The Blind Side 2: The search for more money

[NeverMarryAStripper 21907]

I tend to think everyone involved in this story had ulterior motives and is probably acting out of greed now.  I still liked the movie and would marry Sandra.

[TwiceHorn 31496]

23 minutes ago, redswingline said:

The link above has more info in it, compared to the story put up by espn

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38199104/tuohy-family-disputes-michael-oher-claims-alleges-shakedown-blind-side-subject

 

Several parts of this (mostly from the UK version) caught my eye

"The notion that a couple worth hundreds of millions of dollars would connive to withhold a few thousand dollars in profit participation payments from anyone -- let alone from someone they loved as a son -- defies belief,' Singer said."  

"'Over the years, the Tuohys have given Mr. Oher an equal cut of every penny received from The Blind Side,' Singer said. "

"Singer did acknowledge that the Tuohys 'received a small advance from the production company and a tiny percentage of net profits' from the film, which they either shared with Oher or tried to share with him, according to the attorney."

"Oher is asking for the public to respect his privacy during his legal battle"

"For his career, Oher earned $34.5 million."

 

Some things come to mind:

- I wonder who leaked this filing to the media?

- What does "tried to share with him" mean, exactly?

- If you wanted privacy, why would you write a book on your life and file a lawsuit when that book is released?

- If he earned +$34 million in his NFL career, does this lawsuit mean he blew it all?

-What does "an equal cut" mean, exactly? Does each person in the family (so, 5 people including Michael) get a cut? Or is it Tuhys get half and Michael gets half? That aside, why wouldn't Michael get most if not all of it? He was the main subject of this film. I don't get why they would take any of it to be honest.

 

In closing, I love big naturals

Well, the filing is public record, of course.  But someone had to bring it to the attention of the media for them to notice.  I think it has become rather obvious who that someone was.

If some of the things are to be believed, this looks like a really ham-handed way to shame/extort the Tuohys for some pretty "technical" things they may have done "wrong."  Like calling a conservatorship an adoption.

It would be really interesting to know how their relationship evolved over the years.  It sounds like from his 2011 book that it was still good, but at some point it must have deteriorated for some reason.

Edited August 16, 2023 by TwiceHorn

[ztejas 43476]

21 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

https://x.com/edsbs/status/1691637894278988173?s=46&t=eJHk9B0xfuP0VGyqKCxp-g
 

It's mostly bashing the mom. The rest of them don't seem to be popular, either. 

[Zepol87 9188]

38 minutes ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

I tend to think everyone involved in this story had ulterior motives and is probably acting out of greed now.  I still liked the movie and would marry Sandra.

Everyone?

[TwiceHorn 31496]

37 minutes ago, ztejas said:

It's mostly bashing the mom. The rest of them don't seem to be popular, either. 

I went and looked and saw this, imitating Sean's calling  a Grizzlies game:

“SHOOOOOOT FIRE! HES JUST DANG OL PEANUT BUTTER AND LIPSTICK WITH A SHIM SHAM ON THE FLAPPY DOWN. FLIM BAM HONKEYTOWN, GONNA PUT A BLIP BLAP ON THE WIFE TONIGHT!”

Lulz.

[Valmy77 13243]

1 hour ago, Texas Wahoo said:

https://x.com/edsbs/status/1691637894278988173?s=46&t=eJHk9B0xfuP0VGyqKCxp-g
 

You guys called it!

[Valmy77 13243]

1 hour ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

I tend to think everyone involved in this story had ulterior motives and is probably acting out of greed now.  I still liked the movie and would marry Sandra.

As a College Football fan it was hard to watch. I was thinking "holy shit these Ole Miss boosters really have no shame. They do something blatantly for recruiting and then pretend they are damn heroes." That part at the end about how other poor black kids in Mississippi get killed because they didn't get saved by Ole Miss boosters was especially ridiculous.

But agree Sandra is great. Nothing against any of the actors in the film.

[Blotto 23559]

11 hours ago, Zeus said:

Seriously though

If these people that helped him out had sold their franchises for $200M, and they weren't taking a dime of his NFL money, it's really silly for his lawyers to go after them for some of that hollywood money.

The attorney fees are going to be more than the money he can go for on that movie deal.

We'll make a right fine attorney out of you yet!

7 hours ago, Park Gothic said:

Her telling an investigator that she wants the conservatorship removed doesn't do anything though. It's like Michael Scott "declaring" bankruptcy.

She has to actually petition the court for a judge to actually make a change. And it sounds like the moment she actually did that the conservatorship was removed.

Why she didn't talk to a lawyer about any of this sooner is beyond me. 

because she's dumb as turnip. and bat shit insane. 

