| Advertisement |
|
|
When Manti's girlfriend supposedly passed away in September, he wasn't shy when talking to WSBT about his relationship with her.
WSBT's Colleen Ferreira was searching through our archives Wednesday night. From listening in on many past news conferences, it's clear he spoke about her like he knew her. There was never any indication on his part that this relationship was strictly an online and on the phone relationship.
Manti played against Michigan State the weekend after his girlfriend and his grandmother both passed away. The next week, Notre Dame fans packed the stadium at the Michigan game wearing leis in honor of him and his struggle.
Every time Manti talked about his girlfriend, he spoke like they were in a real relationship. And Notre Dame says that's what Manti thought as well, since 2009.
Throughout the rest of the season, Manti continuously thanked fans for their support to him and his girlfriend's family.
Again, the university confirms, Manti and his girlfriend never met face to face...they had an online relationship. Now it's just waiting to see what Manti reveals about his time with her.
Unanswered questions
On Wednesday Swarbrick told reporters that Te'o was contacted by an alleged perpetrator of the hoax on Dec. 6, while in Florida for the ESPN College Football Awards show, and that a female caller whom Te'o recognized as that of the person he believed to be Kekua told him that she was "still alive."
However, in a Dec. 8 interview with a group of reporters before the Heisman Trophy ceremony in New York City -- two days after Swarbrick said Te'o received the phone call -- Te'o was asked a question about his community service work. He said, in part, the following quote:
"I don't like cancer at all. I lost both my grandparents and my girlfriend to cancer."
Is this a grieving Te'o struggling with how to process the brand-new revelation that his feelings for his girlfriend were very real, but she was not?
Or perhaps perpetuating the hoax, as Deadspin.com's article suggests?
Te'o's comment does not prove complicity in the hoax, but it does raise more questions, yet to be answered.