## Deflategate

Never agree to 3 points above the vig.
Doctor X
Posts: 79476
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah

### Re: Deflategate

To take it seriously for a moment, the NFL has everything that was on the phone. They sort of, you know, conveniently lack to mention it. The NFLPA is reminding everyone of this in their scathing reply. I will not bother linking because we are in Stage II of what will soon be a multi-leveled Federal Case, and everyone is leaking everything. This includes the NFL offering to drop the suspension to one game provided Brady admit guilt, admit, specifically, that he directed the deflation which, we now know, no one knows actually happened, and apologize.

That was not going to happen.

Goodel cannot admit he ran a worthless investigation. He needed a confession to cover over all of the mistakes.

That being written and taking my FOUR-TIME SUPERBOWL CHAMPION EXTRA-ABSORBANT UNDIES off for a moment, let us pretend Brady is guilty.

Why would he have fought it? Why not just state he was so upset the refs over inflated the balls during the Jets game he told Frick and Frack to re-check the balls after the refs checked them. "I am so sorry!" It is clear Dark Hoodie thinks "Spygate" was a colossal waste of time. Even so, he came immediately clean. Why not Brady? Goodel could puff his chest out, again, the haters would hate, the fans would fan.

But then why did Pete throw. . . .

--J.D.
Doctor X
Posts: 79476
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah

### Re: Deflategate

Meanwhile, Brady responded on his Facebook--this has been quoted all over the place:
I am very disappointed by the NFL’s decision to uphold the 4 game suspension against me. I did nothing wrong, and no one in the Patriots organization did either.

Despite submitting to hours of testimony over the past 6 months, it is disappointing that the Commissioner upheld my suspension based upon a standard that it was ‘probable’ that I was ‘generally aware’ of misconduct. The fact is that neither I, nor any equipment person, did anything of which we have been accused. He dismissed my hours of testimony and it is disappointing that he found it unreliable.

I also disagree with yesterdays narrative surrounding my cellphone. I replaced my broken Samsung phone with a new iPhone 6 AFTER my attorneys made it clear to the NFL that my actual phone device would not be subjected to investigation under ANY circumstances. As a member of a union, I was under no obligation to set a new precedent going forward, nor was I made aware at any time during Mr. Wells investigation, that failing to subject my cell phone to investigation would result in ANY discipline.

Most importantly, I have never written, texted, emailed to anybody at anytime, anything related to football air pressure before this issue was raised at the AFC Championship game in January. To suggest that I destroyed a phone to avoid giving the NFL information it requested is completely wrong.

To try and reconcile the record and fully cooperate with the investigation after I was disciplined in May, we turned over detailed pages of cell phone records and all of the emails that Mr. Wells requested. We even contacted the phone company to see if there was any possible way we could retrieve any/all of the actual text messages from my old phone. In short, we exhausted every possibility to give the NFL everything we could and offered to go thru the identity for every text and phone call during the relevant time. Regardless, the NFL knows that Mr. Wells already had ALL relevant communications with Patriots personnel that either Mr. Wells saw or that I was questioned about in my appeal hearing. There is no ‘smoking gun’ and this controversy is manufactured to distract from the fact they have zero evidence of wrongdoing.

I authorized the NFLPA to make a settlement offer to the NFL so that we could avoid going to court and put this inconsequential issue behind us as we move forward into this season. The discipline was upheld without any counter offer. I respect the Commissioners authority, but he also has to respect the CBA and my rights as a private citizen. I will not allow my unfair discipline to become a precedent for other NFL players without a fight.

Lastly, I am overwhelmed and humbled by the support of family, friends and our fans who have supported me since the false accusations were made after the AFC Championship game. I look forward to the opportunity to resume playing with my teammates and winning more games for the New England Patriots.
Lawyers are going to get fat.

--J.D.
Paulie Cicero
Posts: 227
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 12:52 am

### Re: Deflategate

Telephones? I got no use for those.
Laura Bush
Posts: 2542
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:04 am
Location: Chapel Perilous

### Re: Deflategate

Doctor X
Posts: 79476
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah

### Re: Deflategate

Unfunny cowardly sockpuppets? I have no use, let alone respect, for those.

Meanwhile:
Robert Kraft's Surprise Address: In light of yesterday’s league ruling, I felt it was important to make a statement today, prior to the start of training camp. After this, I will not be talking about this matter until after the legal process plays itself out and I would advise everyone in the organization to do the same and just concentrate on preparation for the 2015 season.

The decision handed down by the league yesterday is unfathomable to me. It is routine for discipline in the NFL to be reduced upon appeal. In the vast majority of these cases there is tangible and hard evidence of the infraction for which the discipline is being imposed and still the initial penalty gets reduced. Six months removed from the AFC Championship game, the league still has no hard evidence of anybody doing anything to tamper with the psi level of footballs.

I continue to believe and unequivocally support Tom Brady. I first and foremost need to apologize to our fans because I truly believe that what I did in May, given the actual evidence of this situation and the league’s history on discipline matters, would make it much easier for the league to exonerate Tom Brady. Unfortunately, I was wrong.

The league’s handling of this entire process has been extremely frustrating and disconcerting. I will never understand why an initial erroneous report regarding the psi level of footballs was leaked by a source from the NFL a few days after the AFC Championship game was never corrected by those who had the correct information. For four months, that report cast aspersions and shaped public opinion.

Yesterday's decision by Commissioner [Roger] Goodell was released in a similar manner under an erroneous headline that read “Tom Brady Destroyed His Cell Phone.” This headline was designed to capture headlines across the country and obscure [the fact the NFL still has no hard] evidence regarding the tampering of air pressure in footballs. It intentionally implied nefarious behavior and minimized the acknowledgement that Tom provided the history of every number he texted during the relevant time frame. And we had already provided the league with every cellphone of every non-NFLPA employee that they requested, including head coach Bill Belichick.

Tom Brady is a person of great integrity and is a great ambassador of the game, both on and off the field.

Yet, for reasons that I cannot comprehend, there are those in the league office who are more determined to prove that they were right rather than admit any culpability of their own or take any responsibility for the initiation of a process and ensuing investigation that was flawed.

I have come to the conclusion that this was never about doing what was fair and just. Back in May, I had to make a difficult decision that I now regret. I tried to do what I thought was right. I chose not to take legal action. I wanted to return the focus to football. I have been negotiating agreements on a global basis my entire life. I know that there are times when you have to give up important points of principle to achieve a greater good.

I acted in good faith and was optimistic that by taking the actions I took, the league would have what they wanted. I was willing to accept the harshest penalty in the history of the NFL for an alleged ball violation because I believed it would help exonerate Tom.

I have often said, “If you want to get a deal done, sometimes you have to get the lawyers out of the room.” I had hopes that Tom Brady’s appeal to the league would provide Roger Goodell the necessary explanation to overturn his suspension. Now, the league has taken the matter to court, which is a tactic that only a lawyer would recommend.

Once again, I want to apologize to the fans of the New England Patriots and [to] Tom Brady. I was wrong to put my faith in the league.

Given the facts, evidence and laws of science that underscore this entire situation, it is completely incomprehensible to me that the league continues to take steps to disparage one of its all-time great players and a man for whom I have the utmost respect.

Personally, this is very sad and disappointing to me.

Now, I know the real reason you came here was to hear Coach [Bill] Belichick, so I’ll turn the podium over to him.

--J.D.
Laura Bush
Posts: 2542
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:04 am
Location: Chapel Perilous

### Re: Deflategate

Perhaps this would be an excellent time to discuss why Brady ultimately belongs in the conversation of who are the all-time best NFL quarterbacks.
Doctor X
Posts: 79476
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah

### Re: Deflategate

About that exploding cellphone. You know, the one NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell seems to think belonged to Machine Gun Kelly and was used in the kidnapping of the Lindbergh baby, as well as the Krupp diamond theft. The one that Ted Wells said he didn’t want or need to complete his investigation into DeflateGate. The one the NFL’s own investigator said wasn’t necessary to the case.

That one.