 

2 hours ago, redswingline said:

In closing, I love big naturals

[Homesickhorn 2202]

Oher is looking like a dumbass early on.
On the flip side, it’s hilarious that people are naive enough to think Ole Miss boosters adopted/took in/whatevere’d a physically huge and athletically gifted black kid just out of the goodness of their heart. Book and movie were formulaic bullshit. 

[Texzilla58 4738]

The folks that will look really bad if this goes to court will be Hollywood. They will have to expose all payments made on the film, which will expose their fucked up costs accounting to show massive losses. Stan Lee didn’t get a dime from Spider-Man which grossed like a billion dollars.

[TwiceHorn 31496]

5 hours ago, Homesickhorn said:

Haha, yeah I guess the movie was kind of syrupy.  Come to think of it, I don't remember hardly a thing about the movie.

Disagree about the book.  Like most Lewis stuff, it was an expose of the business of football, mostly at the college level.  And of course I was already familiar with most of that as an insane fan.  But it was good to see it in a sort of complete context involving actual humans.

I've been a huge Lewis fan going back to Liars Poker.  I did not recall that he and Tuohy were big buds.  That seems rather at odds with what I knew or think about Lewis.  I mean, Tuohy is just your standard southern clod, and Lewis is a Princeton art history major with an MBA from LSE.

And that brings up one of the odder factoids that came up:  Lewis gave the Tuohys half of his proceeds from the movie?  What's that all about?

[Frank Drebin 5644]

8 hours ago, ztejas said:

It's mostly bashing the mom. The rest of them don't seem to be popular, either. 

On the other hand, Reddit city pages are almost exclusively full of dipshits.  

Edited August 16, 2023 by Frank Drebin

[statsman 5472]

3 hours ago, Texzilla58 said:

The folks that will look really bad if this goes to court will be Hollywood. They will have to expose all payments made on the film, which will expose their fucked up costs accounting to show massive losses. Stan Lee didn’t get a dime from Spider-Man which grossed like a billion dollars.

Steve Ditko says, “Hi!”

[956 Worldwide 34715]

Having a Hollywood movie made where Sandra Bullock plays you as a step down from sainthood ain’t nothing.  Something important— this family have been huge advocates for adoption and have called Oher their “son,” publicly. 
 

At the very least they encouraged the perception that they actually adopted him. If I want to buy the argument that a conservatorship is just as good as made above— then why wouldn’t the family be fine with that as the public story?

I think there is likely not as much financial stuff as Oher is making it out to be. But at the end of the day the Tuohys happily let the world (and maybe Oher) believe they had adopted him when in fact they did a conservatorship to get the NCAA off their backs. And that’s some seriously fucked up, big-time asshole behavior especially in the context of a homeless black kid and a rich white family of Ole Miss boosters. 
 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna99896

[South Austin 52519]

11 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

There is such thing as an adult adoption. 

 

[EuroHorn 3265]

 

[ztejas 43476]

1 hour ago, Frank Drebin said:

On the other hand, Reddit city pages are almost exclusively full of dipshits.  

Oh - I know. But the disdain was pretty universal with no one playing devil's advocate or coming to her defense. 

[Frank Drebin 5644]

48 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Having a Hollywood movie made where Sandra Bullock plays you as a step down from sainthood ain’t nothing.  Something important— this family have been huge advocates for adoption and have called Oher their “son,” publicly. 
 

At the very least they encouraged the perception that they actually adopted him. If I want to buy the argument that a conservatorship is just as good as made above— then why wouldn’t the family be fine with that as the public story?

I think there is likely not as much financial stuff as Oher is making it out to be. But at the end of the day the Tuohys happily let the world (and maybe Oher) believe they had adopted him when in fact they did a conservatorship to get the NCAA off their backs. And that’s some seriously fucked up, big-time asshole behavior especially in the context of a homeless black kid and a rich white family of Ole Miss boosters. 
 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna99896

These Oher's own words from his 2011 book, I Beat the Odds: From Homelessness, to The Blind Side, and Beyond.

