Brady 4 game suspension upheld; Will go to court

[Kelly the Dog]

No direct evidence, yes. But the circumstantial evidence that McNally deflated balls in the past and that he did it for compensation from Brady, is very compelling. Any reasonable person could say there is at least a 51% chance of that likelihood.

If the judge is assuming the league's case is strictly about the championship game vs. the Colts, then shame on the league for not making their case clear enough.

GO BILLS!!!

Actually it was a big mistake by Vincent in retrospect in his letter to Brady about the four game suspension. In the report it was clear that the conclusions were about the entire ordeal. Vincent only mentioned the Championship Game in the one page letter. That is what the judge was referring to but the actual suspension and findings and a lot of the circumstantial evidence was before that game.

 

Not that The NFL couldn't have imposed the four games just for the Championship Game and Brady's uncooperative behavior and lies wouldn't warrant it. That wasn't an error or mistake.

[starrymessenger]

Despite the media hype and what the Brady trolls in the press have been saying I think the League wins this one (80/20 for the League). If that's what happens any appeal by Brady would also be unsuccessful and an obvious ploy to avoid the consequences of the decision. So I don't think an appellate court would allow him to play pending the appeal hearing.

JMO and of course I could be wrong.

[Mr. WEO]

Sorry Dave but that is one of the weakest arguments possible. So if Jastremski texted McNally and said "Tom Brady told me to have you deflate the footballs" you would say "there is no evidence of malfeasance in those earlier games?"

 

There is extremely compelling, virtually inarguable, circumstantial evidence.

 

Unless, of course, you want to say that Jastremski and McNally were just making that all up about "Tom" and the earlier games and the texts at halftime telling Jastremski to deflate, because it's all about weight loss or they did it without Brady even though they are constantly referencing Brady as knowing and complicit.

No. You Brady supporters dont even read what you respond to. I said the NFL and Pash made a mistake. He should have turned over his notes. He probably should have been a witness because it wouldn't have mattered. I never implied it was inadvertent and an oversight. Where the !@#$ does that come from?

 

I'm saying Pash didn't take part in the actual Wells investigation, he edited the report after it was already done, and unless you want to say that Wells found Brady innocent but Pash edited it to say he was guilty it didn't change anything. What Wells did is laid out in extreme detail at every turn. He may have been biased, he may have presented the case in a way someone else may not have but it doesn't change any of the facts in the case we know to be true.

 

 

When the press release named Pash as co-investigator, did anyone subsequently, during th einvestigation, come out and correct that "error"? I think most people assumed Pash was co-investigator after that, so why would they question otherwise?

 

Wells, by the way, described him as a "facilitator". Why and independent investigator with free reign would need the NFL's head counsel to facilitate interviews or anything is an obvious question.

[Kelly the Dog]

When the press release named Pash as co-investigator, did anyone subsequently, during th einvestigation, come out and correct that "error"? I think most people assumed Pash was co-investigator after that, so why would they question otherwise?

 

Wells, by the way, described him as a "facilitator". Why and independent investigator with free reign would need the NFL's head counsel to facilitate interviews or anything is an obvious question.

That is not the error they made. The error was not showing his notes and perhaps not having him as a witness. Someone from the league has to be in charge.

 

I'm done with this conversation though. You, like the Brady team, are just trying to play a gotcha game based on semantics and technicalities. There is zero accusation or insinuation or anything that Pash did anything wrong or changed the results or altered anything that mattered. The facts are the facts in this case. All that matters is the texts and phone calls, the video of McNally, the ball measurements, Brady's (non) cooperation, and the testimony of Jastremski and McNally and Anderson and a few others, Wells would have thrown a hissy fit if it wasn't what his investigation concluded. He's a pisspot like that.

[dave mcbride]

Sorry Dave but that is one of the weakest arguments possible. So if Jastremski texted McNally and said "Tom Brady told me to have you deflate the footballs" you would say "there is no evidence of malfeasance in those earlier games?"

There is extremely compelling, virtually inarguable, circumstantial evidence.

