August 19th hearing transcript now available

Kjmass1 · Aug 22, 2015

MagicMarker said:
I wonder how extensive Pash's edits were. Is it possible Wells conclusion was "inconclusive" and Pash changed the conclusion?

I'd guess there is a lot more of mcnally's testimony that was redacted. Maybe even more examples of the ref's messing with the balls?

cmasspatsfan · Aug 22, 2015

Why is the NFL so afraid to have Pash questioned? They could and will probably lose on that point alone.

SVN · Aug 23, 2015

cmasspatsfan said:
Why is the NFL so afraid to have Pash questioned? They could and will probably lose on that point alone.

Just arrogant. As kessler said they even didnt allow ted wells initially but changed their mind.

eom · Aug 23, 2015

cmasspatsfan said:
Why is the NFL so afraid to have Pash questioned? They could and will probably lose on that point alone.

eom · Aug 23, 2015

PatsFanSince74 said:
I wrote several lengthy posts out here a few weeks ago, before Judge Berman even opened his mouth on this case, giving my read on Richard Berman, based on his background and my being around folks in the legal and judicial communities in NYC for 25 years [a couple of ADA's, several Federal Prosecutors, many Civil and Criminal Defense Attorneys and some high profile folks to whom I won't allude here].

Judge Berman has not only lived up to my predictions, but, frankly, has exceeded my expectations. He is exactly the guy I thought he was and, even more, the guy I hoped he was.

A word of caution: this does not mean his ruling in this case is a slam dunk. He keeps pointing out that there are "strengths and weaknesses" on both sides and that he thinks the two parties should reach a Settlement.

I read through the transcript at a top level, i.e., not a detailed, word-by-word analysis. There are several places where Judge Berman allows Nash's statements to go unchallenged. Page 55 is a particular example where Nash points out that a passage cited by Kessler earlier in the proceedengs as evidence that the NFL violated the Notice provision is actually broader than Kessler implied and includes the possibility of "...other forms of discipline, including higher fines and suspension..." Berman doesn't challenge that. However, that is when Berman takes the discussion in the direction of "why four games?" and how many were attributable to "ball tampering" and how many to "failure to cooperate?" And where he is almost mocking the entire process followed by the NFL. It seems to me that Judge Berman is wrestling with the underlying fairness issues here as they relate to the whole process and whether they constitute grounds for vacating the ruling.

In other words, I don't think his mind is made up, but his fundamental sense of what is "just" is offended by how the NFL has behaved and he is trying to find ways (the Pash references being particular examples) to rule on behalf of Brady, but he is far from decided in that regard.

Rusty Coupe · Aug 23, 2015

Newsday stands up for Brady

Robert Blecker is convinced Patriots quarterback Tom Brady did not illegally tamper with the footballs in the AFC Championship Game, and that the NFL's investigation into the matter is filled with false accusations and exaggerations designed to make Brady look guilty. The photograph on page 175 of the Wells Report only confirms his suspicions.

Blecker, a professor of criminal law at New York Law School, had to look at the picture several times before realizing something looked fishy. The picture was included as part of a study by Exponent, a company hired by attorney Ted Wells to conduct experiments aimed at determining if footballs used in similar conditions would deflate as much as the Patriots' footballs did in the conference title game.

It showed the needles on the gauges used by officials at the game to measure the footballs. One needle measured 1.4 inches and the other .9 inches. But wait a minute. The shorter needle didn't actually measure .9 inches. It was more like .7. Why? Because in the photograph of the shorter needle, the ruler was placed at 0 at the bottom of the needle's base. In the photo of the longer needle, the ruler was placed at 0 at the top of the base.

http://www.newsday.com/sports/colum...give-opinions-on-tom-brady-s-appeal-1.1076506

borg · Aug 23, 2015

What if....Berman's decision had two components:
1) A conclusion of the evidence:
No evidence of tampering. NFL interpretations of rules unjustified...yada yada yada......."I see no evidence what so ever that TB12 had general awareness."
2) Affirmation of NFL rights:
Despite the NFL's failure to justify TB12's persecution and punishment, the NFL has the right to operate in any fashion based on the collective bargaining agreement and therefore NFL sanctioned punishment stands.

Judge Berman: "The NFL can punish an innocent man as it sees fit."