Quote

"It kind of felt like a formality, as I’d been a part of the family for more than a year at that point. Since I was already over the age of eighteen and considered an adult by the state of Tennessee, Sean and Leigh Anne would be named as my “legal conservators.” They explained to me that it means pretty much the exact same thing as “adoptive parents,” but that the laws were just written in a way that took my age into account. Honestly, I didn’t care what it was called. I was just happy that no one could argue that we weren’t legally what we already knew was real: We were a family."

https://books.google.com/books?id=ErNPEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA169&lpg=PA169&dq="It+kind+of+felt+like+a+formality,+as+I’d+been+a+part+of+the+family+for+more+than+a+year+at+that+point.+Since+I+was+already+over+the+age+of+eighteen+and+considered+an+adult+by+the+state+of+Tennessee,+Sean+and+Leigh+Anne+would+be+named+as+my+“legal+conservators.”+They+explained+to+me+that+it+means+pretty+much+the+exact+same+thing+as+“adoptive+parents,”+but+that+the+laws+were+just+written+in+a+way+that+took+my+age+into+account.+Honestly,+I+didn’t+care+what+it+was+called.+I+was+just+happy+that+no+one+could+argue+that+we+weren’t+legally+what+we+already+knew+was+real:+We+were+a+family."&source=bl&ots=51PvhRADLx&sig=ACfU3U06GPt-SBMjVtuEMhbX_1KWo9zEcw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjMqc2koeGAAxWYkGoFHVxVBe4Q6AF6BAgwEAM#v=onepage&q="It kind of felt like a formality%2C as I’d been a part of the family for more than a year at that point. Since I was already over the age of eighteen and considered an adult by the state of Tennessee%2C Sean and Leigh Anne would be named as my “legal conservators.” They explained to me that it means pretty much the exact same thing as “adoptive parents%2C” but that the laws were just written in a way that took my age into account. Honestly%2C I didn’t care what it was called. I was just happy that no one could argue that we weren’t legally what we already knew was real%3A We were a family."&f=false

 

Given Oher's quotes from a book he wrote 12 years ago, any claim by him that he only recently discovered he was adopted is bullshit.

[South Austin 52519]

2 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

These Oher's own words from his 2011 book, I Beat the Odds: From Homelessness, to The Blind Side, and Beyond.

https://books.google.com/books?id=ErNPEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA169&lpg=PA169&dq="It+kind+of+felt+like+a+formality,+as+I’d+been+a+part+of+the+family+for+more+than+a+year+at+that+point.+Since+I+was+already+over+the+age+of+eighteen+and+considered+an+adult+by+the+state+of+Tennessee,+Sean+and+Leigh+Anne+would+be+named+as+my+“legal+conservators.”+They+explained+to+me+that+it+means+pretty+much+the+exact+same+thing+as+“adoptive+parents,”+but+that+the+laws+were+just+written+in+a+way+that+took+my+age+into+account.+Honestly,+I+didn’t+care+what+it+was+called.+I+was+just+happy+that+no+one+could+argue+that+we+weren’t+legally+what+we+already+knew+was+real:+We+were+a+family."&source=bl&ots=51PvhRADLx&sig=ACfU3U06GPt-SBMjVtuEMhbX_1KWo9zEcw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjMqc2koeGAAxWYkGoFHVxVBe4Q6AF6BAgwEAM#v=onepage&q="It kind of felt like a formality%2C as I’d been a part of the family for more than a year at that point. Since I was already over the age of eighteen and considered an adult by the state of Tennessee%2C Sean and Leigh Anne would be named as my “legal conservators.” They explained to me that it means pretty much the exact same thing as “adoptive parents%2C” but that the laws were just written in a way that took my age into account. Honestly%2C I didn’t care what it was called. I was just happy that no one could argue that we weren’t legally what we already knew was real%3A We were a family."&f=false

 

Given Oher's quotes from a book he wrote 12 years ago, any claim by him that he only recently discovered he was adopted is bullshit.

This doesn't change my opinion about Tim McGraw's music.

[ClubWhatever 12146]

Frank.   Frank...

[Frank Drebin 5644]

 

1 minute ago, South Austin said:

This doesn't change my opinion about Tim McGraw's music.

Are you an Indian Outlaw?

[The Dog 44062]

10 hours ago, Texas Wahoo said:

https://x.com/edsbs/status/1691637894278988173?s=46&t=eJHk9B0xfuP0VGyqKCxp-g
 

 

[Gene Parmesan 4008]

I really don't understand what it matters adoption vs conservatorship?  I get that they have different legal definitions and duties, but otherwise it boils down that they did take care of him, and of course it was because he was good at football.  Now if they screwed him out of money, I hope they get exposed, and he gets paid, but I don't really give a crap if the family let everyone think they adopted him when they only had a conservatorship. 

[Beau Vine 54254]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

I've been a huge Lewis fan going back to Liars Poker.  I did not recall that he and Tuohy were big buds.  That seems rather at odds with what I knew or think about Lewis.  I mean, Tuohy is just your standard southern clod, and Lewis is a Princeton art history major with an MBA from LSE.

Lewis grew up in New Orleans and went to the same HS that the Mannings went to.

[Gene Parmesan 4008]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Haha, yeah I guess the movie was kind of syrupy.  Come to think of it, I don't remember hardly a thing about the movie.