Wells never asked for Tom Brady’s cellphone and didn’t require it. “Keep the phone,” Wells told Brady and his agent. He insisted his investigation was thorough without it. “I don’t think it undermines in any way the conclusions of the report,” he said. Those were his exact words. So were these, after interrogating Brady for more than five hours: “Totally cooperative,” Wells said of Brady’s testimony.

Yet somehow Goodell found Brady guilty of lack of cooperation and willful destruction of evidence on appeal, all because he upgraded to an iPhone 6? There are two separate issues here. One is whether Brady and the Patriots knowingly softened game balls in the AFC championship game — and it seems clear from the league’s own recent rule changes that it doesn’t have enough evidence one way or the other on that, given its sloppy procedures and the fact that it treated ball inflation as not worth monitoring. The second, larger matter is that of the league’s basic due process.

Watching this case closely and curiously is John Dowd, the special counsel who conducted Major League Baseball’s investigation into Pete Rose and got him banned from the game. As a neutral observer, Dowd finds the abuse of process in DeflateGate to be the real scandal. “I still don’t know what this is about. . . . Like ‘Seinfeld,’ this is about nothing,” he said in an e-mail. He called Goodell’s ruling against Brady based on a sudden issue over Brady’s cellphone “an ambush” and added, “The entire NFL disciplinary process lacks integrity and fairness.” [John Down is a Steelers fan.--Ed.]

. . . .

On Feb. 28, the Wells team sent an e-mail to Brady and his agent, Don Yee, requesting his cellphone records. Not the phone itself, just the records. Yee responded that he wasn’t willing to turn over Brady’s private cell information, on precedent. While it was reasonable for Wells to collect information from work cellphones issued by the Patriots — Wells already had possession of five phones from Patriots employees and examined their communications with Brady — Brady’s private phone information was simply not necessary, Yee said. Wells wasn’t thrilled, but he accepted it.

“They knew and had no quarrel with the non-production of the phone,” Dowd points out.

Neither Wells nor Goodell ever notified Brady that not producing his phone would mean discipline for non-cooperation. On Wednesday, the NFL Players Association filed a 54-page lawsuit on Brady’s behalf making that point. The issue Brady and his team thought they were addressing in his Wells interview and appeal was the inflation of game balls. According to Dowd, this compromises the whole matter: Goodell moved the finish line.

There is another pattern here — a very unseemly pattern of unethical behavior by the league office under Goodell’s leadership. First, there is always a leak from the league that commands a big headline and gins up public indignation. Next comes a disciplinary hammer from Goodell that makes him look like a hero-protector. But when the excitement dies down and actual facts emerge, it all turns out to be a souped-up overreach.

. . . It’s only when you go back and examine the Wells report and study Goodell’s written decision more closely that you discover the phone was never demanded as evidence. You also discover Footnote No. 11.

Goodell’s own buried footnote says that during the appeal before him, Brady and his agents furnished comprehensive cellphone records, including records of 10,000 text messages, and offered to help find and reconstruct all relevant communications.

Goodell rejected the offer as “not practical.”

. . . .

Sally Jenkins: The Washington Post
Meanwhile, details are fast and furious. Very important is the identity of the official who lied about the level of deflation--see Grammy's posts WAY back. Even more important is the recently released e-mails from the Patriots to the NFL asking them, repeatedly, to correct the record. This, according to a competent sports attorney Michael McCann may be a "shot across the bow" to use his terms, to threaten litigation:
If Kraft sues NFL, key theme would be NFL damaged Patriots brand by leaking & not correcting false stories to media.

Patriots say released emails are only "to illustrate." I think Patriots are warning NFL there are many more emails.
@McCannSportsLaw is releasing the emails an attempt to force the NFL to drop the punishment? Or more scorched earth this means war attack?
McCann is actively tweeting even though his is on vacation.

For Kraft and the Pats to, themselves, take the NFL/Goodell to court is a "scorched Earth" or "nuculer option" in that it breaks the "rules." It may be "unfair" but the owners signed agreements not to basically sue one another--this from the history of Al "Just Win Baby!" Davis. However, the Pats would have a case given what now appears to be intentional smearing on the part of the NFL. "Win" or not, it is embarrassing. People get supoena'd.

Meanwhile, much is made about the Federal Judge. As a few put it, if the NFLPA could not get Dowdy in Minnesota [History of ruling in favor of unions and specifically against the NFL as well as castigating Goodell.--Ed.], this is a judge they would want. He has appropriately told both sides to "settle down" and "initiate negotiations." Pats-Fanboys and even Pats Haters have tried to make a big deal about that. However, it is par for the course in these cases. One Sports Lawyer notes:
My personal view is that the decision will be vacated whichever court hears the appeal. In the words of Title 9, the court may vacate the award “where there was evident partiality . . .in the arbitrator.” That would seem an easy pass to complete.

Alan Milstein: Sports Law Blog
McCann contributes to that site, incidentally.

In other words: start making a lot more popcorn.

Oh and Chris Mortenson--the idiot who reported and has never retracted the lie--is getting his ass handed to him because he had been ducking interviews on it. Good.

--J.D.
Pyrrho
Posts: 33822
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6

### Re: Deflategate

Pyrrho
Posts: 33822
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6

### Re: Deflategate

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... suspended/
Bernard Pollard and Tom Brady aren’t exactly simpatico. It was Pollard who ended Brady’s 2008 season with a Week One shot to the knee, and Pollard and Brady have clashed in other games as well.

But when it comes down to Brady vs. Roger Goodell, Pollard takes Brady’s side.

“I do not like Tom Brady as a competitor, somebody that’s playing against him because he is a competitive player. I respect the piss out of him because the guy knows how to win. The guy, you can say whatever you want about him, but he is a true champion,”
Doctor X
Posts: 79476
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah

### Re: Deflategate

Because the judge ruled nothing would be sealed, the NFLPA has filed a response with the complete, previously sealed by the NFL, transcript of the Tom Brady appeal hearing.

10 hours = 457 pages.

All of it is now available.

Note, it was the NFL which did not want this released.

People are in a tweetgasm.

As one Sports Dude put it: "it's coming out of the printer now."

:hyper:

--J.D.
Doctor X
Posts: 79476
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah

### Re: Deflategate

NFL Dude Cross-Examination: "Are you certain you disposed of that phone."

Tom Terrific: "I gave it to my assistant."

So far, Brady never says he "destroyed" the phone as the NFL tried to spin it on its release of its decision.

--J. "MOAR Popcorn!" D.
Grammatron
Posts: 37811
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

### Re: Deflategate

Doctor X wrote:NFL Dude Cross-Examination: "Are you certain you disposed of that phone."

Tom Terrific: "I gave it to my assistant."

So far, Brady never says he "destroyed" the phone as the NFL tried to spin it on its release of its decision.

--J. "MOAR Popcorn!" D.
But ultimately that doesn't even matter.

What matters to the case are the rules in the CBA about punishment and arbitration. On top of that, NFL doesn't even care about winning, they just have to drag it out passed game 4 and then they will be more than happy to settle.
Pyrrho
Posts: 33822
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6

### Re: Deflategate

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-CdEG8HKVCrk/U ... +2_116.png
Doctor X
Posts: 79476
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah

### Re: Deflategate

Grammatron wrote:What matters to the case are the rules in the CBA about punishment and arbitration.
Oh indeed, but lying about a response demonstrates a failure to arbitrate. Of course, that is a poppy seed on the mountain of problems with the process and evidence that this was a witch-hunt.

Though, as "Gentlemen Skilled at This Work" have described it, do not try to tell a Federal judge what he can and cannot consider in a case.
On top of that, NFL doesn't even care about winning, they just have to drag it out passed game 4 and then they will be more than happy to settle.
That will not happen. The judge is setting up the two hearings which--according to a federal attorney interviewed--the arbiter selected by the judge will want to know what the legal arguments are on various points. There will then be a "sense" of how well it should fly either way. What it is not--to my surprise--is a "Tom, you should accept two games and Roger, you should accept this leek shoved up your anus." That back-and-forth happens before then: as the judge directed both parties in the beginning.

We all know that neither party is going to "budge" in that respect.

