NEWYou can now listen to PK Press Club articles!
Las Vegas – EXCLUSIVE: The Mountain West conference responded to concerns about an investigation into an alleged fault of the former Transgenre Volleyball player from San Jose State Blaire Fleming in an exclusive declaration provided to PK Press Club Digital. The press release also clarified an erroneous response from Mountain West Gloria Nevarez Commissioner to a question on a press conference on Wednesday.
PK Press Club Digital reported in June that the conference had hired the law firm Willkie Farr & Gallagher (WFG) to investigate allegations against Fleming de plot with an opponent to harm his teammate Brooke Slusser in November. The same company defended the Mountain West against a preliminary injunction request which would have ruled that Fleming ineligible to participate in women’s volleyball during the same month.
CLICK HERE for more sports cover on Foxnews.com
Mountain West Gloria Nevarez Commissioner on media football days at Circa Resort and Casino in Las Vegas. (Photos Lena Sattarin / NCAA)
PK Press Club Digital interviewed Nevarez at his press conference Mountain West Media Days on the issue, asking “in November, the Mountain West launched an investigation into misconduct on a volleyball player from San Jose State. Why did the conference hired the same law firm who was hired to defend the playing in the court to conduct this investigation of a conflict of interest? ”
Nevarez replied: “Well, this is a question about active disputes, so I will not comment on the current disputes. But the assertion that the same law firm represented the school in the defense of the player is incorrect.”
PK Press Club Digital asked: “Why is it incorrect?”
Nevarez replied: “Because it is not, that the lawyer who made our investigation did not represent the state of San Jose.” PK Press Club Digital did not insinuate in his question and never pointed out that the law firm represented the state of San Jose.
PK Press Club Digital immediately followed during the press conference, saying: “He represented the Mountain West to defend the player’s eligibility in court.” Nevarez did not respond, remaining silent for several seconds.
PK Press Club Digital then asked: “Are you confident in your legal defense?”
Nevarez replied: “Um, yes.”
PK Press Club Digital tried to question Nevarez of her answer shortly after the end of her press conference when she spoke with other journalists, but she ignored the investigation and moved away. A Mountain West media relations partner said: “Sir, we have to get to another interview.”
The Mountain West then provided his statement which claimed that Nevarez “thought” that “the initial question was to ask questions about the law firm representing SJSU.
“Commissioner Nevarez thought you were asking questions about our law firm, Willkie Farr & Gallagher, representing both Mountain West and San Jose. It was specified that you were asked questions about a potential conflict of interest with the trial linked to a conference policy and the investigation of the match,” said the press release.
The law firm who worked to keep the eligible trans SJSU player also cleaned the conspiracy athlete in order to harm his teammate
The press release also said that WFG had not defended Fleming’s eligibility in the legal dispute of November.
“To be clear, Willkie Farr & Gallagher defends Mountain West’s policy concerning confiscations, and not the eligibility of a student-athlete. The eligibility is determined by NCAA and University policy, not the conference office. The investigation was not focused on the alleged interest.
Four opponents of the conference allowed the SJSU matches in 2024, and the status of confiscated matches and the impact of the sowing of the conference were disputed in the request for a preliminary injunction. However, Fleming’s admissibility to continue the season and the game in the conference was disputed as well as a key point.
WFG deleted a press release from November 27 from its website announcing that the firm had won a legal victory for the West mountain against the complainants, led by Slusser, seeking to keep the trans tournament athlete. The page is always visible via online archives and notes the right of the athlete to play as the first issue in the dispute.
“Willkie won a large -scale victory for the college conference of athletics Mountain West Conference in a trial brought by members of the San Jose State University women’s volleyball team and other Mountain West teams who played against the SJSU. Player in question in all the remaining matches this season.”
The press release also directly referenced the eligibility policy to the genre of Mountain West.
“The court noted that the player in question has played for SJSU since 2022, and that Mountain West’s policy on transgender athletes has been in place since 2022.”
WFG lawyers who represented the Mountain West pleaded against the request for a preliminary injunction as a whole, and made no clear distinction not to contest the complainants of having Fleming deemed ineligible.