Disagree about the book.  Like most Lewis stuff, it was an expose of the business of football, mostly at the college level.  And of course I was already familiar with most of that as an insane fan.  But it was good to see it in a sort of complete context involving actual humans.

I've been a huge Lewis fan going back to Liars Poker.  I did not recall that he and Tuohy were big buds.  That seems rather at odds with what I knew or think about Lewis.  I mean, Tuohy is just your standard southern clod, and Lewis is a Princeton art history major with an MBA from LSE.

And that brings up one of the odder factoids that came up:  Lewis gave the Tuohys half of his proceeds from the movie?  What's that all about?

When you sell your story for a book maybe it standard that it includes an option for the author to sell it for a movie.

[Texzilla58 4738]

Jason Whitlock getting into it. Shines some light on Oher.

This is a shit story combining Hollywood success and bullshit accounting with the total corruption of big time college football and the ncaa.

[Beau Vine 54254]

LA Times' original review of the book in 2006:

Quote

Over the last two decades, Michael Lewis has become an all-star at what the pros call immersion journalism. He is able to burrow into a cultural ecosystem, zero in on the most colorful characters available and use them to lay bare the intricacies of that world for us civilians. His bestsellers have demystified — among other exotic precincts — Wall Street (“Liar’s Poker”), modern baseball (“Moneyball”) and Silicon Valley (“The New New Thing”).

In “The Blind Side,” Lewis takes on football, and specifically the mania for the game as encountered in Southern culture. It is a riveting account, though its pleasures — like those of watching grown men nearly kill one another over a pigskin — are ultimately distressing.

“The Blind Side,” in fact, tells two stories. The first is about the ascendance of left tackle, the offensive lineman in charge of protecting valuable NFL quarterbacks from harm. The second is about the ascendance of a young giant named Michael Oher, widely considered one of the best left tackle prospects in the country.

ADVERTISEMENT

Lewis opens with an image familiar to football fans: Lawrence Taylor, the New York Giants’ revered linebacker, delivering a (literally) bone-crunching hit on Redskins quarterback Joe Theismann in 1985. The play ended Theismann’s career. It also placed a sudden premium on finding players who could prevent such catastrophes. This task fell to the left tackle, who suddenly graduated from just another grunt in the trenches to heroic point man. Unlike many sportswriters, who tend to traffic in the immediate (and obvious), Lewis takes the long view. He traces how 49ers Coach Bill Walsh revolutionized football during the 1980s by installing a short passing game that caused the traditional emphasis on running to be outmoded. Lewis also notes how this shift in the pro market, like others, trickled down:

“The NFL would discover a passion for athletic (read: black) quarterbacks, or speedy pass rushers, and first the colleges and then the high schools would begin to supply them. There was a lag of course ... but the wave always came. What the NFL prized, America’s high schools supplied, and America’s colleges processed.”

Having established the lay of the land, Lewis proceeds to his main attraction: Oher, a painfully shy black kid from the projects of west Memphis, Tenn., who happens to be 6 feet 6 and 345 pounds. Thanks to his unusual combination of size and speed, he is accepted at a private evangelical high school, adopted by a rich white family on the east side of town and molded into an All-American.

ADVERTISING

There’s an undeniable thrill in tracking his rise from a destitute kid with no prospects to a gridiron prodigy beset by college recruiters. And Lewis does a remarkable job of describing the emotional contours of the feeding frenzy. “The wooing of Michael Oher was pure southern ritual: everyone knew, or thought they knew, everyone else’s darker motives, and what didn’t get said was far more important than what did. The men seized formal control of the process. The women, acting behind the scenes, assumed they were actually in charge.”

Lewis also documents the rule-bending done to keep Oher college-eligible. The administration at his high school accepts him although he can barely read. He secures a full-time tutor. When his grade-point average still proves too low for the NCAA, his adoptive father, a canny former college basketball standout named Sean Tuohy, manages to find a crucial loophole. He has Oher tested to prove he’s learning disabled, then has him take numerous easy, online courses. Lewis treats these measures as ingenious. We are meant to cheer the fact that Oher has gamed the educational process.

 

Tuohy’s indomitable wife also plays a key role in the reeducation of Oher:

“Leigh Anne was now making it her personal responsibility to introduce him to the most basic facts of life, the sort of thing any normal person would have learned by osmosis. ‘Every day I try to make sure he knows something he doesn’t know,’ she said. ‘If you ask him, ‘Where should I shop for a girl to impress her?’ he’ll tell you, ‘Tiffany’s.’ I’ll go through the whole golf game. He can tell you what six under is, and what’s a birdie and what’s par.’”

