The actual, irrefutable evidence in Deflategate

1960Pats said:

It's astounding how some people want to blame B&B for not talking enough but then want to hang them by twisting around the words that they do say.

If by some chance the Pats go 12-4 again, get a bye in the playoffs and then make it near or to the SB, it will be fantastic. If they win it will be the greatest win of them all, even better than last year. Well, maybe not that good.

And just think of what it will feel like if that happens? I can't wait.

Click to expand...

It would definitely be better than this past SB. There would be no sporting event sweeter than the Pats winning SB 50 after all this garbage.

letekro said:

The report can be torn to shreds and the suspension will almost certainly be reduced if not overturned, but the failure to allow Wells to interview McNally with the texts or Brady with Brady's texts led to the severe team punishments, which bother me more than Brady's suspension. If the Patriots had nothing to hide, it was a boneheaded move. Personally, I think the Patriots had something to hide--the only question is whether that something was that they hand the balls to the officials under 12.5 (minor, minor violation, if a violation at all) or whether they deflate the balls after the officials have approved them (also a minor violation, but one that has more of a "cheating" vibe).

Click to expand...

This is wrong. People who had nothing to hide get put in legal jeopardy routinely because they operated from the premise "I did nothing wrong, go right ahead and take a look at my personal communication/interactions". IMHO authorities should not be able to use your lack of "cooperation" as proof of guilt (as Goodell did). When they can they make the right to remain silent worthless.

There are reasons that every competent lawyer says "shut up! say nothing, write nothing, hand over nothing". Take it to the bank that one of the reasons is they know from experience "I'll just cooperate, I have nothing to hide" can factually end you up in legal jeopardy.

Kdo5 said:

It would definitely be better than this past SB. There would be no sporting event sweeter than the Pats winning SB 50 after all this garbage.

Click to expand...

I think what separates this past SB from any other is the way the game ended. It's hard to top a 2nd and goal pick from the 1 with 20 seconds left. I've been watching football since the late 50's and I can't think of a bigger, better play ever by any team.

However, I think if we asked Tommy LomBrady he might agree with you, even though Brady was quoted as saying that there wouldn't be a game he'd want more than that last one. Even he couldn't have dreamed of the lengths that people would go to discredit him and the Pats though.

PugBrady said:

Is there any other hard evidence in this case?

Click to expand...

The hard evidence:

McNally took balls out of the locker room in an unusual manner.

McNally called himself "the deflator"

The team refused to let Wells interview McNally after he read that text.

.......... and that's about it.

What I find amusing is that Wells' own report proves conclusively that the balls hit the field at 12.5. The lower psi ratings are almost entirely explained by atmospheric factors and those that aren't are explained by flawed or demonstrably false assumptions made in his scientific study.

So, the balls were at 12.5 initially (per Anderson's testimony) and they hit the field at 12.5 (per the evidence supplied), so the one thing we can say with absolute certainty - per Wells' own report - is that no air was taken out in the bathroom! Fondling, cuddling, defiling, kissing... they're all still possibilities, but not deflation.

I feel like our arguments are going over everyone's heads because they make too much sense. Haters take statistics and rationalize them to fit their agenda.

I've seen some people talk about our fumble rates being so low as proof that we cheat when they don't even consider the fact that BJGE's running style rarely put the ball in harms way or that Brady hits guys in stride better than the average qb, thus allowing receivers time to secure the ball.

I'm annoyed to death that this whole situation extends beyond the Colt game. I don't care about the month of May etc.

TheBostonStraggler said:

This is wrong. People who had nothing to hide get put in legal jeopardy routinely because they operated from the premise "I did nothing wrong, go right ahead and take a look at my personal communication/interactions". IMHO authorities should not be able to use your lack of "cooperation" as proof of guilt (as Goodell did). When they can they make the right to remain silent worthless.

There are reasons that every competent lawyer says "shut up! say nothing, write nothing, hand over nothing". Take it to the bank that one of the reasons is they know from experience "I'll just cooperate, I have nothing to hide" can factually end you up in legal jeopardy.

Click to expand...

I am a lawyer and, while the principle you espouse is a good one, but doesn't really apply in this context. In the criminal context, there is generally ZERO upside to turning over potential evidence to authorities, while at the same time there is immense downside risk. So, you don't do it unless compelled to do so. In Brady's case, the downside was pretty minimal (certainly couldn't be worse than a 4 game suspension and destruction of his reputation based on innuendo) while the upside was obvious.