What this lawyer--and all various lawyers who actually deal in these cases--suspect is that one party will hear something it does not want to hear. "Tom? You're probably fucked." "Roger? As with all of your previous cases, you're an idiot!" Which way? Depends in a sense though it is considered significant that there was failure to warn--as in other cases--the precedent from previous cases--the reliance upon a duty Brady does not actually owe to the league--in the CBA specifically--et cetera this all probably comes down to:

1. Judge Rules Strongly in Favor of Tom: in which case Goodell may still push it to a trial. In that case, Brady wins an injunction, Roger loses but runs off to the 31 other owners reminding them of the $200+ million check they each received and how Brady "got away with it thanks to these meddlesome lawyers and their federal judge!" 2. Judge Rules Strongly Against Tom: in this case, Tom may still push it, get the injunction--maybe yes, probably no--then appeals it formally. That may still result in him serving the suspension. Given the legal mess Goodell made of the whole process, that is considered less likely. The reason I do not include a "wishy-washy" is decisions are not "wishy-washy." The "sense" from lawyers is if the judge does not simply crush Brady with a "you signed the mother-fucking CBA! Get out!" then there was a problem with the process. Also, this judge will not want to serve as precedent for further abuses of the arbitration system. To give an example: the NFL has no legal--CBA even--expectation of a personal cell phone. Period. They could not compel Brett "And Then I Pull My Penis Out!" Farvererer to turn in his phone. The NFLPA could have attacked the decision to weakly fine him for not doing that, but Am I Retired Yet? wanted the case over given the details: married + sexual harassment + dick picks IF Brady complied then, as one lawyer put it, you could get this conversation: NFL: says you blew a 2.0 after they pulled you off Zamboni. Let us see your phone. Since Brady accepted turning it over that could become precedence to declare that further failure to turn over the phone is "failure to comply with a league investigation." The NFL minor fine of Who is This Aaron Rogers Punk is actually a major point in Brady and the NFLPA's favor: at least with I'll Always be a Packer, what was on his phone was material to a case involving sexual harassment via phone! With Brady, it was a fishing expedition. Further, Wells affirmed he did not want the phone. Goodell deciding to hang his suspension on the phone was a major cock-up but as you surmise, he does not care about "right and wrong." He will spin it--actually, his minions will--that Brady "destroyed evidences [Thanks.--Ed.]" and he "got away on a technicality. I do agree with you that Goodell will not accept anything less since he will admit failure. He has to make it appear that he was overruled incorrectly by the courts. That will be his "spin." He has fought to force Tom to admit guilt. If he gets that he can justify every cent spent and bury all of his incompetence. Tom will not do that. Further, since Goodell and the NFL have basically admitted they had and have no clue on balls and all of that, it is suspected that they have been paying attention to various independent scientists that have been telling them that, well, "Science, it works Bitches!" Goodell may "choose to believe" the hacks in the Wells report all he wants for suspension and spin purposes, but just as I claim I can fly, and I run towards the window and see the sidewalk OH FUCKING SHI [We will take over the rest of this. It will prove more concise. The point he attempted to render was since the NFL is pursuing a study of air pressure and weather during the season it will become clear that these various changes are, indeed, valid. If this case continues and it becomes clear that the New England Patriots footballs behaved as expected, the NFL may actually lose the public relations battle.--Ed.] shw9eyrge354g [Do not type with your cast.--Ed.] --3y Doctor X Posts: 79476 Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm Title: Collective Messiah Location: Your Mom ### Re: Deflategate More from McCann: After seeing the transcripts of Brady’s appeal hearing that were released Tuesday, McCann said he has altered his thinking and now can’t make sense of why Brady is facing a four-game suspension. “I don’t understand why he’s being suspended, at the end of the day,” McCann said. “And I say that because, let’s look at the testimony. He categorically denied any wrongdoing. So from that you have the fact that the standard is preponderance of evidence more likely than not, you have his denial. Then you have the absence of evidence contradicting him. Some people said, ‘Oh, he was a little evasive.’ Well, if you ask someone the same question 12 times they’re going to come up with slightly different answers and you might contend that they’re somehow being evasive because their answers aren’t the same each time. Well, that’s human nature, our answers are never the same each time. “I look at this testimony and I say for all the failing the NFL has, the bizarre process they use, at the end of the day where is the evidence Tom Brady participated in a ball-deflation scheme? I don’t see it. Then you’re left with, OK, was he cooperative? Well, Ted Wells found him sufficiently cooperative. You have Ted Wells saying he is. Why would that would even warrant a suspension if he isn’t as cooperative as he should have been? This doesn’t add up to me.” McCann noted that Judge Richard Berman’s job is to determine if the league overstepped its authority or mismanaged the situation, not if it penalized Brady too harshly. But after seeing the appeal transcript, McCann said Berman likely will have some concerns to address with the league when the sides get together for settlement talks. Initially my expectation was that he would tell Tom Brady in essence, ‘Look, this may not be fair, but the CBA gives Roger Goodell wide latitude. And even if I’m not sure about the allegations against you, it looks like the league has discretion.’ But after reading the testimony, I’m really leaning in the other direction. I’m think the judge is going to tell the NFL this was a kangaroo court. You have the cross-examiner also involved with the preparation of the so-called independent report that clearly wasn’t independent. You have categorical denials by the person who’s alleged to have done the wrongdoing. You have the lack of evidence contradicting those denials. I just don’t see, as deferential as the court will be to the NFL, where’s the actual evidence? What is the reasoning that led the NFL to suspending Tom Brady? And if I’m a judge, I’m going to have some hard questions for the NFL. McCann predicts Brady ultimately will end up with no more than a one-game suspension. “I think there’s a good chance it will get settled in a couple of weeks. I don’t think it’s going to go to a [judge’s] decision,” McCann said. “I think right now they’re probably negotiating between a fine and one game, and there’s probably an argument over that. Before I thought maybe Brady would maybe agree to a two-game suspension, but after reading this transcript I’m of the belief that Brady should hold out until he gets it down to a fine. It is What it Is WEEI Interview http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/word/more-d ... oticon.png --J.D. Rob Lister Posts: 23535 Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm Title: Incipient toppler Location: Swimming in Lake Ed ### Re: Deflategate if brady is innocent, he should hold out for whatever in the nfl constitutes an acquittal, or resign in protest. this is his legacy at stake. as far as the nfl is concerned, there should be no negotiation anyway. if, in their opinion, he cheated, then they should stick to their guns unless the courts decide otherwise, or better yet, fire goodell, which they should have down two years ago. and hire condie rice. which they should have done a decade ago when she first asked for the fucking job. but i know i'm naive. Doctor X Posts: 79476 Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm Title: Collective Messiah Location: Your Mom ### Re: Deflategate So passionate you were you lost your Shift key! I basically agree on all point. With the release of the transcript and personal e-mails, the NFL basically has no case in the sense of suggesting anything actually happened, Goodell and Vincent are caught in lies, let alone evidences--thanks--against Brady in particular. Granted, the court case is on the process and not "guilt or innocence," but "Law of the Shop" along with the CBA requires a fair process. It is clear the NFL had no desire for such. With the resignation of David Stern, Goodell became The Worse Commissioner of a Real Sport. Stern was a narcissistic tyrant. I may rethink this in that Stern was, as far as I know, competent. The transcript of the appeal--which the NFL refused all requests to make public until it became a point no longer mootable--shows Goodell did not actually read the full Wells Report. Worse, Goodell claimed as justification for upholding his/not his but Vincent's/not Vincent, definitely his suspensions Brady's refusal to discuss his conversations with Frick. The transcripts quote Brady discussing these conversations in detail. I would agree with your that he must go. Problem is I fear it is "more likely than not" that Hillary will be sunk by another Bill Bimbo than the other owners voting him out. He makes them too much money and they are too damn jealous. Rice certainly would be more competent. Hell, I think Budd "Is it Time for the Early Bird Special Yet?" Selig would have handled this better. --J.D. Doctor X Posts: 79476 Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm Title: Collective Messiah Location: Your Mom ### Re: Deflategate Transcripts paint Ted Wells, Roger Goodell in shady light FOXBORO — If Tom Brady has lied at any point during the Deflate-gate investigation, he has at least done a better job of it than his adversaries on the NFL side. Commissioner Roger Goodell and purported independent investigator Ted Wells have each trumpeted Brady’s lack of credibility as a reason for his placement in the crosshairs of an alleged deflation scheme. But new developments this week, namely the collection of unsealed transcripts from Brady’s appeal hearing, have further compromised the integrity of Goodell and Wells, among others. Yet, through it all, Brady has been painted as the villainous liar. Start with Goodell, who blatantly lied in the 20-page letter that explained his reason to uphold Brady’s four-game suspension. As Goodell portrayed Brady’s testimony in the letter, the commissioner said Brady was attempting to conceal the topic of his conversations with ball boy John Jastremski during a series of phone calls and text messages following the AFC Championship Game. Goodell wrote, “The unusual pattern of communication between Mr. Brady and Mr. Jastremski in the days following the AFC Championship Game cannot be readily explained as unrelated to conversations about the alleged tampering of game balls.” Goodell added, “Mr. Brady testified that he was unable to recall any specifics of those discussions and he suggested that their principal subject was preparation of game balls for the Super Bowl.” That’s a lie. First, Goodell contradicted himself in his own footnote by including Brady’s admission that most of the conversations surrounded the football preparation process for Super Bowl XLIX. But the transcript released this week makes Goodell’s assertion far worse, as Brady mentioned a handful of times his conversations with Jastremski did hit on the Deflategate