SITE MENU
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.I honestly feel guilty for not paying more attention to this or taking complaints by Saints more seriously. It's important to stay informed and I didn't do it because it wasn't my team. Not good.The NFL did this BS in Bountygate too. "YES WE HAVE A LEDGER SHOWING ALL THE BOUNTY PAYMENTS MADE FOR SAINTS PLAYERS WHO INJURED PLAYERS ON OPPOSING TEAMS" "ok that sounds damning, show it to us" "WELL WE DON'T HAVE THE LEDGER TO SHOW YOU BUT WE DO HAVE SOME VIDEO OF A PLAYER TALKING ABOUT IT" "ok that's not what you said earlier but that is still pretty damning" "HERE'S THE VIDEO" "that's... that's not what you said it was, there's no evidence in this video at all" "WELL WE KNOW WHAT GAME IT WAS" "...nobody got injured in that game" "OK IT WAS ACTUALLY THIS OTHER GAME" "the only person in that game who got injured tripped over his own feet!" "WELL WE STILL HAVE THAT LEDGER WE TOLD YOU ABOUT, WE JUST AREN'T SHOWING IT TO YOU"
Yes I am sure that Goodell who is fighting for his job would hold back evidence that would help him.
As far as I'm aware, Nash wasn't sworn in at the time, so I don't think perjury would apply. But of course, it would have been completely idiotic to lie and say you don't have direct evidence when you actually have direct evidence.
If Violin is right then Nash in all likelihood perjured himself when he told Berman they had no direct evidence linking Brady to a scheme to deflate footballs.
The owner never said direct evidence. Their evidence likely is in the Lionel Hutz school -- conjecture and hearsay are kinds of evidence.
Maybe the NFL* has "evidence" of something entirely unrelated that they want to penalize the Pats for after Defamegate has been resolved.
What I would love is for Berman to use this leak to call for all materials related to the Wells report to be given to him and then released for public consumption.
Yes I am sure that Goodell who is fighting for his job would hold back evidence that would help him.
IANAL, but I'm sure there are sanctions for lawyers lying to judge.As far as I'm aware, Nash wasn't sworn in at the time, so I don't think perjury would apply. But of course, it would have been completely idiotic to lie and say you don't have direct evidence when you actually have direct evidence.
That's a remarkably stupid passage.
It's wholly illogical for the NFL to both:
There's no way Volin should have repeated the claim without in some way addressing its great illogic.
- Punish Brady with appallingly little evidence to prove wrongdoing.
- Hold back evidence of wrongdoing.