Maybe it’s just me, but I’m not sure these qualify as the most basic facts of life. Indeed, for all her Christian charity, Leigh Anne seems to treat her adopted son more like a giant kachina doll than a human being. Oher recognizes the ulterior motives swirling around him: “He didn’t go so far as to treat Leigh Anne with suspicion but, as Leigh Anne put it, ‘With me and Sean I can see him thinking, If they found me lying in a gutter and I was going to be flipping burgers at McDonald’s, would they really have had an interest in me?’ ”

This question is never answered.

As I tore through the book, I kept wondering how Lewis got such remarkable access to the Tuohys; and I also wondered, why does he take such an uncritical view of their role? The author’s note at the end provides the obvious explanation, stating that Lewis is a friend of Sean Tuohy’s and that they had been longtime classmates at the same New Orleans school.

The Tuohys eventually persuade Oher to attend their alma mater, Ole Miss, where football players have to “go through the tedious charade of pretending to be ordinary college students” to get their shot at the NFL. Lewis doesn’t dwell on the cynicism of this arrangement, either. He is too determined to paint Oher as a heroic figure. “The world that had once taken no notice of Michael Oher was now so invested in him that it couldn’t afford to see him fail,” he insists. The problem is, that Lewis never bothers to ask why.

The essential message of “The Blind Side” is that poor black children matter, and are seen as worth helping, not because of the content of their characters but because of their physical prowess. Like most fans — myself included — Lewis prefers not to notice the prejudices that belie our lust for sport, the perverse arrangement by which watching young black men engaged in violent spectacle has become our most profitable form of entertainment. I have no doubt that this book will become another Lewis bestseller. It will play to the masses as an inspiring underdog saga, spiced with proper pieties about the power of hope and individual destiny. It should also stand as an inadvertent testament to the national blind spot that still prevails when it comes to our racial pathologies.

 

[Beau Vine 54254]

Someone just unironically posted a 90-minute Jason Whitlock video?

[The Dog 44062]

https://www.thedrawplay.com/comic/the-blind-side-2-this-partys-oher/

[TwiceHorn 31496]

1 hour ago, Beau Vine said:

LA Times' original review of the book in 2006:

 

Oddly, I find I disagree with the characterization that Lewis presents certain matters uncritically.  He just doesn't explicitly comment on them.

Like the Leigh Anne Tuohy bit about Tiffany's and golf.  The very fact that he included that ludicrous detail is a commentary and criticism unto itself and I think his writing is rife with that kind of fhing.  

I also found the treatment of Oher as a commodity to be an underlying theme of the book.  And I wasn't as woke then as I am now.

[Felix 607]

I don't know much about how all this will play out and it seems pretty cleat that something about he relationship changed over the years.  I do know that my wife (no pics) worked for a non-profit that did conventions/training and Leigh Anne Touhy was a featured speaker one year.  Let's just say that she wasn't very popular amongst the folks who had to deal with her.  Demanding, condescending, conceited, and self important were the words that were used.

['stache 21819]

2 hours ago, Gene Parmesan said:

I really don't understand what it matters adoption vs conservatorship?  I get that they have different legal definitions and duties, but otherwise it boils down that they did take care of him, and of course it was because he was good at football.  Now if they screwed him out of money, I hope they get exposed, and he gets paid, but I don't really give a crap if the family let everyone think they adopted him when they only had a conservatorship. 

I don't get it, but for the opposite reason. There's a huge difference. One is a familial relationship, one is strictly legal and usually to protect monetary assets. Lawyers often act as conservators knowing nothing about the ward. If he was truly "family" to them, adoption would be how to make him true family. I really don't get the conservatorship v. adoption because he was 18. Adoptions of adults is something that happens. I also don't understand how a legal conservatorship fixes the booster problem, if anything, it sounds very much like an agency relationship, involving managing someone else's financial interests with fiduciary obligations. Sounds like some NCAA/SEC bullshit.

[Gene Parmesan 4008]

1 minute ago, 'stache said:

I don't get it, but for the opposite reason. There's a huge difference. One is a familial relationship, one is strictly legal and usually to protect monetary assets. Lawyers often act as conservators knowing nothing about the ward. If he was truly "family" to them, adoption would be how to make him true family. I really don't get the conservatorship v. adoption because he was 18. Adoptions of adults is something that happens. I also don't understand how a legal conservatorship fixes the booster problem, if anything, it sounds very much like an agency relationship, involving managing someone else's financial interests with fiduciary obligations. Sounds like some NCAA/SEC bullshit.

