And POOF! There Goes the NFL Complaint About The Cellphone Up in Smoke!

BradyFTW! · Jul 28, 2015

manxman2601 said:
I'm not an aficionado of the law but this seems troublesome:

http://www.atlredline.com/no-destroying-tom-bradys-cell-phone-was-not-okay-1720689663

My guess would be that they'll argue that what Brady did or did not text is irrelevant, since the point of the suit is that Goodell never had the authority to demand the contents of Brady's personal phone in the first place?

grux · Jul 28, 2015

skinnydog said:
I'm in the Brady camp on all of this, but destroying the phone was dumb, dumb, dumb. Anyone with even the most cursory understanding of legal proceedings or PR would have recognized you don't destroy the phone.

Wells didn't even ask for Brady's phone, just his records. Also, there was no chance Brady was handing over his phone to the NFL.

letekro · Jul 28, 2015

BradyFTW! said:
What they really wanted was one of two things. Either:

A) they get Brady's phone. Great, now they can go on a McNally-esque fishing expedition and see if he's ever said anything to anyone that could even possibly be interpreted as being aware of rulebreaking.

or

B) they don't get Brady's phone. Then, even if Brady cooperates fully right up to the point of giving over his phone, they can say that he didn't cooperate. Even if he gives them selected texts, they'll still just say "he obviously didn't give us all of them, since none of them implicated him." Therefore since they've already determined he's guilty, he must not be cooperating.

Wouldve been better to give a few printouts of benign texts discussing the balls (if they existed) then to give nothing and dispose of the phone. Sorry gang, the disposal of the phone means Bradys lawyers viewed the ball-related texts as problematic at best.

VectorPrime · Jul 28, 2015

NashuaPats said:
Regarding why Brady should not hand over the phone, it's worth watching this video.

Someone posted it in another thread, but it's worth reposting. If you have the time, you should watch it. You never know if you could end up in trouble.

I agree. But why destroy it?

Koma · Jul 28, 2015

fnordcircle said:
Oh man, that means you might have to call like, 20 or 30 people. How impractical.

Yeah, but I hate cold-calling people. And what if I they aren't there and I have to leave a message? Then I have to wait for them to call me back or remember to follow up with them. And I can't just ignore calls from strange numbers because is might be them...

I can see Goodell's point. That sounds like a nightmare.

manxman2601 · Jul 28, 2015

grux said:
Wells didn't even ask for Brady's phone, just his records. Also, there was no chance Brady was handing over his phone to the NFL.

These two Stephanie Stradley tweets seem to sum things up pretty well:

Evidence spoliation mostly applies when the state or opponent is entitled to that information. Union guy's cell? Nah

I think if you are going to rely on extent of cooperation as a part of punishment, you better document accurately and completely what was asked for, why you were entitled to it, and perhaps that it couldn't not be obtained by other less intrusive means.

They stated categorically that they didn't want his phone so they can't then complain about it's 'destruction'.

VectorPrime · Jul 28, 2015

But why destroy it at all!

flasox27 · Jul 28, 2015

VectorPrime said:
But why destroy it at all!

It looks bad but it is irrelevant.

NashuaPats · Jul 28, 2015

VectorPrime said:
I agree. But why destroy it?

What difference does it make if he was never going to give it to Wells?

Do you really think that back in March he thought his lawful decision not to hand over his phone when
Wells already had the other side of the text messages to the ball boys would be the basis behind suspending him four games? It's a red herring by the NFL because they have nothing else. Don't fall for it.

JMC00 · Jul 28, 2015

letekro said:
Wouldve been better to give a few printouts of benign texts discussing the balls (if they existed) then to give nothing and dispose of the phone. Sorry gang, the disposal of the phone means Bradys lawyers viewed the ball-related texts as problematic at best.

If McNally and Jestremski didn't have any direct text messages about it on their phones, why the hell would Brady. So what the f**k was he supposed to print out?

He was advised not to hand over his phone by the nflpa because the nfl doesn't have subpoena power. Brady gives up his cell and he sets precedent for the nfl. Same reason why Gostowski refused to give up his personal cell phone.

manxman2601 · Jul 28, 2015

VectorPrime said:
But why destroy it at all!

