A person close to the investigation, who requested anonymity because he is not authorized to speak publicly, said a USC representative was part of an attempt by the NCAA and Pac-10 to contact Lake in the first week his allegations were public. But Watkins said he only heard from the association and conference.
Neither has USC sought to interview Johnson, who alleges that Floyd delivered an envelope full of $100 bills to the man who helped steer Mayo to the basketball team, said Murphy, Johnson's lawyer.
Johnson's account of the alleged 2007 payment became public earlier this month, but his other accusations against Mayo and an associate, Rodney Guillory, surfaced a year ago. He said Guillory received $200,000 to $250,000 in cash and gifts to lure Mayo to a Northern California sports agency, and that some of the money was funneled to the player before and during his USC tenure. (Guillory has also been questioned by federal authorities about his ties to a non-profit charity.)
USC knew before it recruited Mayo that Guillory was accused of inappropriate contact with former Trojan Jeff Trepagnier and another player in 2000. The school says the NCAA and Pac-10 investigated Mayo before the player signed scholarship papers with USC and found nothing to disqualify him. Mayo, who recently completed an outstanding rookie season with the NBA's Memphis Grizzlies, has denied doing anything improper.
NCAA officials, citing confidentiality rules, would not discuss anything about its investigation of USC. The association is a voluntary organization, a tax-exempt nonprofit that lacks the authority of a governmental investigative agency, such as the power to compel testimony through subpoenas. However, schools must cooperate in NCAA investigations as a condition of the membership, and there has been no indication that USC has not done so.
Despite its commanding public profile, its own tax-exempt status, and its receipt of millions in government funding, USC is not subject to the sort of disclosure laws that can force public colleges to release information. The same is true for the NCAA, although it does make its investigative findings public in a final report.
Former and current NCAA officials say it is always smarter for colleges to seize the initiative on corruption allegations, if only because the association often rewards such behavior with lighter penalties, as it did with Oklahoma.