allegations. Even though Brady’s testimony, which was under oath, submitted the topics of conversation, Goodell wrote, “I do not fully credit that testimony.” Then, take Wells and the credibility questions regarding his 243-page report, which was edited by NFL general counsel Jeff Pash. When asked about their relationship at the appeal hearing, Wells said the NFL was his client and cited attorney-client privilege to avoid the topic and protect the privacy of their conversations, which certainly comes across as a double standard in relation to Brady’s conversations. Similarly, Lorin Reisner, who worked for Wells’ investigative team, was also hired by the NFL to cross-examine Brady. Brady’s cellphone has continued to be a major issue.It’s been known Wells told Brady he wouldn’t be punished for failing to turn over his phone. But then Wells testified it damaged Brady’s credibility. So which is it? Goodell has cited Brady’s lack of credibility as a chief reason for his discipline. Troy Vincent, the NFL’s executive vice president of football operations, didn’t do the league any favors bytestifying he “never” heard of the Ideal Gas Law before launching the investigation. If Vincent had been aware of the scientific elements the night of the AFC Championship Game, the psi measurements might have been shrugged off. To be fair, they would not since this was a "sting" operation. Never assume integrity. Vincent and Wells also likely hurt Goodell’s case with their appeal testimony.Vincent testified the Competitive Integrity Policy is not delivered to or applicable to players, which seems to mean Brady can’t be suspended by Goodell’s referenced standard. And though Wells danced around the issue, he essentially admitted he had no idea that players weren’t governed by the Competitive Integrity Policy. So it can be argued Wells held Brady to a rule that is intended for owners and management. When I first heard of that some time ago during the first filing--in the NFLPA "bullet-points"--I thought this weak. Apparently, it is not since "notice" is a major part of a valid policy. As part of the Deflategate fallout, even the Colts and Ravens can’t get their stories straight on their conversations about the Patriots’ kicking balls in the playoffs, specifically which team initiated the conversation prior to the AFC Championship Game and who was involved in those conversations. To be fair, this investigation might have been spared of its Threat Level Midnight status if ball boy Jim McNally didn’t continuously change his story about why he disappeared into the bathroom with a sack of game balls. To be fair. And to rehash a major note that stuck out from the Wells Report, NFL vice president of football operations Dave Gardi lied to the Patriots on the morning after the AFC title game by telling them one of their balls was measured at 10.1 psi, and misleading the Pats and Grammy that the Colts’ balls universally met the standards. Point is, everyone’s credibility should be called into question with the Deflategate saga, as the leading characters all appear more disingenuous by the day. While tripping over themselves with the goal of assassinating Brady’s integrity, the NFL’s cast of puppeteers have unveiled plenty of warts of their own. Jeff Howe: Boston Daily Mail Without Tits on Page 3 :( http://i1175.photobucket.com/albums/r63 ... opcorn.gif --J.D. Doctor X Posts: 79476 Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm Title: Collective Messiah Location: Your Mom ### Re: Deflategate Roger Goodell's manipulation of Tom Brady's testimony leaves NFL on slippery slope No matter where you stand on the guilt or innocence of Tom Brady, et al, the actions of the league office grow more disconcerting and indefensible by the day, especially after Thursday's release of testimony and documents from Brady's appeal of his four-game suspension. There is a laundry list of concerns here, starting with the fact no one in the league office knew footballs could naturally deflate. This ignorance lit the fuse of a scandal that is still burning. The NFL was prone to wrongly conclude that any measurement under 12.5 pounds per square inch was an act of cheating. From there, pretty much every single action, conclusion or determination was designed to find a path to that original belief of guilt. But this is about focusing on one curiously inconsistent point because going over all of them would take an entire book. So let's look at Roger Goodell's conclusion that conversations between Brady and Patriots staffer John Jastremski after the news of the scandal broke are proof that Jastremski was running a cheating operation and Brady either knew about it, tried to cover it up or both. Goodell and his investigator, Ted Wells, were obsessed with the fact Brady and Jastremski had not texted or spoken on the phone for six months until the morning after the AFC championship game, when news hit the league was investigating the Patriots' footballs. Then the two started communicating, numerous times over the next few days, including a face-to-face meeting in the quarterbacks room in Gillette Stadium. To the NFL, this was proof of guilt. . . . . Once accused of playing with under-inflated footballs, of course Brady would want to find out what the heck was going on and talk to Jastremski. And of course Jastremski would want to profess his innocence – especially if he was really innocent – or theorize with Brady about how such a thing could occur. It would have been far more incriminating if Brady and Jastremski never spoke. Both Wells and Goodell, for instance, saw no issue in Patriots coach Bill Belichick, upon hearing the news, going to Brady and asking if he knew anything about the footballs. It's completely natural. So not with Brady? Furthermore, after the first conversation between Brady and Jastremski, all other communication came under false pretenses. By late Monday morning the NFL had wrongly told the Patriots that their footballs were deflated as low as 10.1 psi – which put the organization on its heels because it was such a significant reduction. Hearing such data from the league office would certainly cause Brady and Jastremski to revisit the situation. Let's say Jastremski said early Monday morning he didn't do it, doubted anyone did and couldn't even believe this occurred – something both Brady and Jastremski said occurred. Then the NFL put out the false 10.1 psi number. Of course Brady would call back and say, "Well, this is what the NFL found, something must have happened. What's the story?" Then later, ESPN, citing league sources, reported that 11 of the 12 Patriots footballs were two pounds or more below the league standard. It was also completely wrong but no one in New England knew that at the time so this looked terrible. Again, Brady would reasonably want to ask more questions. The NFL instead said the daily discussions were proof of guilt. So the league created fake duress for Brady via false evidence and then found him guilty for reacting to it in an understandable fashion. . . . . Here's one answer when asked about what was discussed during one conversation, why it was discussed and why he was even talking to Jastremski. "[Jastremski] was the person that prepared the footballs and like I said, the initial report was that none of the Colts' balls were deflated, but the Patriots', all the Patriots' balls were," Brady testified. "So I was trying to figure out what happened. [It] was certainly my concern [to attempt] to figure out, you know, what could be – possibly could have happened to those balls." Does this seem reasonable? Or proof of overwhelming guilt? Actually, don't bother answering because it gets far worse for the league office. Here is how Goodell saw it, and, in the process, characterized what Brady said he and Jastremski discussed. "The sharp contrast between the almost complete absence of communications through the AFC championship game undermines any suggestion during the three days following the AFC championship game that the communications addressed ONLY [emphasis added] preparation of footballs for the Super Bowl rather than the tampering allegations and their anticipated responses to inquiries about the tampering," Goodell wrote. Only? Wait, Brady and Jastremski ONLY discussed the preparation of the footballs for the Super Bowl? That certainly could undermine things. It would be incredibly suspicious, incriminating even, if Brady claimed that in the midst of this growing scandal, he and Jastremski spoke repeatedly but ONLY about preparing footballs for the Super Bowl. No one would believe that. Which is perhaps why Goodell wrote it as such. Like many things from the NFL in this scandal, it's completely incorrect (and actually contradicted within other portions and footnotes of Goodell's own ruling, not to mention the Wells Report). With the release of the transcript, though, the commissioner's claims have misrepresented the evidence. . . . . Is that a fair and accurate portrayal of what Brady testified? Is that even remotely reasonable? Or is it just an attempt to make Brady appear guilty and thus continue months of conduct that appear designed to justify the original suspicion. Perhaps more importantly, how does anyone in the NFL – owner, coach, player or fan – possibly trust the league office to investigate and rule on anything ever again? Dan Wetzel: Yahoo Sports Roger Goodell misled me on Tom Brady. I won’t trust him again. Last week, I relied on the word of Roger Goodell. I won’t make that mistake again. . . . . But among the most powerful weapons Goodell deployed was this: that Brady had suggested his frequent communications with the key Patriots equipment assistant in the days after the scandal broke concerned the preparation of Super Bowl balls and not DeflateGate, a hard-to-believe claim. “Mr. Brady testified that he was unable to recall any specifics of those discussions and he suggested that their principal subject was preparation of game balls for the Super Bowl,” Goodell wrote. Goodell further argued that the huge uptick in communication between Brady and the assistant “undermines any suggestion that the communications addressed only preparation of footballs for the Super Bowl rather than the tampering allegations and their anticipated responses to inquiries about the tampering.” Those words swayed my original piece, which was based on Goodell’s report. And those words were, to be frank, hogwash. . . . . This isn’t about whether or not anyone took air out of footballs, or whether or not a quarterback knew anything untoward was happening. This is about whether the commissioner of the NFL cares at all about accuracy, and whether he can be believed when he belches out his 20-page decisions. Last week, I made the mistake of assuming he could. I’ll try not to do that again. Dan Steinberg: Washington Post --J.D. Doctor X Posts: 79476 Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm Title: Collective Messiah Location: Your Mom ### Re: Deflategate Berman told NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady on Wednesdaythat while similar civil cases generally take about two years to resolve: "I think it's fair to say nobody here today wants to wait that long." MattPStout --J.D. Rob Lister Posts: 23535 Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm Title: Incipient toppler Location: Swimming in Lake Ed ### Re: Deflategate Will Goodell try to step in and set Geno Smith's jaw? http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13416 ... broken-jaw Doctor X Posts: 79476 Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm Title: Collective Messiah Location: Your Mom ### Re: Deflategate As I suggested, he will fine the Patriots$1 million and another draft pick. . . .

