Tom Brady, NFLPA Granted 14-Day Extension To File Motion For Rehearing By Second Circuit Court

Ivan said:

Not facts, ********. And pontificating out of your arse it's clearly what you are best at, as has been demonstrated repeatedly throughout this thread.

Congratulations on the troll job.

Click to expand...

letekro said:

I don't think this is right. What is your source for this? I could be missing it but I didn't see Brady differentiate between work/personal phones anywhere.

Here is Brady's testimony (sorry for the interlaced numbers):

Q. And you see there is a reference in 5 paragraph 1 to, "Two mobile phone devices used by 6 Mr. Thomas Brady, Jr.," correct? 7

A. Yes. 8

Q. And that refers to the mobile phone devices 9 that you provided for his review, correct? 10

A. Yes. 11

Q. And directing your attention to paragraph 4 12 of the document, it refers to the first phone and 13 says that, "It's dates of active use were from 14 March 6, 2015 through April 8, 2015." 15 Do you see that? 16

A. Yes. 17

Q. And directing your attention to the next 18 paragraph which refers to the second phone review, 19 it says that, "The dates of active use were from 20 March 23, 2014 or May 23, 2014 through November 5, 21 2014," correct? 22

A. Yes. 23

Q. And those were the only two phones that were 24 provided to the forensic expert, correct?

25 A. Yes.

Q. And do you see that there is a gap from 2 November 6, 2014 to March 5, 2015, in the phones 3 provided to and received by and reviewed by the 4 forensic consultant? 5

A. Yes. 6

Q. And did you use a cell phone to make calls 7 and send and receive text messages during this gap 8 period of November 6, 2014, to March 5, 2015? 9

A. Yes.

Click to expand...

Tony2046 said:

The two phones referenced there are under the same number; the old one and the new one. So once he got rid of a phone he got another one. They are discussing records from both his phones.

Maybe I misunderstood your question.

Click to expand...

letekro said:

Sorry. He gave his two personal phones to the forensic analyst didn't he? But not the third one (active Nov. 2014-March 2015). He says the third one was disposed of as per his usual practice. But why were the two phones that he was using earlier turned over to the forensic analyst? Just trying to understand that point.

Click to expand...

Tony2046 said:

Let's look at a worse case scenario.

We can assume because of text messages presented in the Wells Report and the appeal transcripts that Brady wanted his footballs between 12.5 and 13.0 initially and at 12.5 after the Jets game.

We can assume that properly inflated footballs during away games had no impact on Brady's performance nor fumble rates. Tom Brady's home and away stats may shed some light on Deflategate (<<Link)

So based on that and many other elements, which I won't rehash, we can assume or know that Brady did not want to have the footballs changed or altered for the purpose of "cheating" or to gain a competitive advantage.

I think you are on board with those assumptions. Correct me if I'm wrong. If you agree shouldn't have the NFL come to the same conclusion?

So we look at the Science. Were there mistakes in the Wells report? Yes. Can science accurately pinpoint to a number or a PSI with so many unknowns and recollections? No. Of course not.

But please understand that Science can still provide an accurate window of possibility with what is known and greater minds than I (much greater actually) can conclude statistically that those parameters prove to be insignificant or IOW that it is likely that no deflation occurred.

But that does not mean that it is impossible just not likely.

So how much air do you believe was "missing" from those footballs? If you stick to the intercepted ball we know that it measured approximately 11.0. The Wells report states 11.32 for a wet football and the intercepted football was definitely wet. So without science or math would you accept 0.32 psi missing? IF so for what purpose would they have released that air?

IF I accepted that number it would lead me to believe that McNally went into the restroom to Check the psi of all the footballs because of what happened during the Jets game. OR the Refs pumped the footballs up to 16 psi , as they apparently did during the Jets game, and McNally brought them back down to 12.5.

Is that cheating?

Shouldn't the NFL have concluded that it was, at worse, a ball attendant trying to ensure the balls were at 12.5 psi? They didn't and wanted blood. They had already released the 2 psi story either out of ignorance or for some other nefarious purpose and needed to hang them out to dry.

So would you hand over your phone under those circumstances? Not one lawyer would advise that. They were not looking for the truth they were looking to hang Brady.

Click to expand...

Tony2046 said:

They wanted to search them for deflategate related data.

Good question though.

Maybe they were trying to find data that would create a record of cheating over a certain timeframe other than just that specific game.

Click to expand...

letekro said:

The NFL should have concluded that they had no idea what the hell went on (like the rest of us). And that should have been the end of it.

As for the phone, the way this works in practice is, before you turn over anything, you review everything. My guess is Yee's team reviewed that phone like they did the other two and there was stuff on it that either (i) was incriminating or (ii) could have been construed as incriminating by a likely partial trier of fact.

So, if there is something damaging (or that could be perceived as damaging) you might consider coming up with an alternative, especially where you are not in a formal legal proceeding where you could be subject to sanctions, disbarred, etc. The story that Tom was like "Hey Don, mind if I toss my old phone--the one in use during the AFCCG--I want to get the new Iphone 6!" and Don responded "Sure, go ahead buddy, I'm sure there was nothing on it anyway right?" is not really believable to someone that has participated in high-stakes litigation.