Something overlooked was the refs filled the Pats balls to 16 PSI against the Jets. Could this be an attempt to influence the game? 16 PSI is way off.

doesntmatter1 said:

I feel like our arguments are going over everyone's heads because they make too much sense. Haters take statistics and rationalize them to fit their agenda.

I've seen some people talk about our fumble rates being so low as proof that we cheat when they don't even consider the fact that BJGE's running style rarely put the ball in harms way or that Brady hits guys in stride better than the average qb, thus allowing receivers time to secure the ball.

I'm annoyed to death that this whole situation extends beyond the Colt game. I don't care about the month of May etc.

Click to expand...

The argument goes over people's heads because they want to believe the Pats are guilty. Simple as that.

letekro said:

I am a lawyer and, while the principle you espouse is a good one, but doesn't really apply in this context. In the criminal context, there is generally ZERO upside to turning over potential evidence to authorities, while at the same time there is immense downside risk. So, you don't do it unless compelled to do so. In Brady's case, the downside was pretty minimal (certainly couldn't be worse than a 4 game suspension and destruction of his reputation based on innuendo) while the upside was obvious.

Click to expand...

I am not a lawyer, but I wouldn't hand over anything to the NFL office that I didn't want read by everyone in the world. Goodell's office operates with leaks constantly. How fair was it to our team that the league leaked information about the ball inflation issue immediately following our win over the Colts? Given the past tar & feathering of the Pats by the league during "spygate," they had to know that any hint of impropriety would be viewed as "evidence" of the "Pats cheating again."

I'm sure Brady's phone is filled with texts to all sorts of people talking about what a horse's ass Goodell is, dating back 5+ years. If I were Brady I wouldn't want to turn something like that over to a guy like Goodell. Brady's mistake was underestimating how committed the NFL was to ginning up charges against him and the Pats. Kraft made the same error.

Oswlek said:

Fondling, cuddling, defiling, kissing... they're all still possibilities, but not deflation.

Click to expand...

Ah, but I will sleep better at night knowing those alternatives weren't more probable than not

letekro said:

I am a lawyer and, while the principle you espouse is a good one, but doesn't really apply in this context. In the criminal context, there is generally ZERO upside to turning over potential evidence to authorities, while at the same time there is immense downside risk. So, you don't do it unless compelled to do so. In Brady's case, the downside was pretty minimal (certainly couldn't be worse than a 4 game suspension and destruction of his reputation based on innuendo) while the upside was obvious.

Click to expand...

Wow. I would never hire you. You really don't see the downside to providing information to Roger de Torquemada?

Everything that is being used against the Patriots and Brady came from voluntarily handing over information before being compelled to do so: video of McNally, text messages, etc. What would they have otherwise?

http://drewfustin.com/deflategate/

A great article about the logical fallacies in the Wells Report.

letekro said:

I am a lawyer and, while the principle you espouse is a good one, but doesn't really apply in this context. In the criminal context, there is generally ZERO upside to turning over potential evidence to authorities, while at the same time there is immense downside risk. So, you don't do it unless compelled to do so. In Brady's case, the downside was pretty minimal (certainly couldn't be worse than a 4 game suspension and destruction of his reputation based on innuendo) while the upside was obvious.

Click to expand...

Well said. I bolded the ones I will disagree with you on because of the assumptive nature of the claims. How would Brady or the Patriots know anything? Can't we just as easily assume that the Patriots counsel said to the Patriots "don't hand anything over. It is becoming clear there is an agenda to assign guilt by the league and investigator". If you don;t believe that I point you to Anderson's memory being used for scientific purpose only to dismiss the rest of his memory to wrap up the scientific purpose. Sound like someone you could trust to hand over personal communications to because it's almost all upside?
I point you to the name "deflator". Tom Brady likes his footballs at the low end of inflation -- an established and legal fact -- and the football handler would be in charge of legally deflating to the low end (he would be a "deflator"). Yet not a mention of this absolutely reasonable explanation. Sound like someone you could trust to hand over personal communications to because it's almost all upside?

I wish police, prosecutors, judges, NFL commissioners, "independent" investigators could be relied upon to care less about PR/success and adhere to a rigid moral code of fairness. Since we both know that isn't the case I lump Goodell and Wells in the same category as Police (cooperate at your own peril). So we will agree to disagree.

