This is the Ray Ray theory. Stipulate that, at SC, “We own the police.” If in fact we own the police, the police are estopped from telling us what to do. (We tell them what to do.) If the police are estopped from telling us what to do, we cannot possibly be held criminally liable for refusing to do what they are telling us to do.

This is the M’Naughten Rule used in raising an insanity defense. If a defendent does not know that what he/she is doing is wrong, then he/she lacks the mens rea (“guilty mind” or criminal intent) required for him/her to be found criminally liable. Stipulate that, at SC, football players are especially recruited for such character traits as not knowing the difference between right and wrong. If in fact SC footballers do not know the difference, then they cannot possibly have any criminal intent and thus are not guilty (even if morally reprehensible).

This is the OJ theory. Stipulate that there was tons of evidence against OJ and he still wasn’t convicted by a jury. If in fact there is something less than tons of evidence against Shareece, clearly he must be less guilty than OJ and therefore equally not guilty. (But make sure not to slander the policeman, because then it’s a civil lawsuit and we saw how OJ fared against that standard.)

This is where you never have to produce a defense. You suck up to the D.A., blame things on “youth going a bit overboard, like you did when you were in college,” stress that Shareece is not a hardened criminal, note that he will improve his character as he spends more time in the positive environment that is Trojan football, and maybe grease some palms (e.g., by contribution to a favorite charity). The jails are too full already, so why not cut some slack and drop the charge completely (or at least no jail time, so Shareece can go to the university library on weekends).

7477 has just about covered the board. The only other ones I can think of would be

Theory #4 – Just ignore it. Pretend it never happened. Never acknowledge that it happened. Change the subject when it comes up. If you’re really confronted, say you’re cooperating in every way possible, but really just ignore it. That defense has worked time and time again for justsc’s football program and for Cheatie Petie.

Theory #5 – unequivocal denial, but with room left for plausible deniability of the denial (aka the non-denial denial). “I absolutely didn’t do it. I was never at the house and I never even heard of the house or the people in the house, or anyone west of the Mississippi for that matter. And if I was there, I left when I was told to. And if I didn’t leave, I meant to leave. But I wasn’t there.”

Next?

Excellent theories by Fox, especially since proven time and again.

1. is the Miracle on 34th Street theory. When the judge asks, “Mr. Galey, do you have anything to say?” then you can go to town. “Your honor, let me read the statistics on the National Collegiate Athletic Association. It has blah blah members, a budget of blah blah dollars, it has received official nonprofit status from the Government of the United States. The NCAA, duly authorized to identify and punish all violations by college athletes, has devoted an entire division the last five years investigating allegations of wrongdoing by USC — your honor will recall the Bush, Leinert/Jarrett, Mayo, and DeRozan cases, and there are far too many more to mention — and the NCAA, duly authorized to make the determination, has never found one jot, tittle, or iota of malfeasance by the University of Sports Criminals.” The judge then rules, “Since the NCAA, an organization recognized by the Government of the United States, has found USC innocent of every charge, no matter how heinous, this court will not dispute it. Case dismissed.”

This is the Animal House theory, appropriately applicable to USC. Shareece is represented by Otter, who queries, “The issue here is not whether we broke a few rules, or took a few liberties with the police — we did. But you can’t hold a whole football team responsible for the behavior of a few, sick, twisted individuals. For if you do, then shouldn’t we blame the whole University of Spoiled Children? And if the whole university is guilty, then isn’t this an indictment of our educational institutions in general? I put it to you, Greg — isn’t this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do whatever you want to us, but we’re not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America.” And march out of the court with your ciient.

Act like Perry Mason. Use up nearly all of the time allotted for the trial, then at the very last minute, turn on someone nondescript in the audience, blame it on him/her, and intimidate him/her into confessing. It doesn’t matter whether the confessor actually did it; you got Shareece off.

This is the CIS theory. More and more often these days one hears about acquittals where in the past there were convictions, because the jurors are now so used to CIS/clones on TV that they expect to be bombarded by (and entertained by) all sorts of forensic neat stuff and, not seeing it, they vote not guilty. So if you don’t manage to destroy or hide the evidence (e.g., OJ’s disappearing boots and knife), then make sure it’s inadmissible, so the jurors dont’ get a gander.

This is the mistaken identity theory. “May it please the court, it is a matter of public knowledge that Shareece is a girl’s name. My client is a boy. Therefore my client cannot be guilty of this offense. Res ipsa loquitur.”

LA Times reports Shareece now accepts plea bargain to not be one more officially convicted football felon at the U. of Sports Criminals. (Just a misdemeanor.) He is quoted as saying that Pete Carroll wants to see him back in class. We’ll take the word of this admitted criminal that Pete Cheat is always greatly concerned about the scholarship, and the character, of his charges.

Please vote, which of the 10 theories above won the case for Shareece? (You may volunteer an additional theory, too.)