Humphrey, I went to Auburn and am a big Cam Newton supporter. The facts, unfortunately, are that the NCAA did NOT find that Cam was innocent. First, the NCAA stated that Cecil was guilty of shopping Cam. On Cam, they did not say there was no evidence that Cam committed any NCAA violation. Rather, the NCAA stated that while they was evidence against Cam, they were unsure that they had enough evidence to find that Cam was guilty. The NCAA clearly stated that they were closing the investigation, not that they were closing the case. They could have stated, if they had no evidence against Cam, that he was innocent and permanently closed the case. Rather, the NCAA said if they became aware of "additional evidence," they would re-open the investigation. I wanted to make sure you recognized the difference between finding someone innocent and not having enough evidence to find someone guilty.