Meanwhile, the judge slapped the NFL around the head and shoulders on a number of major points. What does that mean?

Means MOAR POPCORNS!!!!

--J.D.
Pyrrho
Posts: 33822
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6

### Re: Deflategate

Did I read this morning that the NFL changed the conditions of a settlement by demanding that Brady accept the conclusions of the Wells report? Nice try.
Doctor X
Posts: 79476
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah

### Re: Deflategate

Exactly.

Every lawyer I have heard laughed and noted, "he would be confessing to perjury!" Leave aside that the Wells Report has been debunked and destroyed, and Goodell and the NFL have been moving the goal posts faster than a bunch of . . . of . . . goal post moving people things, Brady testified under oath that, in effect, the Well Report is wrong.

The NFL is desperate to get a confession. Anything less than that and this becomes confirmed as the colossal waste of time and money this witch-hunt is. The tone of the judge suggests that he is not at all amused with this extremist position.

This is also despite the fact that the judge accepts the balls were tampered with. However:
Berman: "Turns out Mr. Brady did better with higher inflated balls than underinflated balls. You might say he got no competitive advantage" Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 12, 2015
Some more gems from the Now Most Popular Court Reporter Stephen Brown:
Berman: "I don’t know what to make of that finding Tom Brady was 'at least generally aware of the activities of'
Mcnally, Jastremski."

“Somebody deflated the balls, but it didn’t help Mr. Brady. Does that matter?”

From legal perspective: “You have to show that conspirators intended to be in the conspiracy…Is there a meeting?”

“I’m not sure where the ‘gate’ (in #DeflateGate) comes from. The Wells Report and the award relates only to one game.”

“What is the evidence of a scheme or conspiracy that covers the Jan. 15 game? I’m having trouble finding it.”
The irony of all of this is the NFL rushed to court to confirm its ruling--a rare thing--so as to avoid Minnesota and Infamous Judge Dowdy. In fact, tomorrow Goodell has to appear at a contempt-of-court hearing before said judge. The NFL rushed to file in New York to get a more "business friendly" court. According to a few lawyers, Judge Berman is going much farther to examine the evidences--thanks--the NFL pretends to have than even Judge Dowdy would. More than one Talking Legal Head has warned these hearing tend to confine themselves to "proper procedure" per collective bargaining agreements and Law of the Shop. The NFL's entire case has been reduced to "Goodell can decide whatever he wants because CBA!" The questions of guilt, innocence, and all of that was predicted not to be a part of this. Judge Berman is embodying the maxim, "don't try to tell a judge what he can and cannot do."

Unless you are a higher judge.

However, one can also argue that Judge Berman considers the ruling by Goodell based on no evidences--thanks--means the investigation process and the subsequent appeal were all invalid. Interesting.

Finally, more than one Talking Head has noted that Judge Berman has asked questions everyone has wanted to ask the NFL which Goodell et al have basically ignored.

Apparently, next week, Judge Berman may call Goodell and Brady to testify. :hyper:

--J.D.
Pyrrho
Posts: 33822
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6

### Re: Deflategate

http://s24.postimg.org/bpr2w022t/Capture.jpg
Doctor X
Posts: 79476
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah

### Re: Deflategate

MOAR FROM [Stop it!--Ed.] Sports attorney/law professor/SI legal analyst Michael McCann:
Alan Milstein, who's litigated against NFL and tried cases before Judge Berman, told me: “Berman will absolutely vacate Brady's suspension.”

Responding to question:
Based mainly off today, though also from his experience with the judge. I wrote about it in my article: http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/08/12/deflat ... l-patriots
And here is the article:
Legal takeaways from Brady-Goodell Deflategate federal court hearing

1. Judge Berman seemed very skeptical of the NFL’s core allegation that Brady participated in an alleged ball deflation scheme.

The legal question in Brady’s case is not whether Brady “did it.” It’s whether the NFL lawfully applied Article 46 of the collective bargaining agreement in investigating and punishing Brady. Yet on Wednesday Judge Berman appeared unexpectedly interested in whether, in fact, Brady “did it.”

Most tellingly, Judge Berman pressed Nash, the NFL’s attorney, for reference to actual evidence that Brady participated in a ball deflation scheme. Judge Berman also signaled skepticism in the NFL’s factual case by highlighting that Brady played better with over-inflated footballs than with under-inflated ones. In response to this line of questioning, Nash conceded that no direct evidence of Brady’s involvement in a ball deflation scheme or conspiracy exists. He further granted that the NFL possesses no texts or other forms of evidence that directly prove Brady’s involvement.
. . . .
Judge Berman’s noticeable skepticism of the NFL’s alleged facts is clearly an encouraging sign for the Brady camp. Attorney Alan Milstein, who has litigated against the NFL and tried cases before Judge Berman, told SI.com Wednesday night: “After what we heard today, I think Judge Berman will absolutely vacate Brady's suspension.”

