So what has Brady been hiding?

PatsGuy · Jul 28, 2015

The arguments that Letekro raises are those that every media creation outside of this form n Boston are debating. There are 2 fronts to this battle: one will b fought in whatever Federal court hears this case. The other front is the Court of Public Perception. The NFL have implied that that Brady, and by default the Pats cheated. In this Court of Public Perception, destroying the cell was not smart

nowayback · Jul 28, 2015

I think its about time the men with the white jackets came and collected godell. Really psi? phone records, private phone?

Cover up worse then the crime,,,well yea,,, there was no crime !!!

TommyD4207 · Jul 28, 2015

PatsGuy said:
The arguments that Letekro raises are those that every media creation outside of this form n Boston are debating. There are 2 fronts to this battle: one will b fought in whatever Federal court hears this case. The other front is the Court of Public Perception. The NFL have implied that that Brady, and by default the Pats cheated. In this Court of Public Perception, destroying the cell was not smart

In this "Court of Public Perception", Tom Brady has been a cheater his entire career, and certainly since 2007.

Nothing that could have happened today, nothing, would have changed that. Going forward, nothing that comes from the courts will change that, including full exoneration.

Nothing's changing public perception. I don't get why people are still thinking that's either a) important or b) a possibility.

letekro · Jul 28, 2015

TommyD4207 said:
That's the NFL's problem, not Tom Brady's.

Jastremski and McNally had team-owned (and NFL-owned because of this) cellphones, and the NFL had a right to them, because they were property of the Patriots and the NFL.

Brady's cellphone belonged to Brady. Not the Patriots. Not the NFL. He was under no obligation to show anybody anything on his own cellphone.

The NFL had the texts from Jastremski and McNally. They also have any texts they might have shared with Tom Brady. They don't need Brady's phone for that.

No employer has any right to their employees' personal property for any reason.

If the NFL did a ****ty job of investigating, then that's the fault of the NFL. It's not Brady's responsibility to do their job for them, and moreover, it's not his responsibility to violate his own rights to do their job for them.

Ted Wells isn't a judge. This isn't a criminal case. This isn't Law and ****ing Order.

The NFL wanted the responsive texts from Bradys phone not the phone itself. This is a critical distinction that you ignore so that you can make some kind of rambling point.

Oh, and this is very much Tom Brady's problem. His case on the merits will never be heard by a court of law and he disposed of the one thing that could potentially have exculpated him in the court of public opinion. Yes, the Wells report was flawed. Yes, it was a witch hunt, yes if he can get in front of Judge Doty he may have some success arguing procedural points. But on the merits, Brady has had his hearing and, unlike Andy Dusfresne, did not come out clean on the other side.

ausbacker · Jul 28, 2015

TommyD4207 said:
That's the NFL's problem, not Tom Brady's.

Jastremski and McNally had team-owned (and NFL-owned because of this) cellphones, and the NFL had a right to them, because they were property of the Patriots and the NFL.

Brady's cellphone belonged to Brady. Not the Patriots. Not the NFL. He was under no obligation to show anybody anything on his own cellphone.

The NFL had the texts from Jastremski and McNally. They also have any texts they might have shared with Tom Brady. They don't need Brady's phone for that.

No employer has any right to their employees' personal property for any reason.

If the NFL did a ****ty job of investigating, then that's the fault of the NFL. It's not Brady's responsibility to do their job for them, and moreover, it's not his responsibility to violate his own rights to do their job for them.

Ted Wells isn't a judge. This isn't a criminal case. This isn't Law and ****ing Order.

You've nailed it with the bolded term @TommyD4207. The world is as presented on television...

nowayback · Jul 28, 2015

Btw what is the difference between wire tapping and giving up your phone? What would everyone say if godell said that Brady destroyed the "bug" in his house?

Palm Beach Pats Fan · Jul 28, 2015

letekro said:
The NFL wanted the responsive texts from Bradys phone not the phone itself.

And they had absolutely no right to get what they wanted. This is a critical distinction that you ignore as you ramble on.

Deus Irae · Jul 28, 2015

letekro said:
The NFL wanted the responsive texts from Bradys phone not the phone itself.

The phone was requested. Care to try again?

rochrist · Jul 28, 2015

TommyD4207 said:
In this "Court of Public Perception", Tom Brady has been a cheater his entire career, and certainly since 2007.

Nothing that could have happened today, nothing, would have changed that. Going forward, nothing that comes from the courts will change that, including full exoneration.

Nothing's changing public perception. I don't get why people are still thinking that's either a) important or b) a possibility.

That's certainly revisionist history. There was never the slightest hint of anything until 2007. His entire career? Nonsense.

rochrist · Jul 28, 2015

Deus Irae said:
The phone was requested. Care to try again?

Is that true? I've seen numerous reports that supposedly Wells was willing to let Yee vet the phone and just hand over hardcopy of anything relevant. Although why they'd do that escapes me, I have to say.