I'm not delving into the NCAA rules as they are likely so ass backwards there is no point to make sense of it.  As I understand the only reason he is anything other than a family friend to them is because he and they wanted him to go to Ole Miss, but they were boosters.  Otherwise he'd just be a friend that they helped had that went to a different school.  If the conservatorship solved the NCAA issues I don't really care vs adoption.  Family is not strictly a legal term, it's commonly used to express a bond to the people you care about most.  Typically that's blood relatives, but if it's not, I don't require an adoption in order for somebody to be considered family.  If there is evidence that they screwed him out of money with the conservatorship, I'm all ears.  I don't believe they got paid what he is alleging for the book/movie, and there is no evidence they were doing anything to his NFL money.

[EuroHorn 3265]

2 hours ago, Texzilla58 said:

 

 

Jason Whitlock getting into it. Shines some light on Oher.

This is a shit story combining Hollywood success and bullshit accounting with the total corruption of big time college football and the ncaa.

 

Oher might be backpedaling a bit in the near future 

['stache 21819]

5 minutes ago, Gene Parmesan said:

I'm not delving into the NCAA rules as they are likely so ass backwards there is no point to make sense of it.  As I understand the only reason he is anything other than a family friend to them is because he and they wanted him to go to Ole Miss, but they were boosters.  Otherwise he'd just be a friend that they helped had that went to a different school.  If the conservatorship solved the NCAA issues I don't really care vs adoption.  Family is not strictly a legal term, it's commonly used to express a bond to the people you care about most.  Typically that's blood relatives, but if it's not, I don't require an adoption in order for somebody to be considered family.  If there is evidence that they screwed him out of money with the conservatorship, I'm all ears.  I don't believe they got paid what he is alleging for the book/movie, and there is no evidence they were doing anything to his NFL money.

Definitely true, but they used the term "adoption" as part of the story, which wasn't true, and has a far more familial connotation that conservatorship. Even if they didn't swindle him out of money (i'm not sure why people are railing on plaintiffs attorneys but taking defense attorney's word as gold), if they needed something legal to avoid them being boosters with respect to him as a prospect, the fact that they chose conservatorship over adoption, it tells me they weren't quite as familial as the story portrays. If he truly was family to them, and they needed that relationship for him to go to Ole Miss, then adopt him. Again, the whole thing sounded fishy from the start, and something was fucked up here, either financially, relationship-wise, or most likley (imo) both. 

[T’Boo Ted Marshall 2732]

3 hours ago, Frank Drebin said:

 

Are you an Indian Outlaw?

Half Cherokee and Choctaw

[Gene Parmesan 4008]

2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Definitely true, but they used the term "adoption" as part of the story, which wasn't true, and has a far more familial connotation that conservatorship. Even if they didn't swindle him out of money (i'm not sure why people are railing on plaintiffs attorneys but taking defense attorney's word as gold), if they needed something legal to avoid them being boosters with respect to him as a prospect, the fact that they chose conservatorship over adoption, it tells me they weren't quite as familial as the story portrays. If he truly was family to them, and they needed that relationship for him to go to Ole Miss, then adopt him. Again, the whole thing sounded fishy from the start, and something was fucked up here, either financially, relationship-wise, or most likley (imo) both. 

I am not sure what it matters had they never used the word adopted.  Unless they are running some charity scam based on that.  Obviously he truly wasn't your definition of "family" to them, but they still helped him.  It's semantics in my opinion until we get to the receipts of him being screwed over.  The only thing that's come to light so far is that the movie was a ridiculous embellishment of the true story, but everyone should have already knew that when they saw the trailer.

['stache 21819]

I think the semantics are important. Best case scenario, they didn't screw him over financially, but they still chose him, of all the poor struggling Black kids in the south, because he was a D1 prospect and legit NFL prospect, not out of the goodness of their hearts. I'll let the case play out, but I don't think he'd bring the case if there wasn't some evidence of financial fuckery.

Edited August 16, 2023 by 'stache

[NeverMarryAStripper 21907]

Because filing a lawsuit is evidence of fuckery?

['stache 21819]

Do you think a defense attorney's statement is evidence of lack of fuckery?

[orange dream 1254]

I wonder if somewhere along the way (maybe when they sold the restaurants) in the Touhy's estate planning it somehow became more obvious to Oher that he was NOT getting a "child's" portion of the general family inheritance.  I could see a scenario where he really did feel like part of the family (as he indicated in the passage from the earlier book) and the Touhy's continued to put him in the Christmas card photos, etc. to the point where he thought he was going to get 1/3 in the mom and dad's wills but ultimately realized he was getting the "conservatorship" portion instead of lining up next to Collins and SJ for the gravy train to unload; that he may have started looking for a way to "get his" and that lawyers may have encouraged this action as a means (potentially misguided based on the information that is coming to light) to that end.

