Are you blind sided The Blind Side may have been a lie?

Plenty of room to blame both sides, they both seem to have taken advantage to one degree or another. All we have for facts are what has been printed, and those "facts" seem pretty malleable depending on who is talking (and when) as the story mutates. The Touhys probably had their hearts in the right place to start, with a side interest in boosting the high school and college teams that they backed. The money comes later.

There is room to both praise and doubt both sides here. It sounds like the Touhys helped themselves to a generous slice of money that should have been primarily Ohers, but I have to wonder why Oher decided to go back to them and demand $15m.

This is one of those stories that I don't engage in much. The facts are cloudy and neither side sounds entirely in the right. That said, I have to lean toward Oher getting manipulated when he was young and inexperienced. His not having his own lawyer to look the deal over combined with the lawyer being a personal friend of the Touhys looks bad even if there was no funny business alleged.

The personal hurt that Oher feels over being told he would be adopted and then finding out that he was not, and that the conservatorship seems to be largely about the legal handling of the money instead rubs salt in the wound. I hope that it was indeed related to clearing the NCAA hoops but when hundreds of thousands of dollars are involved color me skeptical.

Neither side comes out of this looking good, and we may never really know what the actual facts are.

 

I saw the movie over the holidays in 2009 back in Middle Tennessee, a season after Fulmer was canned as coach. When he came on screen, the orange-blooded patrons around me laughed like it was a circus clown making an entrance. That’s when I knew UT was in for a protracted free fall.

 

That post sounded incredulous to you?

 

I'd be really curious to know how much money Oher actually has right now..

I mean, he's not "a kid" anymore. He graduated college, he's had an NFL career, one with some real success in it, and you could add in whatever he did get -- whatever that is -- from the Touhys, the movie, the books, and life savings in general, and it seems to me you'd have a pretty tidy sum.

The fact that he seems to be literally coming after the Touhys for the money -- lots of money -- and making threats about it, tells me he probably hasn't handled whatever money he has very well.

If I had millions, I don't think I'd be worried about getting millions more from people who once cared for me, and about whom Oher must have cared, too, to be living with them and having whatever relationship he did with them for years.

The other thing that needs to be known: the details of the conservatorship. In fact, that might be the key to really understanding the case -- and I think I'd be going after the lawyer who apparently was being used.

Even if he was a friend of the Touhys, wouldn't he, as a lawyer, have an ethical obligation to serve Oher better than he apparently did? Shouldn't Oher have known, before this past January, that he was under a conservatorship, and had some understanding of what, exactly, that meant? How, in fact, did Oher find out about the conservatorship?

What was the financial set-up of it, and when was it supposed to end, if ever, and if not, why not? After growing up, and having said NFL career, wasn't Oher capable of handling his own affairs?

Because if not is typically when a conservatorship would be used.

 

Sure did. And so did this one ^^^^, only with some added "just asking questions" deniability. Well done.

 

You have a really low incredulity threshold, apparently.

 

No. Just in your case. The subtext in your two posts is in bright neon lights.

 

If you say so.

What I am, or was, is a reporter. So I think about these things, from all sides, and am interested in them.

So, you don't wonder how much money Oher actually has? You don't wonder about the details of the conservatorship? You don't think those things are key to the case? Or, you just don't care?

 

I don't think your questions are asked in good faith. How's that?

 

Alabama threw all the time on first down.

 

Do you intend this to be:

"If you're poor and destitute (now not then), then I really feel bad for you when they lied about adopting you and unbeknownst to you took total control of all your rights..."

but

"If you're well off now, then I DON'T feel bad for you when they lied about adopting you and unbeknownst to you took total control of all your rights..."
​

Because that's the logic you're spouting. How much he has now is irrelevant. (Sorry but that's how the attorney thinks because what's happened now does nothing to indicate what happened before is true or not. That's why we have rules of evidence in trials.)

 

Got a pretty good idea who is baiting you. Ignore the fucker.