JJC said:

Wow. I would never hire you. You really don't see the downside to providing information to Roger de Torquemada?

Everything that is being used against the Patriots and Brady came from voluntarily handing over information before being compelled to do so: video of McNally, text messages, etc. What would they have otherwise?

Click to expand...

.

Pffft. There is nothing voluntary about turning over relevant information to the league. Obstructing the investigation is clearly conduct detrimental to the league for which punishment can be levied. If Bradys relevant texts were no worse than the equipment guys', he probably should have turned them over. My guess is that they are worse and that is why they were not turned over.

letekro said:

Pffft. There is nothing voluntary about turning over relevant information to the league.

Click to expand...

If that were the case, Brady would have been compelled to do so. He was not.

letekro said:

Obstructing the investigation is clearly conduct detrimental to the league for which punishment can be levied.

Click to expand...

That is the NFL office's assertion. Brady, the NFLPA, and their attorneys will rebut that assertion and we will find out if it holds water. At present, I agree that this appears to be true. An arbiter or judge will rule on this.

letekro said:

If Bradys relevant texts were no worse than the equipment guys', he probably should have turned them over. My guess is that they are worse and that is why they were not turned over.

Click to expand...

Some points on this assertion:

1. The substance of the available texts supports the fact that Brady wanted the balls within the legal bounds.
2. The NFL did not need to have Brady's phone to get access to messaging between Brady and either of them. The NFL got access to the cell phones of Jastremski and McNally, the two parties whom are alleged to have conspired to deflate the balls. Any text communication between those parties and Tom Brady would be resident on those devices.
3. In the absence of evidence, Wells asking for Brady's texts was nothing more than a fishing expedition lacking probable cause. I do not believe that Brady or the NFLPA yielded his 4th amendment rights, but not being familiar with the CBA, that may be possible in a narrow sense.
4. You correctly characterize this as "my guess". Nothing more than grasping at straws, as was the Wells staff. There was nothing there to turn over. All that would have resulted was more fodder for innuendo and character assassination. If Brady is your client, how does that help him?
5. Wells asserts that he and his staff promised Brady that they would only use relevant data that was found and would respect his privacy. Where in this whole process has the NFL and its agents shown such decorum? They have leaked like a sieve - much of which has been sensational and less than truthful. They have been bad actors from the start. Trusting them is irrational.

I am not a lawyer. I am married to one and have many friends who are attorneys. One rule I have learned is that you never volunteer more information than is absolutely required when dealing with attorneys. They have a job to do and even the slightest hand hold can be enough to allow them to climb all over you, even if there is nothing there. Why expose oneself unless compelled to do so?

DaBruinz said:

As Bruschi pointed out, Bruschi didn't know who McNally was until he saw a picture and said "Oh, BIRD". So, the idea that Brady lied about that doesn't hold up.

Could you provide a link to said press conference??

Click to expand...

To this point, there's a guy I play basketball with regularly, and have for 18 years. For the first, oh, 10 years of that time I knew him by one name (let's say Bob). Everyone called him this one name, and that's how I knew him. It wasn't until a decade into playing with him that I learned that the name everyone called him wasn't his actual name, and he handed me a business card with his real name on it (let's say Alan Smith).

So if an investigator had come up to me in year 10 and asked if I knew Alan Smith, I would have said, no. Then if he showed me a picture of him, I'd have said, oh wait, I know him, his name is Bob.

So I've had this exact experience.

doesntmatter1 said:

I feel like our arguments are going over everyone's heads because they make too much sense. Haters take statistics and rationalize them to fit their agenda.

I've seen some people talk about our fumble rates being so low as proof that we cheat when they don't even consider the fact that BJGE's running style rarely put the ball in harms way or that Brady hits guys in stride better than the average qb, thus allowing receivers time to secure the ball.

I'm annoyed to death that this whole situation extends beyond the Colt game. I don't care about the month of May etc.

Click to expand...

They also don't take into account the quick passing game with a quick release which eliminates a ton of QB fumbles that happen during longer developing plays.

AndyJohnson said:

They are proceeding with appeals in order to do that.

Click to expand...

You don't need an appeal to hold a press conference denying every allegation.

Its that simple.

Bruins29 said:

Its a select few ADD guys and Triumph just trolling. I actually think Triumph is Felger.

Click to expand...

Don't think.

Youll hurt yourself.