ws-p2MKUF8A

Everyone “defending” them here has said they might be jerks AND it was a mutually beneficial relationship. That’s just too much nuance for an Internet forum apparently.

Nothing mutually beneficial in the conservatorship. There was an extreme advantage to the Tuohys and they were terrible conservators. They didn’t even do their basic annual filing of finances. Even the Spears family had the sense to do the money filing.

They didn’t use it. So he can sue them for being jerks I guess? But he doesn’t seem to have suffered by playing for an incredible pro team and making millions.

You’re either being intentionally dense or flat out lying. Leigh Anne constantly talks about Michael and adoption. She talks more about Michael than her own bio son which is crazy because the Tuohy lawyer says they have been estranged for about 10 years.

Michael is a public figure. The details of his story with the Tuohys were made public in a book and film before Leigh Anne starting her speaking tour or whatever she does. This situation might be different if he was a private individual.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why people are defending the Tuohys when legal experts say there doesn’t appear to be a reason for it.

https://x.com/phil_lewis_/status/1692152975760785449?s=46&t=a6K0qHt7Ze4ws-p2MKUF8A

Everyone “defending” them here has said they might be jerks AND it was a mutually beneficial relationship. That’s just too much nuance for an Internet forum apparently.

Nothing mutually beneficial in the conservatorship. There was an extreme advantage to the Tuohys and they were terrible conservators. They didn’t even do their basic annual filing of finances. Even the Spears family had the sense to do the money filing.

They didn’t use it. So he can sue them for being jerks I guess? But he doesn’t seem to have suffered by playing for an incredible pro team and making millions.

You’re either being intentionally dense or flat out lying. Leigh Anne constantly talks about Michael and adoption. She talks more about Michael than her own bio son which is crazy because the Tuohy lawyer says they have been estranged for about 10 years.

Michael is a public figure. The details of his story with the Tuohys were made public in a book and film before Leigh Anne starting her speaking tour or whatever she does. This situation might be different if he was a private individual.

This. If there were any legal basis for this theory of harm, he wouldn’t have had his previous lawyers drop him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why people are defending the Tuohys when legal experts say there doesn’t appear to be a reason for it.

https://x.com/phil_lewis_/status/1692152975760785449?s=46&t=a6K0qHt7Ze4ws-p2MKUF8A

Everyone “defending” them here has said they might be jerks AND it was a mutually beneficial relationship. That’s just too much nuance for an Internet forum apparently.

Nothing mutually beneficial in the conservatorship. There was an extreme advantage to the Tuohys and they were terrible conservators. They didn’t even do their basic annual filing of finances. Even the Spears family had the sense to do the money filing.

They didn’t use it. So he can sue them for being jerks I guess? But he doesn’t seem to have suffered by playing for an incredible pro team and making millions.

You’re either being intentionally dense or flat out lying. Leigh Anne constantly talks about Michael and adoption. She talks more about Michael than her own bio son which is crazy because the Tuohy lawyer says they have been estranged for about 10 years.

Not PP but no that injunction will not happen. You can’t stop someone from using your name the way they use his. Sorry. That is not NIL. Now if their kfc’s had Oher’s name then sure. But in a no -profit way, no.

On the accounting it is just going to say zero. That will stick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why people are defending the Tuohys when legal experts say there doesn’t appear to be a reason for it.

https://x.com/phil_lewis_/status/1692152975760785449?s=46&t=a6K0qHt7Ze4ws-p2MKUF8A

Everyone “defending” them here has said they might be jerks AND it was a mutually beneficial relationship. That’s just too much nuance for an Internet forum apparently.

Nothing mutually beneficial in the conservatorship. There was an extreme advantage to the Tuohys and they were terrible conservators. They didn’t even do their basic annual filing of finances. Even the Spears family had the sense to do the money filing.

They didn’t use it. So he can sue them for being jerks I guess? But he doesn’t seem to have suffered by playing for an incredible pro team and making millions.

They’ve used his NIL constantly for the past 20 years to promote themselves.

Is she not allowed to talk about her experience? She was there too.

The weird ass and unethical conservatorship they’ve had on him for nearly 20 years allows them to use his NIL.

But he’s within his right to ask the court to revoke it and further bar the family from using his NIL. [/quote

But how did it allow them to use the name?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why people are defending the Tuohys when legal experts say there doesn’t appear to be a reason for it.

https://x.com/phil_lewis_/status/1692152975760785449?s=46&t=a6K0qHt7Ze4ws-p2MKUF8A

Everyone “defending” them here has said they might be jerks AND it was a mutually beneficial relationship. That’s just too much nuance for an Internet forum apparently.

Nothing mutually beneficial in the conservatorship. There was an extreme advantage to the Tuohys and they were terrible conservators. They didn’t even do their basic annual filing of finances. Even the Spears family had the sense to do the money filing.

They didn’t use it. So he can sue them for being jerks I guess? But he doesn’t seem to have suffered by playing for an incredible pro team and making millions.

They’ve used his NIL constantly for the past 20 years to promote themselves.

Is she not allowed to talk about her experience? She was there too.