2. Jeffrey Kessler admitted that one version of Deflategate could have occurred.

It’s worth remembering that Kessler’s role is not to disprove the NFL’s allegation . . . [it is--Ed.] Kessler’s job is to disprove that Brady had any involvement with a scheme. Kessler—undoubtedly with his clients, the NFLPA and Brady, in mind—stressed that even if McNally and Jastremski undertook a ball deflation scheme, they would not have done so under Brady’s direction. Further, Kessler stressed, no evidence shows any involvement by Brady. Reading between the lines, Kessler seemed to allow for the possibility that McNally and Jastremski might have overzealously tried to implement Brady’s instruction that the footballs be closer to 12.5 than 13.5 PSI. If that scenario took place, Brady would not be at fault. But McNally and Jastremski would be. Should that happen expect Frick and Frack to get their own attorneys geared to sue for defamation/wrongful termination/et cetera.

3. Daniel Nash reminded Judge Berman that he should defer to Goodell.

It may seem odd to hear an attorney tell a judge, in so many words, that the judge must accept the attorney’s position, but NFL attorney Nash adopted such an approach today.
. . . .
Nash raised these arguments after likely sensing Judge Berman’s skepticism about the NFL’s facts. Judge Berman may have also given Nash reason to worry when he questioned—as many have—what the Wells Report meant by Brady being “generally aware” of a ball deflation scheme. From Nash’s perspective, however, these worries are irrelevant. Goodell, as Nash asserted, was granted almost unlimited authority by the NFLPA to exercise judgment in player conduct matters.

4. NFL might regret its preemptive lawsuit in New York.

Hey! I posted that first! [He spells "Doty" correctly.--Ed.] Both the NFLPA and NFL clearly engaged in “forum shopping” when they sought federal court intervention on Goodell upholding Brady’s four-game suspension.
. . . .
. . . the NFL’s first filing may have backfired. First, Judge Doty was not assigned the case. Instead it was assigned to U.S. District Judge Richard Kyle. Second, early indications suggest that Judge Berman is far from an ideal judge for the NFL. Last week Judge Berman ordered the release of Brady’s transcript in spite of the NFL’s request that it be kept confidential, and today he expressed significant doubt in the factual narrative offered by the league.

5. Jeffrey Kessler may have opened the door for a settlement—and the NFL might be wise to walk through it.

As I wrote in an SI.com article published on Tuesday, both Brady and the NFL have many reasons not to settle. Judge Berman, however, seems adamant that the two sides find common ground. The parties seem to understand the message. In response to Judge Berman’s implicit critique of Brady not sharing all electronic evidence with attorney Ted Wells, Kessler acknowledged that Brady could have acted differently. Keep in mind, Kessler is not known for making acknowledgments that raise questions about his clients. Kessler’s willingness to do so today was likely with at least two strategic goals in mind.

For one, Kessler’s concession makes him appear reasonable, which likely plays well with Judge Berman.
. . . .
Second, Kessler may be signaling to the NFL that if the league offers a settlement where Brady would receive a reduced punishment, Brady might be willing to admit that he could have been more cooperative. This admission would be far different from Brady accepting the conclusions of the Wells Report.
. . . .
Judge Berman’s focus on the absence of direct evidence implicating Brady likely came as both a surprise and disappointment to the NFL. The NFL believes that if Judge Berman focuses on process, the league should win the case. Whether that assertion is true is debatable—the NFLPA has offered a number of persuasive arguments that the NFL’s application of the CBA to Brady was flawed—but clearly the NFL is on stronger legal footing if Judge Berman focuses on process rather than facts. For that reason, Judge Berman asking multiple questions to Nash about the NFL’s evidence linking Brady to an alleged ball deflation scheme was not a favorable development for the league. While it’s possible that Judge Berman could rule for the NFL even if he doesn’t believe Brady partook in an alleged ball deflation scheme, he might reluctant to do so.

Sports Illustrated Deflategate Federal Hearing
http://reactiongifs.me/wp-content/uploa ... e-good.gif

--J.D.
Pyrrho
Posts: 33822
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6

### Re: Deflategate

http://media3.popsugar-assets.com/files ... opcorn.jpg
Evolver
Posts: 12905
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 7:59 pm
Location: The Idiocracy

### Re: Deflategate

Rob Lister wrote:Will Goodell try to step in and set Geno Smith's jaw?
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13416 ... broken-jaw
Goodell has added four more games to Brady' punishment, because Tom was "generally aware of Geno Smith".
Doctor X
Posts: 79476
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah

### Re: Deflategate

WHY HASN'T BRADY DENIED INVOLVEMENT IN GENO SMITH Evolver?!!!!11!!!

--J.D.
Grammatron
Posts: 37811
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

### Re: Deflategate

http://i.imgur.com/V8y0c.gif
Doctor X
Posts: 79476
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah

### Re: Deflategate

“The NFL’s seismic shifts are nothing short of breathtaking,” reads the introduction, which opens the 19-page document. “Having publicly touted the ‘independence’ of the Wells Report and Paul Weiss as the linchpin of the purported fairness of the discipline, the ‘independent’ Report has now been relegated to ‘thorough,’ the ‘independent’ law firm has been relegated to ‘experienced and highly respected professionals,’ and the whole facade of ‘independence’ has been relabeled ‘irrelevant.

“Further, try as it might, the NFL cannot wish away the testimony of Wells stating, e.g., ‘I want to be clear — I did not tell Mr. Brady at any time that he would be subject to punishment for not giving — not turning over the documents'; ‘the analysis of [the halftime] data is ultimately dependent on assumptions and information that is uncertain'; and that he merely found Brady to be ‘generally aware’ of others’ misconduct — not that Brady ‘directed’ it.”

Kessler goes on to argue four main points:

1. The award violates the law of shop, as testified to by Goodell, that the NFL is “required to give proper notification” of player discipline. This is the longest of the four arguments, but one of the main point it seems to hit on is the fact that Goodell was wildly off-base when it came to previously held standards of discipline as they relate to equipment violations.

“This willful disregard of the Player Policies is all the more astounding because they are right on point. According to the Award, ‘[h]ere we have a player’s uncoerced participation in a scheme to violate a competitive rule that goes to the integrity of the game,” writes Kessler. “The Player Policies, meanwhile, apply to ‘equipment violations’ that ‘affect the integrity of the competition and can give a team an unfair advantage.’ They specifically provide that ‘First offenses will result in fines,’ at the collectively bargained amount of $5,512 or$8,268. Goodell’s disregard for the Player Policies is a clear essence-of-the-agreement violation.

2. The award defies the undisputed essence of the CBA, which requires fair and consistent discipline. This section also hammers at the idea of the Wells Report as an independent document.

The NFL is right to abandon this false pretense of independence — the hearing revealed, among other things, that Paul, Weiss (i) acted as the NFL’s counsel in an attorney-client relationship with the duty to zealously defend its client, (ii) was hired to defend Brady’s discipline at the arbitration, and (iii) offered the NFL’s General Counsel the chance to comment on the draft Wells Report. Having now abandoned the pretense of independence, the NFL can no longer use it to try to justify the discipline as ‘fair and consistent,’ as required by the essence of the CBA.

3. The proceedings were fundamentally unfair. There are a handful of facets at play in this section, but it in the words of Kessler, it boils down to fairness for his client, noting the role NFL official Jeff Pash has had in the whole affair.

The NFL continues to claim that, despite Pash’s ‘co-lead investigator’ title, he had ‘no substantive role in the investigation,’ so that depriving Brady of Pash’s testimony was not unfair. But the NFL does not deny that Pash edited the Wells Report, or that Wells testified he did not know what edits Pash made.

4. Goodell was an evidential partial arbitrator. Kessler blasts Goodell for his alleged impartiality, and hints at the fact that the league may have been hoping to keep Brady’s appeal transcript a secret.

Although no more than objective partiality is required to disqualify Goodell, the Award in fact evidences his actual bias. It is more smear campaign than reasoned decision — a propaganda piece written for public consumption, at a time when the NFL believed the transcript would be sealed from public view, to validate a multi-million-dollar ‘independent’ investigation.

Kessler Rips Goodell
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/fac ... -punch.jpg

Our Man Michael McCann opines, first summarizing the two filings:
In a seething memorandum filed to U.S. District Judge Richard Berman Friday night, attorneys for Brady ridiculed Goodell as incompetent and dishonest. They also expanded earlier arguments that the NFL’s procedure for reviewing Brady’s alleged involvement in a purported ball deflation scheme in the 2015 AFC Championship Game between the New England Patriots and the Indianapolis Colts violated federal law.

