Brady's Original Legal Team Screwed Up

AndyJohnson said:

My God can you read what people have written about this and absorb it?
There was no grounds to make it about guilt or innocence.
Volumes and volumes of law say that no one can dispute and arbiters judgment on guilt and innocence.
It is not legal to go to court to fight the arbiters decision.
Brady's team could only fight the process that led to that decision.

If goodell follows all of the rules of arbitration he could determine brady was Aaron Hernandez accomplice and ban him for life from the NFL and then if he followed the rules of arbitration his judgment in making that decision cannot be questioned in court.

Click to expand...

Prove his innocence, without a shadow of doubt, and any ethical or moral judge would question the arbitration process and lift the suspension on any grounds, including being innocent of the crime or whether there was a crime in the first place.

All of the judges questioned the cellphone incident. Since Brady destroying his phone had nothing to do with labor laws and such, I'm going to assume it was on the grounds of proving whether he is entirely innocent or not.

Question:

How would the law of shop apply to this case, IF he didn't deflate balls? Does this not make him look more guilty?

Brady was supposedly suspended for lack of cooperation, rather than deflated balls. His lawyers advised him to"destroy" his cellphone and went as far to admit that he could've been more cooperative. If we were to consider this, couldn't one argue that his lawyers made him look more guilty than before and that he at least deserved a 2-game suspension for lack of cooperation?

The destroying of the cellphone is irrelevant to me, because Wells only wanted certain emails, texts and call logs from a certain date. Brady could've got this info from the phone company, he could've also filtered out any calls, text or info irrelevant to the case. He didnt do that. He gave them some stuff, but conveniently, couldn't recover the information from the time period of Wells' investigation. Perhaps there was nothing to hide and the missing data was convenient enough for Wells to make the NFL's claim, legit. What bothered me was Brady's testimony during the appeal, it sounded suspect. He claimed he didn't know what his assistant did with his old phones, yet he's concerned with privacy and such? Not buying it, it reeks of someone hiding something and it makes him look guilty.

My point: Brady's lawyers turned this into a labor issue instead of proving his innocence in the court of law. They did this because they felt that it was the best argument to "free Brady" because they can't prove his innocence and this made Brady look more guilty than he did in the beginning to me.

It's also funny that you bring up Hernandez, when he appears to be no more or less guilty of murder than Brady appears to be for deflating balls, so they might as well make Brady an accomplice. The jury found Hernandez guilty because he's a tatted up Puerto-Rican, who seemed indifferent to the incident, he associates with thugs and has gang ties. However, no weapon and no motive -- how can they find him guilty? The system is corrupt and people are still judging certain people by certain stereotypes, but in the end: Who are we to say, with certainty, that either party is innocent or guilty? Why are we more sympathetic to Brady than Hernandez?

Think about it.

LivinLovin&Breathin_Brady said:

Brady was supposedly suspended for lack of cooperation, rather than deflated balls.

Click to expand...

That's not true - and that is one of the strongest parts of his lawsuit.

In Troy Vincent's letter to Tom Brady informing him of his suspension, he made it clear that Brady was suspended due to his "role in the use of under-inflated footballs by the Patriots in this year's AFC Championship Game." Vincent mentioned Brady's (supposed) non-cooperation, but it was clear that was not the basis of the suspension. That's why Goodell using the phone as the basis of his arbitrator's decision should not be allowed.

LivinLovin&Breathin_Brady said:

The destroying of the cellphone is irrelevant to me, because Wells only wanted certain emails, texts and call logs from a certain date.

Click to expand...

I agree the destruction of the phone is irrelevant, but that's really because Brady wasn't going to give his phone to the investigators no matter. Given that Brady wasn't turning his phone over to Wells, it didn't matter what he actually did with it.

LivinLovin&Breathin_Brady said:

My point: Brady's lawyers turned this into a labor issue instead of proving his innocence in the court of law. They did this because they felt that it was the best argument to "free Brady" because they can't prove his innocence and this made Brady look more guilty than he did in the beginning to me.

Click to expand...

No, they did it because they had no basis to argue Brady's innocence in court. No matter how unfair, a court cannot overturn an arbitrator's finding of "guilty". All they could do was argue whether or not the punishment was drawn from the essence of the CBA (and other labor-related and arbitration-related issues).

LivinLovin&Breathin_Brady said:

It's also funny that you bring up Hernandez, when he appears to be no more or less guilty of murder than Brady appears to be for deflating balls, so they might as well make Brady an accomplice. The jury found Hernandez guilty because he's a tatted up Puerto-Rican, who seemed indifferent to the incident, he associates with thugs and has gang ties. However, no weapon and no motive -- how can they find him guilty? The system is corrupt and people are still judging certain people by certain stereotypes, but in the end: Who are we to say, with certainty, that either party is innocent or guilty? Why are we more sympathetic to Brady than Hernandez?

Click to expand...

I am not going to argue the evidence against Aaron Hernandez, but maybe we are sympathetic to Brady and not Hernandez is because Hernandez has been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law of first degree murder, whereas Tom Brady is completely innocent of doing something which, even if he did do it, should be about an $8,000 fine.

LivinLovin&Breathin_Brady said:

Prove his innocence, without a shadow of doubt, and any ethical or moral judge would question the arbitration process and lift the suspension on any grounds, including being innocent of the crime or whether there was a crime in the first place.

All of the judges questioned the cellphone incident. Since Brady destroying his phone had nothing to do with labor laws and such, I'm going to assume it was on the grounds of proving whether he is entirely innocent or not.