Click to expand...

Tony2046 said:

OK. So that means you think they were hiding incriminating or damaging data. It is possible.

But given what you know, do you think Brady was looking for a competitive advantage or that McNally snuck into the bathrooms to ensure the balls were at 12.5?

Click to expand...

letekro said:

No. You're missing my point. The patsfans narrative has been "Brady didn't want to turn over the phone because of privacy...Wells had no right to it, blah blah blah." But...he turned over the other two. What was different about that third phone and how does the privacy rationale work if he handed over the other two?

And don't say naked pictures of Giselle, because the negotiated offer was to turn over responsive texts, not the entire phone. Brady could have easily turned over responsive texts (those that included the keywords I posted earlier in this thread) and if any of those so happened to include naked pics of giselle or anything else he could have held those back.

Click to expand...

ReverendMaynard said:

When he was dealing with Wells, it was never mentioned to him that he would be punished for not supplying the phone data, or even that negative inferences would be drawn. Once the punishments were announced and it was time for the appeal, Tom decided that if it was a choice between being punished for withholding the data or giving them the data, he would give them the data. Unfortunately, the most important phone was no longer to be found. In the interest of being as cooperative as he could be, he supplied the phones he did have and all of the data it was possible to collect from activity with the missing phone.

Click to expand...

letekro said:

No. You're missing my point. The patsfans narrative has been "Brady didn't want to turn over the phone because of privacy...Wells had no right to it, blah blah blah." But...he turned over the other two. What was different about that third phone and how does the privacy rationale work if he handed over the other two?

Click to expand...

letekro said:

I gave you the quotes from the record. What have you done but spit invective? I bet you haven't read a single page of the Appeals transcript. You add nothing here.

Click to expand...

letekro said:

The NFL should have concluded that they had no idea what the hell went on (like the rest of us). And that should have been the end of it.

As for the phone, the way this works in practice is, before you turn over anything, you review everything. My guess is Yee's team reviewed that phone like they did the other two and there was stuff on it that either (i) was incriminating or (ii) could have been construed as incriminating by a likely partial trier of fact.

So, if there is something damaging (or that could be perceived as damaging) you might consider coming up with an alternative, especially where you are not in a formal legal proceeding where you could be subject to sanctions, disbarred, etc. The story that Tom was like "Hey Don, mind if I toss my old phone--the one in use during the AFCCG--I want to get the new Iphone 6!" and Don responded "Sure, go ahead buddy, I'm sure there was nothing on it anyway right?" is not really believable to someone that has participated in high-stakes litigation.

Click to expand...

letekro said:

I gave you the quotes from the record. What have you done but spit invective? I bet you haven't read a single page of the Appeals transcript. You add nothing here.

Click to expand...

bbobbo said:

this is incorrect. he never turned over any phones. the forensic analyst, Brad Maryman, was hired by Brady, not the NFL. Maryman was hired after the Wells Report came out and the suspension was handed down. The Brady team only did this after the league made such a big deal about the cell phones.

Click to expand...

AQPE said:

Since I wasn't so friendly to you previously, I'd like to call this out here because it is important for those of us who may not have understood so clearly that you are not "Gary Tanguay-ing" and going beyond playing (fiercely) a Devil's Advocate to a point where you actually believe "Brady did it!" At least that's what I make of your post above.

I'm interested in your opinion, and the opinion of others perusing this thread, about something I thought was critical to Brady in regard to relinquishing the cell phone: setting a new precedent for discipline cases to follow. Since in his defense Brady realizes that he is joined at the hip with the NFLPA, I am led to wonder whether the issue for him is not that there was even seemingly incriminating information on the phone, but rather that he/they were not simply going to concede to yet another in a long line of actions taken by the NFL to reduce the player's freedoms. From the NFLPA's perspective, I think this is the most fundamental point of their efforts to fight the suspension. They can't allow this new dimension of NFL disciplinary action to stand without a tremendous fight, and to wait until the new CBA is negotiated will be a bad approach because at best, as many posters on many threads have suggested previously, at best they will be forced to concede something significant (overseas team, 18 game schedule, etc.) to assure themselves of freedoms that they certainly have a strong basis to believe already.

Click to expand...

letekro said:

Right, he handed over 2 of the 3 phones to the forensic guy who searched the phones for responsive texts.

But he didn't hand over the third one, because he had tossed it. Isn't that right?

Click to expand...

letekro said:

No. You're missing my point. The patsfans narrative has been "Brady didn't want to turn over the phone because of privacy...Wells had no right to it, blah blah blah." But...he turned over the other two. What was different about that third phone and how does the privacy rationale work if he handed over the other two?

Click to expand...

letekro said:

I know this makes sense from a layman's perspective. But a lawyer as sophisticated as the guys in Brady's team would have seen this coming from a mile away. We could see how the NFL meant business from the outside, these guys were dealing with them in close quarters on a day to day basis. They knew there was a risk of adverse inference if they didn't turn over the data, and rolled the dice.

Click to expand...