In a later filing Friday night, the NFL responded by asserting that questions about evidence concerning Brady’s alleged involvement are completely irrelevant under the law. The league also insists that Goodell enjoyed ample facts to conclude that Brady—whom Goodell only a week ago called “a great young man”—had “personal involvement in a tampering scheme.”
to be honest, I did not bother quoting the NFL's shorter response since, frankly, it is pathetic. It does not rebut the questions asked by the judge. It basically claims Goodell can do what he did because of the CBA and "we really think that" Brady is guilty. To be fair, the NFL cites issues that are suspicious--"Deflator"--for example. Unfortunately for the NFL, such are irrelevant. For example: the NFL claims Brady was not cooperative which becomes evidences--thanks--that he is part of a conspiracy. This is despite the Well Report claiming Brady was cooperative, that Well stated he did not want his phone, et cetera. Moving on:
1. This was personal

While all of Brady’s legal filings to date have been critical of Goodell, the one filed on Friday appears uniquely aimed at Goodell. Its tone is especially harsh and its rhetoric is most unforgiving.
. . . .
To advance this dismissive characterization of Goodell, Brady (through NFLPA attorneys) takes direct aim at Goodell’s assertion that Brady “destroyed” his phone. Brady highlights that Goodell “never acknowledged that Brady had turned over all of his emails and all of his phone bills.” Brady, in other words, hopes that Judge Berman—as well as Goodell’s bosses, the 32 NFL owners, and thousands of NFL players and millions of fans—view Goodell as simply not believable.If Judge Berman concludes that Goodell lied in his arbitration award (the memorandum upholding Brady’s suspension), the judge would be more likely to vacate it. That point is critical. The "Anti"-Brady side--some of them Boston Sports Dudes, actually, none of them lawyers, have stressed that the judge "can only"--their terms--rule on the procedure. This is not true. To begin, since the NFL filed to uphold its decision, the facts underlying its decision certainly come into play. Further, if the NFLPA/Brady show that the facts are manifestly crap, the process becomes unfair.

2. No matter what happens from here, Brady’s filing on Friday was damaging to Goodell

Even if Judge Berman ultimately sides with the NFL, the harm inflicted upon Goodell’s reputation from Deflategate has been severe and perhaps irreversible. Perhaps. He still has a majority of owners who have each been paid 4 times the cost of litigation for just this year. Owners who are rather jealous. "It wasn't suppose to be this way." Salary cap was suppose to prevent Dallas and 49rs dynasties. Frankly, I think what damaged Goodell's reputation was Ray Rice. Goodell claims he never saw the video. Irrelevant: others have upheld he knew what happened in the elevator--Rice even confessed it. But if he wishes to claim "Brady MUSTA known"--assuming a conspiracy--how could he "NOT-A" known about the video or what happened in the elevator?

When Rice confessed it to him?

Was Goodell asleep in his meeting?

Perhaps his bungling of Deflategate will be "one more straw," so to write, to be added to his gross incompetence with Ray Rice. Back to The Man:

3. Judge Berman’s unexpected interest in the facts is a focal point in both sides’ briefs

. . . Judge Berman surprised most observers by demonstrating significant curiosity in the underlying evidence relating to Brady and slightly under-inflated footballs. The main reason for this surprise is that Judge Berman’s role is to review an arbitration award, not to conduct a trial. In such a review, judges are expected to accord high deference to the arbitrator’s findings of facts. Moreover, should he issue an order vacating or upholding Brady’s suspension, Judge Berman would base his decision primarily on how the NFL applied Article 46 of the collective bargaining agreement—not on whether Brady “did it.”
. . . .
In its filing Friday night, the NFL indirectly reminded Judge Berman that his interest in the facts could be misplaced. Judges love that. Most notably, the league asserted that Goodell’s factual conclusions about Brady “may not be disturbed” under federal law.
. . . .
Brady’s legal team clearly anticipated the NFL raising the issue of deference for Goodell’s fact-finding. In Brady’s brief, his attorneys tell Judge Berman that, “the point here is not that the Court needs to decide any disputes issues of fact.” Instead, Brady’s team explains, Judge Berman should conclude that, “the Award itself [Goodell upholding Brady’s suspension] evidences a clearly biased agenda—not an effort at fairness and consistency.” Still, Brady’s team used its brief to remind the judge of negative facts for the NFL. This was especially evident when Brady’s side bolded a quote from Wells in which Wells admitted that analysis of halftime PSI measurements was based on “uncertain” information.

4. Brady team hammers home argument that rationale for his punishment has changed

One of Brady’s core arguments centered on unlawful process is that the NFL’s rationale for punishing Brady has changed without notice or explanation. Basically, Goodell moves from the very wishy-washy "more probable than not" to "certitude."

5. Will witnesses testify in court next Wednesday?

In yet another surprising twist, ESPN’s Sal Paolantonio reported on Friday that the NFL and NFLPA might call witnesses to testify before Judge Berman next Wednesday. If this proves true, it would constitute a highly irregular development in a federal court review of an arbitration award. . . . Since neither Goodell nor Brady are required, these are not the witnesses. Both already met with Judge Berman privately. The big question is if Frick and Frack could testify. Here is the Important Point: IF Frick and Frack were part of a conspiracy, and IF Brady knew it . . . well, first Wells did interview them and did not include their testimony in the report. One assumes they did not say, "YES! WE DID IT! BRADY KNEW! JET FUEL CAN'T MELT STEEL!!!1!!" since that would be in the fucking report.

But under oath?

IF the naysayers are correct Brady becomes the Dumbest Dude in SportsDom in thinking they would lie for him under oath. I do not think that is the case, but . . . stay tuned! :hyper:

McCann is more of the opinion that Wells could be called to testify:

Wells, however, could invoke the attorney-client privilege if called to testify before Judge Berman, just as he did during Brady’s hearing before Goodell on June 23, 2015. To be sure, Wells invoking the attorney-client privilege before Judge Berman would further undermine the NFL’s earlier characterization that Wells conducted an “independent” investigation. NFL attorneys, however, now insist that because Article 46 does not obligate the NFL to provide an accused player with an independent investigation, Wells’ independence is irrelevant under the law. As I explained last week, Judge Berman might reject such an argument under a collateral estoppel rationale.

McCann is the Man Who Stilled the Waters!
"Collateral Estoppel Rationale!"

--J.D.
Pyrrho
Posts: 33822
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6

### Re: Deflategate

Rob Lister
Posts: 23535
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed

### Re: Deflategate

This is the best preseason game ever.
Paulie Cicero
Posts: 227
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 12:52 am

### Re: Deflategate

Where the fuck is Morrie? I gotta get the vig on this.
Tommy D
Posts: 114
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 12:03 am
Title: Real Funny Guy

### Re: Deflategate

Morrie? I thought he'd never fucking shut up!
Morrie
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:15 pm
Title: Hair Specialist
Location: "Probably with One of His Girls . . . Who Gives a Fuck?"

### Re: Deflategate

Who loves you more than me?!
Doctor X
Posts: 79476
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah

### Re: Deflategate

Federal judge Richard Berman grilled NFL lawyers with probing questions about the evidences--Thanks they used to suspend Patriots quarterback Tom Brady in a hearing today that seemed to go Brady's way.

Conducting his second public hearing in adjudicating the months-long Deflategate ordeal,Berman asked lawyers for the league why investigator Ted Wells did not specifically say that Brady was aware of the deflating of footballs at the AFC title game in his report that the league used as the basis for the four-game ban.

Wells concluded it was “more probable than not” that Brady was “at least generally aware” of the deflating of footballs. The NFL has maintained that the footballs were deflated before the Patriots’ 45-7 win over the Colts in the conference championship game.

The NFL argued to Berman that one could infer that Wells was referring to the AFC title game, but the judge wasn't convinced.

Berman said if settlement talks in the case continue to be fruitless, he wants Brady and NFL commissioner Roger Goodell in his court on Aug. 31. Berman indicated that his "current plan" is to try and have this case resolved before the start of the NFL season. Brady’s suspension would begin on Sept. 4 as of now.