Unless, of course, you want to say that Jastremski and McNally were just making that all up about "Tom" and the earlier games and the texts at halftime telling Jastremski to deflate, because it's all about weight loss or they did it without Brady even though they are constantly referencing Brady as knowing and complicit.

No. You Brady supporters dont even read what you respond to. I said the NFL and Pash made a mistake. He should have turned over his notes. He probably should have been a witness because it wouldn't have mattered. I never implied it was inadvertent and an oversight. Where the !@#$ does that come from?

I'm saying Pash didn't take part in the actual Wells investigation, he edited the report after it was already done, and unless you want to say that Wells found Brady innocent but Pash edited it to say he was guilty it didn't change anything. What Wells did is laid out in extreme detail at every turn. He may have been biased, he may have presented the case in a way someone else may not have but it doesn't change any of the facts in the case we know to be true.

There is no evidence that the balls were under 12.5 psi in prior games. None. This is irrespective of the texts.

[NoSaint]

That is not the error they made. The error was not showing his notes and perhaps not having him as a witness. Someone from the league has to be in charge.

 

I'm done with this conversation though. You, like the Brady team, are just trying to play a gotcha game based on semantics and technicalities. There is zero accusation or insinuation or anything that Pash did anything wrong or changed the results or altered anything that mattered. The facts are the facts in this case. All that matters is the texts and phone calls, the video of McNally, the ball measurements, Brady's (non) cooperation, and the testimony of Jastremski and McNally and Anderson and a few others, Wells would have thrown a hissy fit if it wasn't what his investigation concluded. He's a pisspot like that.

How would they accuse him of alteration unless pash specifically altered Brady or someone loyal to Brady's interviews? By creating a wall around the evidence, the nflpa couldn't address that prospect extensively. Which is a real problem in the process, and something we've seen before. Edited August 29, 2015 by NoSaint

[Mr. WEO]

That is not the error they made. The error was not showing his notes and perhaps not having him as a witness. Someone from the league has to be in charge.

 

I'm done with this conversation though. You, like the Brady team, are just trying to play a gotcha game based on semantics and technicalities. There is zero accusation or insinuation or anything that Pash did anything wrong or changed the results or altered anything that mattered. The facts are the facts in this case. All that matters is the texts and phone calls, the video of McNally, the ball measurements, Brady's (non) cooperation, and the testimony of Jastremski and McNally and Anderson and a few others, Wells would have thrown a hissy fit if it wasn't what his investigation concluded. He's a pisspot like that.

 

I'm just asking you to answer the questions the jusdge is asking, basically. Your answers are unresponsive. We all understand that Brady is trying to get off on a technicality...no need to endlessly repeat that. It adds nothing to the conversation.

[Kelly the Dog]

How would they accuse him of alteration unless pash specifically altered Brady or someone loyal to Brady's interviews? By creating a wall around the evidence, the nflpa couldn't address that prospect extensively. Which is a real problem in the process, and something we've seen before.

We have seen Pash changing Wells' report to make it something different than it was intended?

[Mr. WEO]

We have seen Pash changing Wells' report to make it something different than it was intended?

 

Strange question since you know we haven't seen Wells's report to compare it to Pash's "wordsmithed" report. ANd the NFL refused to make Pashe available for questioning.

Edited August 29, 2015 by Mr. WEO

[Kelly the Dog]

I'm just asking you to answer the questions the jusdge is asking, basically. Your answers are unresponsive. We all understand that Brady is trying to get off on a technicality...no need to endlessly repeat that. It adds nothing to the conversation.

I have answered most of them. Some of them I cannot answer because who knows what went on in the private conversations of a bunch of lawyers for the NFL. Lawyers are notorious sleazeballs, and these are the top echelon of sleazeballs. I have said over and over the NFL and Goodell and Wells and Pash have made mistakes in all of this. But the mistakes are not important to the core issues here.

 

Sure you want to know what Pash edited. I would love to, too. They should have made those public. But unless Brady was innocent and he changed it to make him look guilty, which is impossible because of what we do know, then it's, as they say, "irrelevant."

Strange question since you know we haven't seen Wells's report to compare it to Pash's "wordsmithed" report. ANd the NFL refused to make Pashe available for questioning.