1. We only have the NFL's word on that. I want to wait for any comments from Brady before rushing to judgement.

2. It could have been a rush of adrenalin thing or he could have been advised to do it by his lawyers.

3. What is actually meant by "destroyed". If it simply means wiped data, then that's prudent. everybody should do that when replacing a phone.

BradyFTW! · Jul 28, 2015

JMC00 said:
If McNally and Jestremski didn't have any direct text messages about it on their phones, why the hell would Brady. So what the f**k was he supposed to print out?

He was advised not to hand over his phone by the nflpa because the nfl doesn't have subpoena power. Brady gives up his cell and he sets precedent for the nfl. Same reason why Gostowski refused to give up his personal cell phone.

That's also why he probably should have kept his phone. So that IF it's subpoenad in the court case, he can provide it. A lot depends on when he wiped/destroyed the phone, to me. Wiping it right around when Wells is requesting its contents doesn't look good.

I'm not saying that this means Brady's guilty--in fact, if their argument is that Goodell had no authority to demand access to the phone's contents in the first place, this shouldn't matter in court--but I will say that it looks bad. It probably lost him the PR war, to whatever extent he cared about that (and I do think he cared, this whole thing has been about legacy after all).

Clonamery · Jul 28, 2015

VectorPrime said:
But why destroy it at all!

A fit of rage? Doesn't matter, they have all the texts from the phone. Get over it.

VectorPrime · Jul 28, 2015

Clonamery said:
A fit of rage? Doesn't matter, they have all the texts from the phone. Get over it.

They have the metadata, not the texts.

And you can't permanently destroy a phone in a fit of rage. Throw it against a brick wall and all the data is still all recoverable with the right software. So if it turns out that they backed up all the data then phew, thats an explanation. But until we know, it looks bad.

JMC00 · Jul 28, 2015

BradyFTW! said:
That's also why he probably should have kept his phone. So that IF it's subpoenad in the court case, he can provide it.

I'm not saying that this means Brady's guilty, but I will say that it looks bad. It probably lost him the PR war, to whatever extent he cared about that (and I do think he cared, this whole thing has been about legacy after all).

Keep buying the nfl's ******** spin. The phone is a non issue when it comes to court, it was never going to be subpoenaed.

letekro · Jul 28, 2015

Clonamery said:
A fit of rage? Doesn't matter, they have all the texts from the phone. Get over it.

No, thats incorrect.The NFL could only recover a portion of the texts from the employee phones. Thats one of the main reasons they asked brady for the relevant texts from his.

patsfan13 · Jul 28, 2015

shmessy said:
By the way, if Brady really had saved a spreadsheet of the date, time, length and addresses of the texts and offered it to the NFL, then that means he did NOT attempt to erase the evidence - - he saved the info for the league and was willing to tell them with whom he communicated and that he had no problem with them getting that info as long as the people on the other end of the texts gave their permission.

He merely was more forthcoming than Wells (who hid behind "client privilege") or Mortenson (who is hiding behind the "not revealing source" right of the press).

About Well's he was supposedly an independent investigator and not acting as a NFL lawyer, so how does lawyer client privilidge come into play?

Deus Irae · Jul 28, 2015

letekro said:
Wouldve been better to give a few printouts of benign texts discussing the balls (if they existed) then to give nothing and dispose of the phone. Sorry gang, the disposal of the phone means Bradys lawyers viewed the ball-related texts as problematic at best.

That is not necessarily the case.

h0c2000 · Jul 28, 2015

VectorPrime said:
But why destroy it at all!

I remember 11 of 12 balls were 2 lbs or more below 12.5. I'll wait until all the facts are out.

Deus Irae · Jul 28, 2015

Clonamery said:
A fit of rage? Doesn't matter, they have all the texts from the phone. Get over it.

Liked to counter the dislike

And POOF! There Goes the NFL Complaint About The Cellphone Up in Smoke!

Goodell sucks

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Pro Bowl Player

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

Pro Bowl Player

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

Pro Bowl Player

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

Goodell sucks

PatsFans.com Supporter

Pro Bowl Player

Pro Bowl Player

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Hall of Fame Poster

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

Similar threads