Deus Irae · Jul 28, 2015

rochrist said:
Is that true? I've seen numerous reports that supposedly Wells was willing to let Yee vet the phone and just hand over hardcopy of anything relevant. Although why they'd do that escapes me, I have to say.

I ask you to give me your phone so we can review the data. You say no. I say I'll take ......

I still asked for your phone.

Here's Wells:

"Mr. Brady, the report sets forth, he came to the interview, he answered every question, he did not refuse to answer any questions in terms of the back and forth between Mr. Brady and my team -- he was totally cooperative," Wells said. "At the same time, he refused to permit us to review electronic data from his telephone or other instruments. Most of the key evidence in this case as in most cases comes from people’s cell phones and he refused to let us review the phone.

http://www.csnne.com/new-england-patriots/Wells-says-he-told-Brady-you-keep-the-phone

So, when you hear the NFL side trying to pretend that they didn't ask for the phone, you know they are lying, regardless of their semantics.

#12 · Jul 28, 2015

Palm Beach Pats Fan said:
And they had absolutely no right to get what they wanted. This is a critical distinction that you ignore as you ramble on.

This. No legal right to even subpoena the phone when there is NO EVIDENCE OF WRONGDOING.

TommyD4207 · Jul 28, 2015

rochrist said:
That's certainly revisionist history. There was never the slightest hint of anything until 2007. His entire career? Nonsense.

Ask a fan outside of New England. People have extrapolated "spygate" to determine that Brady's cheated his entire career.

Hell, ask Marshall Faulk. Not even just some random person. He'll tell you.

AzPatsFan · Jul 28, 2015

rochrist said:
Nobody said he had to give them the phone. But destroying the phone was beyond stupid and the absolute nail in the coffin convicting him outside of NE.

The NFL didn't even know the phone was no longer being used. Wells himself said he didn't want the phone merely records of whom he spoke to including Jastremski and McNally. They got what they wanted. Period.

After the case was closed and the punishment meted out, we discover that Brady has a new phone. So what ? NFL front Office subordinates revealed it in the most malicious and damaging fashion, can only be irrelevant and an attempt to defame. Worse than the Mort erroneous revelation, that was never corrected.

AzPatsFan · Jul 28, 2015

TommyD4207 said:
Ask a fan outside of New England. People have extrapolated "spygate" to determine that Brady's cheated his entire career.

Hell, ask Marshall Faulk. Not even just some random person. He'll tell you.

haters will hate. So what?

TommyD4207 · Jul 28, 2015

AzPatsFan said:
haters will hate. So what?

So why worry about the "Court of Public Perception" when, as you say, the haters already hate?

In other words, nothing could come from today that will change any minds, and nothing will, even if Brady is fully exonerated.

So why worry about it?

Fencer · Jul 29, 2015

Deus Irae said:
Mother of God, why is this still being discussed?

If Brady doesn't have to turn over the phone, then Brady can do whatever the hell he wants with his property.

Brady himself reported on phone contents to the NFL as if it mattered. Further, there was a contradiction in what he reported to the NFL, which Goodell gleefully seized on.

Frankly, the evidence is fairly persuasive that he's hiding something. That said:

It's Brady's right to hide things in general.
It's Brady's right to withhold his phone in particular.
Public figures suffer greatly from the disclosure of private information that in no way shows genuine wrongdoing on their part, so of course they like to maintain their privacy.

Fencer · Jul 29, 2015

letekro said:
Yee is obviously referring to whats described in footnote 12 of the Goodell decision. That has nothing to do with providing texts and was a failed attempt by Team Brady to be cute with the cooperation concept. Bradys legal and PR team has been dominated at every stage of this fiasco.

PR -- Yes.

Legal -- we shall see, and I'm guessing the answer turns out to be No.

The Brandon Five · Jul 29, 2015

letekro said:
The NFL wanted the responsive texts from Bradys phone not the phone itself.

Responsive texts to whom? Mcnally and Jastremski? They would already have the responses from those two phones.

Fencer · Jul 29, 2015

TommyD4207 said:
In this "Court of Public Perception", Tom Brady has been a cheater his entire career, and certainly since 2007.

Nothing that could have happened today, nothing, would have changed that. Going forward, nothing that comes from the courts will change that, including full exoneration.

Nothing's changing public perception. I don't get why people are still thinking that's either a) important or b) a possibility.

I disagree.

My wife, for example, just assumed he cheated. When I explained to her about the actual PSI readings (when we finally knew them), she changed her mind.

So what has Brady been hiding?

2nd Team Getting Their First Start

2nd Team Getting Their First Start

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

TB12

2nd Team Getting Their First Start

Pro Bowl Player

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

On the Game Day Roster

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Pro Bowl Player

Pro Bowl Player

PatsFans.com Supporter

Pro Bowl Player