Either way, somebody is not being truthful and I bet he's not in this year's Christmas card photo.

Edited August 16, 2023 by orange dream

[Gene Parmesan 4008]

26 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I think the semantics are important. Best case scenario, they didn't screw him over financially, but they still chose him, of all the poor struggling Black kids in the south, because he was a D1 prospect and legit NFL prospect, not out of the goodness of their hearts. I'll let the case play out, but I don't think he'd bring the case if there wasn't some evidence of financial fuckery.

I agree he was absolutely chosen because of football, but those facts seem to have been there all along, and they didn't have to choose anyone.  As TwiceHorn has commented the book seems to make that a lot clearer.

[Gene Parmesan 4008]

13 minutes ago, orange dream said:

I wonder if somewhere along the way (maybe when they sold the restaurants) in the Touhy's estate planning it somehow became more obvious to Oher that he was NOT getting a "child's" portion of the general family inheritance.  I could see a scenario where he really did feel like part of the family (as he indicated in the passage from the earlier book) and the Touhy's continued to put him in the Christmas card photos, etc. to the point where he thought he was going to get 1/3 in the mom and dad's wills but ultimately realized he was getting the "conservatorship" portion instead of lining up next to Collins and SJ for the gravy train to unload; that he may have started looking for a way to "get his" and that lawyers may have encouraged this action as a means (potentially misguided based on the information that is coming to light) to that end.

Either way, somebody is not being truthful and I bet he's not in this year's Christmas card photo.

I don't know when they sold the restaurants but he would have to be pretty stupid if he thinks the family that helped him through high school and college was going to give him 1/3 of a nine figure estate.  You guys are taking the word family more serious than Dominic Toretto.

[Aqua Buddha 14598]

18 minutes ago, orange dream said:

I wonder if somewhere along the way (maybe when they sold the restaurants) in the Touhy's estate planning it somehow became more obvious to Oher that he was NOT getting a "child's" portion of the general family inheritance.  I could see a scenario where he really did feel like part of the family (as he indicated in the passage from the earlier book) and the Touhy's continued to put him in the Christmas card photos, etc. to the point where he thought he was going to get 1/3 in the mom and dad's wills but ultimately realized he was getting the "conservatorship" portion instead of lining up next to Collins and SJ for the gravy train to unload; that he may have started looking for a way to "get his" and that lawyers may have encouraged this action as a means (potentially misguided based on the information that is coming to light) to that end.

Either way, somebody is not being truthful and I bet he's not in this year's Christmas card photo.

After reading some of the details, I suspect this is close to the truth.  He's a "son" in name only, the gets split the estate in half and not thirds.  He eventually figured this out and felt burned.

[Dahobbs 17625]

49 minutes ago, Gene Parmesan said:

Family is not strictly a legal term, it's commonly used to express a bond to the people you care about most.  Typically that's blood relatives, but if it's not, I don't require an adoption in order for somebody to be considered family.  If there is evidence that they screwed him out of money with the conservatorship, I'm all ears.  I don't believe they got paid what he is alleging for the book/movie, and there is no evidence they were doing anything to his NFL money.

While family isn't only a legal term, it certainly has legal significance. If he is a family and a formally adopted, then he becomes an heir under intestacy laws and potentially even under a will if it isn't very specific (e.g., says split equally among "children").  Further, being family and adopted would have made it easier to claim Michael as a dependent for tax purposes.

I think the fact Mr. Tuohy has come out and said that adoption of an adult wasn't legal and that's why they went this route is suspect. It clearly is legal and would have done what they needed in terms of NCAA booster issues. While it wouldn't have granted the Tuohy's any other rights or responsibilities for Michael as an adult, as their legal child they certainly were free to take care of him just as any other parent would.

That said, I don't think the lawsuit goes anywhere. 

[TwiceHorn 31496]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

I don't get it, but for the opposite reason. There's a huge difference. One is a familial relationship, one is strictly legal and usually to protect monetary assets. Lawyers often act as conservators knowing nothing about the ward. If he was truly "family" to them, adoption would be how to make him true family. I really don't get the conservatorship v. adoption because he was 18. Adoptions of adults is something that happens. I also don't understand how a legal conservatorship fixes the booster problem, if anything, it sounds very much like an agency relationship, involving managing someone else's financial interests with fiduciary obligations. Sounds like some NCAA/SEC bullshit.

The difference is, a conservatorship creates some amount of "control" that an adult adoption does not.  

As "acting parents" of an adult high school student, the Tuohys needed some control of things, which may have been nefarious or maybe not so nefarious.  Two of the things specifically set out by the order were the ability to make health care decisions, which makes some amount of sense in the event Oher was injured, and the more insidious right to consent to any contracts.