“Preliminary injunctions are an extraordinary remedy granted only in real emergencies. The complainants in motion should not be granted such an extraordinary remedy based on the sense of emergency made by their decision to keep their grievances until the day before the conference tournament of this year”, read the brief of Mountain West’s response to the complaint of Slusser.
Slusser and the other complainants argued in their complaint that “Fleming was continuously ineligible to play female volleyball in accordance with title IX because Fleming sex is a man and is therefore ineligible to play, and should not be authorized by the MWC to play, the MWC women’s volleyball tournament.”
The main lawyer who represented the Mountain West in November, Wesley R. Powell, insisted on the fact that the Mountain West is not subject to title IX, as shown by the transcriptions of the November audience obtained by PK Press Club Digital.
“Our position is that we are simply not subject to title IX,” Powell said at the state conference. “To be submitted to title IX, we had to be beneficiaries of the support of the federal government and the conference is not recipient of such support. And therefore from our point of view, all the details, the testimony of experts, you know, practically everything that has been put in the file is ultimately out of words for us.”
During oral arguments, Powell said: “It is only a title IX problem if the Mountain West receives federal funds, and this is not the case.”
PK Press Club Digital has donated the Mountain West and WFG for a response to the presentation of these facts with regard to the conference declaration. No response was provided. No WFG lawyer has been accused of having violated applicable professional driving rules.
Slusser previously allegedly allegedly allegedly against the West mountain, signed by 10 other current or old female college volleyball players, which Fleming and other teammates were faufed the day before a match of October 3 against the State of Colorado and met an opposing player.
The trial, and a separate complaint of title IX filed by the former SJSU coach, Melissa Batie-Smose, allegedly alleged that the teammates who sneaked with Fleming allegedly said that the players and coaches of an alleged plan of Fleming, in the conspiracy with the player of the state of Colorado, so that Slouser increased in Fleming during the match.
The trial and the complaint allegedly alleged that the players who have fallen for themselves told other players and coaches that they had seen Fleming putting a screening report from the SJSU, with an agreement to launch the game in favor of the State of Colorado.
Slusser has never been enriched in the face during this match. Fleming led the game in mistakes with 10, while San Jose State lost in straight sets.
The Mountain West conference investigated the allegations in November, but concluded that “sufficient evidence” could not be found.
The public archives obtained by PK Press Club Digital show that the main lawyer of the WFG in the investigation, Tim Heaphy, coordinated the SJSU and the legal advisor of the State University of California Dustin May to set up interviews with at least six witnesses. The SJSU head coach Todd Kress was one of the witnesses.
The California State University expurred the identity of the five other witnesses who corresponded to Heaphy and May during the investigation into the public archives provided in PK Press Club Digital.
Tim Heaphy, Brooke Slusser, Blaire Fleming (Getty Images; Gracieuse de Sjsu Athletics; Getty Images)
The coordinated e-mails of the interviews for the investigation, obtained by PK Press Club Digital, said on several occasions that the game had taken place on October 2. A letter announcing that the investigation had closed without finding sufficient evidence was sent just three days after May and the first emails from Heaphy to witnesses to set up interviews were sent. This letter wrongly dated the match on October 2.
In February, Heaphy contacted May offering a legal advisor to navigate a federal investigation into the title IX on the situation against the Trans athlete, as shown by the emails obtained by PK Press Club Digital. May responded on February 18, refusing Heaphy’s offer. Heaphy replied the next day, writing: “Please let me know if we can help any way on this problem or on others.”
The May’s office initially responded to the PK Press Club Digital comments after providing public files, requesting a list of questions and basic information before talking. PK Press Club Digital did not provide the information or the list of comments and requested a virtual or telephone interview.
The May’s office then replied by the declaration: “Any speculation that the company or the lawyer mentioned in your survey represented SJSU or the CSU is unfounded.” PK Press Club Digital had not asked this question or any other stipulation, only a request for interview, at that time.
PK Press Club Digital then followed the May’s office requesting an interview to answer other questions and made the request of his office to provide general information about what would be discussed.
The May’s office replied by saying: “It will not be available” and did not respond to the request for additional comments.