Not a strange question whatsoever as a response to the post I responded to, which is "we have seen this before."

 

As far as what you are talking about, I answered that just above. ^

[PromoTheRobot]

There is no evidence that the balls were under 12.5 psi in prior games. None. This is irrespective of the texts.

Lol, irrespective of the evidence, there's no evidence Just a bunch of deflated balls, a bunch of texts by Patriot ball boys about deflating balls, and obstruction of an investigation. Other than that they are pure as the driven snow.

Edited August 29, 2015 by PromoTheRobot

[NoSaint]

I have answered most of them. Some of them I cannot answer because who knows what went on in the private conversations of a bunch of lawyers for the NFL. Lawyers are notorious sleazeballs, and these are the top echelon of sleazeballs. I have said over and over the NFL and Goodell and Wells and Pash have made mistakes in all of this. But the mistakes are not important to the core issues here.

 

Sure you want to know what Pash edited. I would love to, too. They should have made those public. But unless Brady was innocent and he changed it to make him look guilty, which is impossible because of what we do know, then it's, as they say, "irrelevant."

Not a strange question whatsoever as a response to the post I responded to, which is "we have seen this before."

 

As far as what you are talking about, I answered that just above. ^

We have seen before that the nfl has withheld evidence and then upon release there were obvious issues.

 

So when they say "don't worry, we have this covered, you don't need to see it" that is a bit of a red flag. Whether or not the case here that there will be holes, it's certainly not the right process to "protect the shield"

Edited August 29, 2015 by NoSaint

[Kelly the Dog]

We have seen before that the nfl has withheld evidence and then upon release there were obvious issues.

So when they say "don't worry, we have this covered, you don't need to see it" that is a bit of a red flag. Whether or not the case here that there will be holes, it's certainly not the right process to "protect the shield"

Totally agree.

[NoSaint]

Totally agree.

So why do it? Arrogance? Show of power? Possible they left some stuff out that wouldn't largely change the results but would hurt the pr a little? I'll leave out the total fabrication option, as I don't think they would likely do that.

Edited August 29, 2015 by NoSaint

[Kelly the Dog]

So why do it? Arrogance? Show of power? Possible they left some stuff out that wouldn't largely change the results but would hurt the pr a little? I'll leave out the total fabrication option, as I don't think they would likely do that.

I really don't know.

 

In my business you have a screenplay that is ready to go, and often times a producer will just throw his two cents in and demand some changes to it just because they are egomaniacs. It is unnecessary, often makes it worse, and a lot of times it's just because they have a big title and salary and they want to put their stamp on it.

 

I really don't know. If I had to guess its just because Pash is a jerk and egomaniac and thought he would make something read better if he edited it himself. But I don't have a good answer for you. For some massive company that runs the best sports league in the world, they certainly make a lot of foolish decisions.

[Tuco]

There is no evidence that the balls were under 12.5 psi in prior games. None. This is irrespective of the texts.

 

 

That's true. But there doesn't need to be. If this were a criminal trial where proof beyond reasonable doubt was required then it would matter. But if it were a criminal trial a lot of other things would have happened, like forcing McNally and Jastremski to testify under oath.

 

But what happened instead, the league questioned everybody, then they decided to start fresh with Wells, etc. with the blessing of the Patriots*. They began their questioning of Brady and the Bobsy Twins with the Colts game in mind. All questions were answered more or less While Brady declined to turn over his phone records while his agent cites precedent and privacy clauses.

 

After the initial interview the league discovers texts that clearly show shenanigans was going on long before the Colts game. Of course they're not going to find balls from a month earlier that are deflated. But that doesn't matter. If they find evidence that Brady conspired with the Bobsy Twins to lower the inflation levels after the balls were officially inspected, that is a serious violation of the rules regardless of whether the balls went below 12.5 psi. During this time they also discovered that many of Brady's answers in his original interview were not plausible (lies).

 

Now, not being a court of law the league doesn't have power of subpoena, so they can only go back to the Bobsy Twins if the Patriots* let them - which they not only didn't let them, they terminated them so the league couldn't even leverage another meeting via "full cooperation" reasons. Once they were terminated the Patriots and league can't make those guys do anything. And let's face it, getting those guys under oath would have blown this thing wide open, but the league was denied. They also requested to interview Brady again but were denied.