The right to consent doesn't mean the right or ability to force him into bad deals, on the contrary, it might prevent him from entering into contracts that would jeopardize his eligibility.  And maybe was calculated to keep him from signing an LOI with anyone but Ole Miss.

I have anecdotally heard of people informally adopting school kids and then having trouble with the school because they have no legal relationship to the kid.  If it's a minor child, adoption is a complete solution, but I have also heard of guardianships (which is another name for conservatorship) in those circumstances.

But in the very general case, yes, a conservatorship is rife with potential for abuse and basically amounts to giving someone's civil rights, and every other right, to someone else.

[TwiceHorn 31496]

3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

While family isn't only a legal term, it certainly has legal significance. If he is a family and a formally adopted, then he becomes an heir under intestacy laws and potentially even under a will if it isn't very specific (e.g., says split equally among "children").  Further, being family and adopted would have made it easier to claim Michael as a dependent for tax purposes.

I think the fact Mr. Tuohy has come out and said that adoption of an adult wasn't legal and that's why they went this route is suspect. It clearly is legal and would have done what they needed in terms of NCAA booster issues. While it wouldn't have granted the Tuohy's any other rights or responsibilities for Michael as an adult, as their legal child they certainly were free to take care of him just as any other parent would.

That said, I don't think the lawsuit goes anywhere. 

That's fair, I can't figure out when TN made adult adoptions legal.  

I'm not sure they got the worlds best legal advice, because they utterly failed to fulfill the obligations of conservators from a formal standpoint.  Both of them seemingly acted like it didn't even exist for most of the last 20 years.  And that's kind of consistent with the notion of doing some stopgap thing to satisfy school, NCAA, or Ole Miss requirements.

[txhorns 2409]

I’ve only seen the movie and read articles on this so don’t know what the books say.  Lol at people bashing the Tuohy’s for helping him at all.  They didn’t have to do anything.  It’s facts that he was better off in their care than out of their care as a high school student.  Who gives a shit if their motive was to get him to Ole Miss, he was still much better off under their roof.  He also was not chosen at random from the thousands of kids in Memphis that likely need help.  He went to their kid’s private school, that’s why he was chosen.  I’m sure he stood out among the student population there in more ways than one.

The Tuohy’s may be self centered assholes but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they were in this case.  There’s any easy explanation for why they would call it an adoption instead of a conservatorship in the public realm, the vast majority of the public had no idea what a conservatorship was before this story came out.  Either way they had a legal obligation to him.

In the end all that really matters is how they treated him.  Did they truly treat him as family?  Did they do what was best for him?  Did they use their position as his conservators to take advantage of him?  Those are the only questions that matter in this story.  So far Oher’s side of the story is all over the place while the Tuohys have a pretty solid story.  We will find out if that holds up.

[Dahobbs 17625]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The difference is, a conservatorship creates some amount of "control" that an adult adoption does not.  

As "acting parents" of an adult high school student, the Tuohys needed some control of things, which may have been nefarious or maybe not so nefarious.  Two of the things specifically set out by the order were the ability to make health care decisions, which makes some amount of sense in the event Oher was injured, and the more insidious right to consent to any contracts.

Are the rights an adopted parent of an 18-year old any different from the rights a natural parent of an 18-year old? As far as I know, they are not. So, I'm just not clear why the Tuohy's needed something more for Michael than they would have needed for their own children (or that any other parent in the US needs for their own children). 

[Armybrat 40851]

10 minutes ago, txhorns said:

I’ve only seen the movie and read articles on this so don’t know what the books say.  Lol at people bashing the Tuohy’s for helping him at all.  They didn’t have to do anything.  It’s facts that he was better off in their care than out of their care as a high school student.  Who gives a shit if their motive was to get him to Ole Miss, he was still much better off under their roof.  He also was not chosen at random from the thousands of kids in Memphis that likely need help.  He went to their kid’s private school, that’s why he was chosen.  I’m sure he stood out among the student population there in more ways than one.

The Tuohy’s may be self centered assholes but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they were in this case.  There’s any easy explanation for why they would call it an adoption instead of a conservatorship in the public realm, the vast majority of the public had no idea what a conservatorship was before this story came out.  Either way they had a legal obligation to him.

In the end all that really matters is how they treated him.  Did they truly treat him as family?  Did they do what was best for him?  Did they use their position as his conservators to take advantage of him?  Those are the only questions that matter in this story.  So far Oher’s side of the story is all over the place while the Tuohys have a pretty solid story.  We will find out if that holds up.

Wasn’t Brittany Spears fighting to get released from her dad’s conservatorship recently?