Berman was perplexed as to why Goodell, who authorized the discipline and also served as the appeals officer,did not allow the NFLPA to call NFL attorney Jeffrey Pash as a witness during arbitration. Pash was a co-author of the Wells Report but is also one of the NFL's lead attorneys. According to "gentleman skilled in this work," this is significant.

NFL attorney Daniel Nash said it was in Goodell’s discretion not to allow Pash to testify and the NFLPA could have challenged that, but didn't.

Judge Berman countered that "there are sone[Sic--Ed.]basic procedures for fairness" that need to be followed, in referring to Goodell’s decision on Pash.
Berman also wanted clarification on how the four-game suspension was decided on. Would it have still been four games had Brady cooperated fully?

The NFL said Goodell didn't specify on how the penalties were assessed, but that's within his discretion.

The NFLPA again pressed its main points to Berman for vacating the ban: that Brady had no notice; that no standards were set for testing the psi of the footballs; that Goodell was biased; and that the arbitration was unfair.

The NFL argued again and again that Berman needs to defer to the rules of engagement set forth in the CBA, Which is desperation and may really backfire. If Judge Berman vacates, can one not argue that Goodell should never act in this fashion in the future? which empower Goodell to both issue the discipline and serve as the appeal officer.

Bob McGovern: Boston Sun
and:
"What's the problem having [Pash] testify?" asked Berman. "He edited the Wells Report. Nobody else edited the Wells Report. He was the co-lead on the investigation with Mr. Wells."

Nash responded that Goodell felt Pash "was not a relevant witness," which is why Pash was not questioned during Brady's June 26 appeal.

According to Nash, Goodell did allow the NFLPA to question Wells as to Pash's importance. Berman appeared to waggle his head upon hearing that explanation.

Nash also blamed a press release announcing Wells and Pash as co- investigators as having fermented unnecessary interest in Pash's role, to which Berman said, "Well, you all wrote [the press release]."

When Nash tried to move away from the question of Pash, Berman returned to the topic, again asking who else edited the Wells Report.

Nash explained that Goodell determined Pash's testimony was "cumulative" and there was no need for questioning. Author's confession: Tom E. Curran I'm not sure exactly what that means, but the notion of employing "cumulative" testimony by the NFL really rankled Berman, who said cases have been vacated based on allowing "cumulative" testimony.

"It's not sufficient just to say his testimony would have been cumulative," said Berman.

Tom E. Curran: CSNNNNnnnnnNNNnnnE
--J.D.
Pyrrho
Posts: 33822
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6

### Re: Deflategate

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/73 ... 8c9b40.jpg
Doctor X
Posts: 79476
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah

### Re: Deflategate

A couple of attorneys have recommended this latest write-up by Dan Wetzel on Yahoo Sports. I will quote the salient points:
Yet as the attorney [Daniel Nash, NFL--Ed.] made his presentation he kept getting interrupted by Judge Richard M. Berman, who repeatedly engaged in direct counterarguments against Nash, sometimes even warning that legal precedent suggested the NFL could lose its case.
. . . .

Berman could still rule for the NFL and could just be playing Devil's Advocate – this is a United States District Court, not a political debate – but it sure didn't feel that way here on Wednesday morning. One example among many?

"There has to be some basic process of fairness that needs to be followed," Berman argued to Nash after the NFL explained why it failed to allow Brady to question certain witnesses, notably general counsel Jeff Pash, who also co-wrote the disputed Ted Wells report about deflated footballs.

. . . .

Kessler and the NFLPA argued that the league never provided notice to Brady that "general knowledge" of an infraction could lead to a suspension, that it didn't allow a fair arbitration system, that Goodell knew he was compromised as an arbiter because he had previously praised the findings of Wells' report, that the commissioner improperly increased the findings against Brady from "generally aware" to a full participant in a "scheme" based on no authority and no additional information, that the science of Wells' report was junk, that the NFL didn't provide attorney notes to the NFLPA in violation of federal standards and … so on and so on.

Kessler, as is his way, was often flamboyant and laced his presentation with comic ridiculousness. He noted, for instance, that the footballs were, on average, just 1-2 percentage points underinflated and yet the NFL deemed it a grand conspiracy despite not being able to accurately measure the inflation levels. He likened it to getting pulled over for being 1 mile per hour above the speed limit and asking the police officer how he measured the speed.

"I counted, 'One Mississippi, two Mississippi, three Mississippi, and I can tell you were 1 mile over,'" Kessler said, role-playing a cop.
. . . .
Nash's basic counter was that under the collective bargaining agreement, Goodell has sweeping power and, essentially, even if the system set up is imperfect or objectionable, so what? Goodell, he said, is the arbiter and arbiters make rulings and the court is obligated to respect it no matter the fanfare surrounding the case.
. . . .
It may be a salient legal point and one that will win the case for the NFL. Berman, though, didn't appear moved by it. The judge repeatedly noted that just because something is collectively bargained doesn't mean it can violate federal law.

For instance, Berman didn't just nod when Kessler argued that it says nowhere in NFL policy that a player can be suspended – or punished at all – for being "generally aware" of the conduct of others.
. . . .
Why, Berman kept asking, didn't Wells include a reference to the AFC championship game or even the date of it, Jan. 18, 2015?

"To me it is a conspicuous absence from Mr. Wells' finding," Berman said, noting that game and that game alone is what is in question here, not text messages referring to past games. "Why wouldn't you – he's a smart lawyer – say on January 18, 2015?"

Nash argued that it wasn't needed because the impetus for Wells' report was the AFC title game. Berman said that gave him, "some pause" and called it a leap to just base everything on "probably done it before or some guy from the Colts saying they do it all the time."

As an appreciative Kessler noted later to more courtroom laughs, "Your Honor is spot-on."

Berman also focused on how the NFL came up with the four-game standard, drilling Nash over and over about where this number came from, how much of it was about non-cooperation and how much for the footballs. Kessler argued that the crime was similar to stick 'em on a receiver's hands or any other act like that, which under NFL policy is subject to a four-figure fine for the first offense, not a suspension.

Nash said Goodell decided to liken it to performance-enhancing drugs, which Berman couldn't fathom.

"How is it equal to steroid use?" the judge asked with a tone of disbelief. "How did he pick steroid use?"
. . . .
As for Brady not being allowed to question Pash about his role in Wells' report, Berman blasted Goodell's reasoning that it wasn't allowed because the testimony would be "cumulative."

"How would you know?" Berman asked if Pash didn't testify. When Nash downplayed Pash's contributions, Berman had none of it.

"Who else but Mr. Pash had the opportunity to edit the Wells report before it became public?" Berman asked. "Anybody?"
. . . .
"Under the law the arbitrator doesn't have the authority to determine evidence will be cumulative. They can not just conclude that. I would ask you, who else but Mr. Pash could have given testimony about his edits or how extensive they were? Who else could have possibly given the testimony of Mr. Pash? … What I am saying is it's not sufficient to just conclude his testimony would be cumulative."

There was more, of course. A lot more. On every one of Kessler's points, Berman seemed to take a sympathetic stance and in turn was adversarial to the NFL. What that means in the end isn't determined, but consider toward the end, after Berman went after Nash for the suggestion that you could infer Brady was cheating because he stated that his preferred inflation level was 12.5 pounds per square inch, the legal limit. How, Berman wondered, could wanting the legal limit be a sign of illegal behavior?

Kessler obviously agreed and since he was pressed for time tried to paraphrase Brady's testimony on the subject. Berman stopped him, said he was allowed extra minutes and then requested that Kessler read Brady's exact words into the record. Kessler eagerly complied, reading in open court and for the court reporter a long session of Brady's testimony that can only be considered pro-NFLPA.

If you can't read into that, well …

Dan Wetzel: Yahoo Sports
http://reactiongifs.me/wp-content/uploa ... rn-gif.gif

--J.D.
Pyrrho
Posts: 33822
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6

### Re: Deflategate

https://www.awesomestories.com/images/u ... 619626.jpg