University of Arizona general counsel Laura Todd Johnson took care in federal court to paint her school as a victim, and not a benefactor, of a rogue basketball coach caught up in a bribery scandal.

The depiction is crucial, experts say, as the National Collegiate Athletic Association looks at what role the university played and whether its athletic program should be penalized.

Johnson, the university's general counsel since 2012, forwarded a message seeking comment to Chris Sigurdson, vice president for communications, who said he and Johnson could not discuss the pending investigation. Even though the criminal trial is over, Sigurdson said, the ongoing NCAA probe is just as important to the school.

The probe centers on assistant basketball coach Emanuel “Book” Richardson, who was sentenced June 6 to three months in prison and two years' probation for accepting $20,000 in bribes from a sports agent.

At Richardson's hearing in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, a letter from Johnson was presented as a victim's impact statement.

When Richardson accepted the bribe money to steer young athletes toward the sports agent, the letter says, he “not only violated his employment agreement with the university, he knowingly betrayed the trust that the institution placed in him to act with honesty, integrity, and with the best interests of the student-athletes at the forefront.”

It says Richardson's arrest before the start of the 2017-2018 basketball season was devastating news and “caused enormous pain and disruption” to the team and the entire campus.

The notoriety has caused “significant damage to the reputation” of the university and its basketball program, and several highly regarded recruited athletes decommitted from the school. “The university is also facing the prospect of potentially significant sanctions and penalties from the NCAA flowing from the unlawful actions involved in this case,” it continues.

Besides the school itself, head basketball coach Sean Miller could face NCAA penalties if the association decides to hold him responsible as head of the sports program.

Johnson cited the “legal and financial ramifications” of responding to trial and grand jury subpoenas and providing extensive records to the U.S. Attorney's Office. She said the university also hired outside legal counsel “at significant expense” to conduct internal reviews and investigations, “and to guide the institution through an investigation by the NCAA enforcement staff, which is just now getting underway in the aftermath of the criminal trial.”

The letter says the school believes no money was ever paid to any student-athlete. “As we have to date, we intend to fully cooperate with the NCAA, to be transparent, and to provide whatever assistance may be necessary for the association to fully ascertain the actions of Mr. Richardson and determine the extent to which NCAA rules and bylaws may have been violated,” Johnson wrote.

Public records show that the university has paid over $1.4 million to two Phoenix law firms: Steptoe & Johnson to conduct an independent review of the charges against Richardson and related issues; and Jackson Lewis to guide the school through the NCAA investigation.

Gregg Clifton, co-chair of Jackson Lewis' collegiate and professional sports practice group in the Phoenix office, could not speak about this case. But in a March story about the NCAA's investigation into the college admissions scandal, Clifton discussed how he would advise a school involved in those legal issues.

He said one of the first things a school should do is to examine any potential liability.

“The NCAA part of this will be crucial,” said Clifton about the admissions scandal. “Has any of the bribe money benefited school programs directly? Was there even a trickle down that went into a school program?” he asked. If so, the university and its athletic program could be penalized.

In sentencing Richardson, who had sought no jail time, U.S. District Judge Edgardo Ramos said he believed the university was victimized by Richardson's crime. Ramos cited several of the factors in Johnson's letter to support that belief.