 

Then on top of all the lies and other obfuscation, two and a half months after the investigation, and just 6 days before the appeal, Brady comes along and says here's some messages from a couple of my phones I didn't destroy. That other phone I had destroyed because I always destroy my phones (?). Now that 10 weeks have gone by we decided to ask AT&T if they could recover any messages and they said no. Here's a letter from them that says so. Oh by the way here's a list of the people the 10,000 messages went to feel free to look them up - oops, there's 3 messages missing from that report but they weren't important.

 

Now let's remember once again, this isn't a criminal trial. Not only does the league have the right to make their decision based on certain assumptions combined with evidence, the Patriots* and Brady forced them into having to do so. The league took everything they had available, combined it with the different avenues of obfuscation, and came to their conclusion. And since it's not a criminal case with power of discovery and subpoena, they are allowed to reach that decision while under no obligation to provide absolute proof in the form of under inflated footballs from prior games.

Edited August 29, 2015 by Tuco

[3rdand12]

 

 

That's true. But there doesn't need to be. If this were a criminal trial where proof beyond reasonable doubt was required then it would matter. But if it were a criminal trial a lot of other things would have happened, like forcing McNally and Jastremski to testify under oath.

 

But what happened instead, the league questioned everybody, then they decided to start fresh with Wells, etc. with the blessing of the Patriots*. They began their questioning of Brady and the Bobsy Twins with the Colts game in mind. All questions were answered more or less While Brady declined to turn over his phone records while his agent cites precedent and privacy clauses.

 

After the initial interview the league discovers texts that clearly show shenanigans was going on long before the Colts game. Of course they're not going to find balls from a month earlier that are deflated. But that doesn't matter. If they find evidence that Brady conspired with the Bobsy Twins to lower the inflation levels after the balls were officially inspected, that is a serious violation of the rules regardless of whether the balls went below 12.5 psi. During this time they also discovered that many of Brady's answers in his original interview were not plausible (lies).

 

Now, not being a court of law the league doesn't have power of subpoena, so they can only go back to the Bobsy Twins if the Patriots* let them - which they not only didn't let them, they terminated them so the league couldn't even leverage another meeting via "full cooperation" reasons. Once they were terminated the Patriots and league can't make those guys do anything. And let's face it, getting those guys under oath would have blown this thing wide open, but the league was denied. They also requested to interview Brady again but were denied.

 

Then on top of all the lies and other obfuscation, two and a half months after the investigation, and just 6 days before the appeal, Brady comes along and says here's some messages from a couple of my phones I didn't destroy. That other phone I had destroyed because I always destroy my phones (?). Now that 10 weeks have gone by we decided to ask AT&T if they could recover any messages and they said no. Here's a letter from them that says so. Oh by the way here's a list of the people the 10,000 messages went to feel free to look them up - oops, there's 3 messages missing from that report but they weren't important.

 

Now let's remember once again, this isn't a criminal trial. Not only does the league have the right to make their decision based on certain assumptions combined with evidence, the Patriots* and Brady forced them into having to do so. The league took everything they had available, combined it with the different avenues of obfuscation, and came to their conclusion. And since it's not a criminal case with power of discovery and subpoena, they are allowed to reach that decision while under no obligation to provide absolute proof in the form of under inflated footballs from prior games.

Damn, Man. Can i get your # next time i get arrested?

Good and refreshing post Tuco!

[JohnC]

Sorry Dave but that is one of the weakest arguments possible. So if Jastremski texted McNally and said "Tom Brady told me to have you deflate the footballs" you would say "there is no evidence of malfeasance in those earlier games?"

 

There is extremely compelling, virtually inarguable, circumstantial evidence.

 

Unless, of course, you want to say that Jastremski and McNally were just making that all up about "Tom" and the earlier games and the texts at halftime telling Jastremski to deflate, because it's all about weight loss or they did it without Brady even though they are constantly referencing Brady as knowing and complicit.