Then get yourself a case of popcorn. ESPN might even cross over into the light.

eom · Aug 23, 2015

Rusty Coupe said:
Newsday stands up for Brady

http://www.newsday.com/sports/colum...give-opinions-on-tom-brady-s-appeal-1.1076506

this?

http://www.newsday.com/sports/colum...ive-opinions-on-tom-brady-s-appeal-1.10765060

eom · Aug 23, 2015

eom said:
this?

http://www.newsday.com/sports/colum...ive-opinions-on-tom-brady-s-appeal-1.10765060

Like many of Brady's defenders, Blecker subscribes to the belief that the footballs used in the first half of the playoff game against the Colts - with 11 of 12 measuring well under the 12.5 PSI minimum prescribed by NFL rules

lolz mort

eom · Aug 23, 2015

so, the newsday article is primarily citing this one lawyer who is supporting brady in this, and he's got his own site with some #defamegate blogs.
his latest post on there is kind of an interesting angle I hadn't heard before, although kind of irrelevant, imo.

I guess maybe it's just more evidence of shady behavior that I think was confirmed long ago.
see what you guys think --- what's wrong with the pic below?

http://www.robertblecker.com/

1960Pats · Aug 23, 2015

ivanvamp said:
For the life of me, I'm still trying to figure out what Brady actually did that either violated the integrity of the game, or would be considered "conduct detrimental" to the NFL.

Nobody has adequately explained and demonstrated anything Brady has done that is remotely associable with either of these two things.

There's no explanation because Brady hasn't done anything wrong.

It's still fun to watch them stutter around the question though.

eom · Aug 23, 2015

blecker also has a blog post about this whole thing but I haven't seen it cuz I gotta register for a free week of some crap first

http://www.law360.com/articles/693100/opinion-who-s-the-real-cheater-in-deflategate-

RunAmok · Aug 23, 2015

Ross12 said:
I think the ruling of this case will set one hell of a precedent, either way.

The precedent has been for the last couple of years but RG and the front office don't get it. Actually, neither do the owners who are his boss. Goodell f*cks up and then lies about the Ray Rice process and the owners line up to say what a great job he is doing.

Look at the various owners who say he's doing a great job on the deflategate nonsense.

Bobsyouruncle · Aug 23, 2015

eom said:
so, the newsday article is primarily citing this one lawyer who is supporting brady in this, and he's got his own site with some #defamegate blogs.
his latest post on there is kind of an interesting angle I hadn't heard before, although kind of irrelevant, imo.

I guess maybe it's just more evidence of shady behavior that I think was confirmed long ago.
see what you guys think --- what's wrong with the pic below?

http://www.robertblecker.com/

I think part of the relevance is Wells is saying Anderson mixed up the two gauges. Less likely Anderson was wrong if the gauges look different. Plus overall shoddy work.

neuronet · Aug 23, 2015

SVN said:
Nash did say that the PA had been given opportunity to renew their request to speak to pash after speaking to wells by the commisionner but they never did. The judge didnt seem say anything about that .But its hard to know in transcripts the mood and tone. From reading this alone it seems nash gave a lot of answers and some of them even the judge seem to say "okay got it"

This could turn out to be key and makes me much less confident about the Pash angle as being used for main grouds to vacate.

YOUGOTMOSSED · Aug 23, 2015

eom said:
blecker also has a blog post about this whole thing but I haven't seen it cuz I gotta register for a free week of some crap first

http://www.law360.com/articles/693100/opinion-who-s-the-real-cheater-in-deflategate-

I'm very pleased to hear Professor Robert Blecker chime in on this. He was one of my favorite professors in law school. Deep thinker, very articulate, and very passionate about ethical matters.

I hope he contributes more articles attempting to restore sanity in this seas of madness.

PatsFanSince74 · Aug 23, 2015

borg said:
What if....Berman's decision had two components:
1) A conclusion of the evidence:
No evidence of tampering. NFL interpretations of rules unjustified...yada yada yada......."I see no evidence what so ever that TB12 had general awareness."
2) Affirmation of NFL rights:
Despite the NFL's failure to justify TB12's persecution and punishment, the NFL has the right to operate in any fashion based on the collective bargaining agreement and therefore NFL sanctioned punishment stands.

Judge Berman: "The NFL can punish an innocent man as it sees fit."

Then get yourself a case of popcorn. ESPN might even cross over into the light.

I'll bow to someone who's actually been involved in litigation like this, but I believe that Page 1, Paragraph 1 of the Ruling will read something like "In the matter of so and so number 1 vs. so and so number 2 regarding such and such in which so and so number 1 contends this and so and so number 2 contends that (docket number xxx), This Court finds for so and so number x and upholds/vacates the Arbiter's ruling."