The weird ass and unethical conservatorship they’ve had on him for nearly 20 years allows them to use his NIL.

But he’s within his right to ask the court to revoke it and further bar the family from using his NIL.

This would be an unconstitutional restriction of their 1A rights. It would never ever ever EVER happen.

Ever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why people are defending the Tuohys when legal experts say there doesn’t appear to be a reason for it.

https://x.com/phil_lewis_/status/1692152975760785449?s=46&t=a6K0qHt7Ze4ws-p2MKUF8A

Everyone “defending” them here has said they might be jerks AND it was a mutually beneficial relationship. That’s just too much nuance for an Internet forum apparently.

Nothing mutually beneficial in the conservatorship. There was an extreme advantage to the Tuohys and they were terrible conservators. They didn’t even do their basic annual filing of finances. Even the Spears family had the sense to do the money filing.

They didn’t use it. So he can sue them for being jerks I guess? But he doesn’t seem to have suffered by playing for an incredible pro team and making millions.

You’re either being intentionally dense or flat out lying. Leigh Anne constantly talks about Michael and adoption. She talks more about Michael than her own bio son which is crazy because the Tuohy lawyer says they have been estranged for about 10 years.

Not PP but no that injunction will not happen. You can’t stop someone from using your name the way they use his. Sorry. That is not NIL. Now if their kfc’s had Oher’s name then sure. But in a no -profit way, no.

On the accounting it is just going to say zero. That will stick.

Even if it’s for profit they have every right to tell their own story including the parts that involve him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why people are defending the Tuohys when legal experts say there doesn’t appear to be a reason for it.

https://x.com/phil_lewis_/status/1692152975760785449?s=46&t=a6K0qHt7Ze4ws-p2MKUF8A

Everyone “defending” them here has said they might be jerks AND it was a mutually beneficial relationship. That’s just too much nuance for an Internet forum apparently.

Nothing mutually beneficial in the conservatorship. There was an extreme advantage to the Tuohys and they were terrible conservators. They didn’t even do their basic annual filing of finances. Even the Spears family had the sense to do the money filing.

They didn’t use it. So he can sue them for being jerks I guess? But he doesn’t seem to have suffered by playing for an incredible pro team and making millions.

You’re either being intentionally dense or flat out lying. Leigh Anne constantly talks about Michael and adoption. She talks more about Michael than her own bio son which is crazy because the Tuohy lawyer says they have been estranged for about 10 years.

Michael is a public figure. The details of his story with the Tuohys were made public in a book and film before Leigh Anne starting her speaking tour or whatever she does. This situation might be different if he was a private individual.

This. If there were any legal basis for this theory of harm, he wouldn’t have had his previous lawyers drop him.

The Tuohy's lawyer said that but there's no evidence he's been dropped by numerous attorneys.

It seems as if you believe all the Tuohy allegations against Oher but none of the Oher allegations against Tuohy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why people are defending the Tuohys when legal experts say there doesn’t appear to be a reason for it.

https://x.com/phil_lewis_/status/1692152975760785449?s=46&t=a6K0qHt7Ze4ws-p2MKUF8A

Everyone “defending” them here has said they might be jerks AND it was a mutually beneficial relationship. That’s just too much nuance for an Internet forum apparently.

Nothing mutually beneficial in the conservatorship. There was an extreme advantage to the Tuohys and they were terrible conservators. They didn’t even do their basic annual filing of finances. Even the Spears family had the sense to do the money filing.

They didn’t use it. So he can sue them for being jerks I guess? But he doesn’t seem to have suffered by playing for an incredible pro team and making millions.

They’ve used his NIL constantly for the past 20 years to promote themselves.

Is she not allowed to talk about her experience? She was there too.

The weird ass and unethical conservatorship they’ve had on him for nearly 20 years allows them to use his NIL.

But he’s within his right to ask the court to revoke it and further bar the family from using his NIL.

Where are you getting this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why people are defending the Tuohys when legal experts say there doesn’t appear to be a reason for it.

https://x.com/phil_lewis_/status/1692152975760785449?s=46&t=a6K0qHt7Ze4ws-p2MKUF8A

Everyone “defending” them here has said they might be jerks AND it was a mutually beneficial relationship. That’s just too much nuance for an Internet forum apparently.

Nothing mutually beneficial in the conservatorship. There was an extreme advantage to the Tuohys and they were terrible conservators. They didn’t even do their basic annual filing of finances. Even the Spears family had the sense to do the money filing.

They didn’t use it. So he can sue them for being jerks I guess? But he doesn’t seem to have suffered by playing for an incredible pro team and making millions.

They’ve used his NIL constantly for the past 20 years to promote themselves.

Is she not allowed to talk about her experience? She was there too.

The weird ass and unethical conservatorship they’ve had on him for nearly 20 years allows them to use his NIL.

But he’s within his right to ask the court to revoke it and further bar the family from using his NIL.

This would be an unconstitutional restriction of their 1A rights. It would never ever ever EVER happen.

Ever.

The Tuohy's are lying about Michael being adopted. I definitely think a judge can prevent them from making money spreading a harmful lie. He was never adopted.