No. You Brady supporters dont even read what you respond to. I said the NFL and Pash made a mistake. He should have turned over his notes. He probably should have been a witness because it wouldn't have mattered. I never implied it was inadvertent and an oversight. Where the !@#$ does that come from?

 

I'm saying Pash didn't take part in the actual Wells investigation, he edited the report after it was already done, and unless you want to say that Wells found Brady innocent but Pash edited it to say he was guilty it didn't change anything. What Wells did is laid out in extreme detail at every turn. He may have been biased, he may have presented the case in a way someone else may not have but it doesn't change any of the facts in the case we know to be true.

You are the one missing the point. Not turning over the notes and not stating his involvement, significant or not, is a procedural violation of the court procedure. Why do you think that the judge is asking questions regarding this issue? The judge's primary responsibility directly relates to how this case was handled from a procedural standpoint, even more so than delving into the flimsiness of the evidence.

 

Again, rehashing my prior post, whether Pash was actually involved in the investigation is not the overriding issue here. What is known is that Pash was involved in the write-up/editing of the report. To what extent? He is not saying. Did he shape the report to favor his assumptions? Who knows? It's not known because he is not sharing his notes which he is obligated to. Even a zealous partisan on this issue acknowledges that he should have notified the opposition of his involvement in the report. That in itself is not a trivial issue. It is enough of an issue to have the league's judgment overturned.

 

No one can not deny that Pash is associated with the league office headed by Goodell. There is a basic legal concept that underpins the law that has been trampled i.e. fairness. That is the overarching theme that the judge is addressing in his court. Can an arbitrator who is involved in the investigation through his proxies be qualified to make a fair judgment? What it comes down to is that you believe that the much overturned Goodell on disciplinary issues should be trusted to arbitrate cases that he is involved in. I may be stupid but I'm not that stupid.

 

If Goodell would have recused himself in the arbitration hearing with Brady and had the case reviewed by a dispassionate and credible arbitrator this case would have been resolved with little ability to mount a challenge.

 

 

No. You Brady supporters dont even read what you respond to. I said the NFL and Pash made a mistake. He should have turned over his notes. He probably should have been a witness because it wouldn't have mattered. I never implied it was inadvertent and an oversight. Where the !@#$ does that come from?

 

So now you are admitting that Pash acted in an unethical manner by his deliberate acts of omission? And you think that it shoudln't have a bearing on how the judge rules?

Edited August 29, 2015 by JohnC

[TheWei44]

Tuco, great post!

[Kelly the Dog]

You are the one missing the point. Not turning over the notes and not stating his involvement, significant or not, is a procedural violation of the court procedure. Why do you think that the judge is asking questions regarding this issue? The judge's primary responsibility directly relates to how this case was handled from a procedural standpoint, even more so than delving into the flimsiness of the evidence.

 

Again, rehashing my prior post, whether Pash was actually involved in the investigation is not the overriding issue here. What is known is that Pash was involved in the write-up/editing of the report. To what extent? He is not saying. Did he shape the report to favor his assumptions? Who knows? It's not known because he is not sharing his notes which he is obligated to. Even a zealous partisan on this issue acknowledges that he should have notified the opposition of his involvement in the report. That in itself is not a trivial issue. It is enough of an issue to have the league's judgment overturned.

 

No one can not deny that Pash is associated with the league office headed by Goodell. There is a basic legal concept that underpins the law that has been trampled i.e. fairness. That is the overarching theme that the judge is addressing in his court. Can an arbitrator who is involved in the investigation through his proxies be qualified to make a fair judgment? What it comes down to is that you believe that the much overturned Goodell on disciplinary issues should be trusted to arbitrate cases that he is involved in. I may be stupid but I'm not that stupid.

 

If Goodell would have recused himself in the arbitration hearing with Brady and had the case reviewed by a dispassionate and credible arbitrator this case would have been resolved with little ability to mount a challenge.

 

 

So now you are admitting that Pash acted in an unethical manner by his deliberate acts of omission? And you think that it shoudln't have a bearing on how the judge rules?

It's not unethical to edit a report. They decided to not make him available. Maybe a mistake but not unethical. Brady's team didn't make jastremski and McNally available. That's way worse.