The next section would be the legal precedent under which he was making this ruling, in which the Judge would anticipate all possible objections that could be raised before the Appellate Court, leading up to a "therefore This Court upholds/vacates the Arbiter's ruling." I guess this is where he might make a comment on the underlying issues of fairness, should he be upholding Goodell's ruling. But, I think he would do this in such a way as not to undermine his Ruling on Appeal.

My impression of Federal Judges is that they don't like to send cases to the Federal Appellate Court that will consume a lot of that court's time and that they are highly unlikely to put anything in their ruling that could be used to prolong the Appellate Process or even help get the ruling overturned. Judge Berman knows that there is always going to be a "next case" on which he rules that ends up in the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and he won't want them to think that he sent them a mess this time.

What does the mean? I think it means that we should listen very carefully to what he says in Open Court on the 31st. I think that is where he will go on the record in strong terms about the fairness of the Process. In fact, the more strongly he speaks against the NFL on that day, the more likely I'll think it is that he will be ruling in its favor.

But I'm opened to being corrected by someone who has actually been through this process.

PatsSox363804 · Aug 23, 2015

Bobsyouruncle said:
I think part of the relevance is Wells is saying Anderson mixed up the two gauges. Less likely Anderson was wrong if the gauges look different. Plus overall shoddy work.

There's also the angle that shows the 2 gauges from the front and shows how curved the longer needle is, which you can't make out in exponents picture. So one gauge was twice as long and bent at something like a 70 degree angle but we're supposed to believe that Anderson is wrong about which gauge he used yet take every other thing he said as if it were handed down from Christ? The whole thing is shady and anyone that takes a few hours to read knows it. The NFL is playing a headlines game because they know people who aren't pats fans won't read deeper into things.

RunAmok · Aug 23, 2015

Bobsyouruncle said:
So this is the question I had earlier. Nash's argument here hasn't appeared in any papers I've seen, and I haven't heard it from anyone, and it logically doesn't make much sense.

He is not just saying the court must give Goodell deference in arbitration, but also in interpretations the policy under arbitration. That would be like saying if Goodell chooses to believe a 4 game suspension for steroids should be interpreted as 6 games, then he wins because he gets final say. Not on whether they did steroids, but what the policy says.

Doesn't make sense to me. Two people have an agreement. One may have made a bad agreement, but here Nash is basically arguing that one side reserves the right to change that agreement against the others wishes essentially making it a non-voluntary non-agreement. Further he's saying the courts cannot settle that dispute about the underlying interpretation, which it seems to me that is exactly what they are charged with doing.

Maybe he just reflexively says deference so much he doesn't even know why anymore.

I can only think that RG started this whole nonsense with the sincere belief that he had all the owners behind him and that he could get away with whatever he wanted. Now that the light is being shed on the process he and his lawyers are scrambling and the goal posts keep moving.

From what I follow from Kessler's arguments:

TB was suspended for violating rules covered by "The Integrity of the Game Certification".
Except - that only applies to clubs and not to individuals.

The Commish has broad authority for the punishment for this violation.
Except - this only applies to clubs and not individuals. If the NFL wants to apply it to players, they have to inform them.

Now the goal posts move.

TB was suspended for an equipment violation that is part of the CBA and applies to players.
Except - the penalty for this violation is a fine not suspension. If the NFL wants to change that they have to inform the NFLPA on this.
Also - if "generally aware" is the standard, that is new and again the NFL has to inform the NFLPA of this change.

Move again:

The NFLPA was aware of the integrity of the game powers that the Commish has and he can deal out any penalty he wants.
Except - the law says that if there is a specific penalty "fine for first time violation" it takes precedent over a general policy. And again if the NFL wants to do this, they need to inform the NFLPA in advance.

Move again.

TB was suspended for the violation that is similar to PEDs - 4 games.
Except - if the NFL wants to change the penalty it needs to inform the NFLPA of this new rule and change. And again the specific penalty overrides the general policy.

This keeps happening and it was clear that Berman was getting more and more annoyed. It is also clear that the NFL is hanging all it's hopes on the claim that the CBA, despite all the labor laws that say otherwise, gives Goodell unlimited powers to do whatever he wants.

Gronkowski123 · Aug 23, 2015

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CNGMAXEUsAAjaGS.jpg

..the suspension should be vacated on that alone..

August 19th hearing transcript now available

On the Game Day Roster

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

Pro Bowl Player

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

On the Game Day Roster

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Homer Little

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

On the Game Day Roster

Pro Bowl Player

Similar threads