Question:

How would the law of shop apply to this case, IF he didn't deflate balls? Does this not make him look more guilty?

Brady was supposedly suspended for lack of cooperation, rather than deflated balls. His lawyers advised him to"destroy" his cellphone and went as far to admit that he could've been more cooperative. If we were to consider this, couldn't one argue that his lawyers made him look more guilty than before and that he at least deserved a 2-game suspension for lack of cooperation?

The destroying of the cellphone is irrelevant to me, because Wells only wanted certain emails, texts and call logs from a certain date. Brady could've got this info from the phone company, he could've also filtered out any calls, text or info irrelevant to the case. He didnt do that. He gave them some stuff, but conveniently, couldn't recover the information from the time period of Wells' investigation. Perhaps there was nothing to hide and the missing data was convenient enough for Wells to make the NFL's claim, legit. What bothered me was Brady's testimony during the appeal, it sounded suspect. He claimed he didn't know what his assistant did with his old phones, yet he's concerned with privacy and such? Not buying it, it reeks of someone hiding something and it makes him look guilty.

My point: Brady's lawyers turned this into a labor issue instead of proving his innocence in the court of law. They did this because they felt that it was the best argument to "free Brady" because they can't prove his innocence and this made Brady look more guilty than he did in the beginning to me.

It's also funny that you bring up Hernandez, when he appears to be no more or less guilty of murder than Brady appears to be for deflating balls, so they might as well make Brady an accomplice. The jury found Hernandez guilty because he's a tatted up Puerto-Rican, who seemed indifferent to the incident, he associates with thugs and has gang ties. However, no weapon and no motive -- how can they find him guilty? The system is corrupt and people are still judging certain people by certain stereotypes, but in the end: Who are we to say, with certainty, that either party is innocent or guilty? Why are we more sympathetic to Brady than Hernandez?

Think about it.

Click to expand...

Thanks for telling me you think Hernandez is innocent so I don't have to waste time reading your opinions.

IllegalContact said:

yup, and this whole things was actually over the very fist week while kraft and brady didn't realize the nature of the agenda......

krafts only real fault was that he thought he could navigate the issue using regular business savvy......it blew up in his face....probably helped undermine brady's case, but if you believe it was intentional, then you're a moron

Click to expand...

What's this "regular business savvy" you speak of and imply Kraft has utilized successfully in the past. Is that a euphemism for Mira Kraft's dad's money?

Jlaff said:

What's this "regular business savvy" you speak of and imply Kraft has utilized successfully in the past. Is that a euphemism for Mira Kraft's dad's money?

Click to expand...

don't be angry dude.........he's made plenty of his own money

LivinLovin&Breathin_Brady said:

It's also funny that you bring up Hernandez, when he appears to be no more or less guilty of murder than Brady appears to be for deflating balls, so they might as well make Brady an accomplice. The jury found Hernandez guilty because he's a tatted up Puerto-Rican, who seemed indifferent to the incident, he associates with thugs and has gang ties. However, no weapon and no motive -- how can they find him guilty? The system is corrupt and people are still judging certain people by certain stereotypes, but in the end: Who are we to say, with certainty, that either party is innocent or guilty? Why are we more sympathetic to Brady than Hernandez?

Think about it.

Click to expand...

Evidence against Brady:
- Written evidence that he wants balls in the legal range 12.5-13.5
- Gave ballboys, like any other locker room attendant, autographed memorabilia (shocking)
- Refused to give up his phone because he's a Player's Union rep and didn't want to set a precedent
- Two lower-level employees that work for him exchange vague and immature texts that resemble interpersonal lingo
- Physics exists

Evidence against Hernandez
- Shell casing that matched the bullet that killed Lloyd found in the car that he rented
- Bubble gum with his DNA on it found attached to the casing which was proven to have been bought by Hernandez an hour before the murder at a gas station
- Picked Lloyd up and drove to an industrial park and left without him
- Lloyd texting his sister that he was with Hernandez and told her "just so you know"
- Got home minutes after gunshots were heard and proceeded to have a cleaning crew come the next day to his home and all of his security cameras bashed
- Footage of Hern carrying a gun going downstairs right after he got home
- Text messages between Lloyd and Hern
- Etc. etc. etc.


Yeah, they're real similar.

Edit: the only way you could make the connection between Brady and Hern is if Lloyd wasn't even murdered. All the circumstantial evidence (albeit way more convincing than Brady's) and no dead person would mean Hern got railroaded. The fact that the balls were not even deflated to begin with makes this comparison ridiculous.

Some random thoughts based on some of the posts here (sorry if I am repeating others):

• The NFLPA had no way of knowing when Goodell was going to issue his decision. They couldn't have someone sitting on the courthouse steps for days or weeks to file a brief for the eventual ruling from Goodell. It wasn't like Goodell said he was going to rule in a certain short time period.
• The NFLPA had no reason to believe the NFL would try to beat them to the courthouse. This is the first time ever that the NFL decided to file a motion with the federal courts to uphold their decision. It was unprecedented.
• The NFLPA couldn't file an appeal with the courts until they saw his ruling. They would need to cite things directly from Goodell's ruling in their brief and they had no way to know Goodell was going to do things like take a "general awareness" of ball tampering and twist it into Brady being the mastermind of a cheating conspiracy.
• Kessler was brilliant in front of Judge Berman, but he is not an appellate lawyer. They should have brought Olsen in for the appeal hearing or another top appellate lawyer.
• The NFL got lucky. I don't think they ever thought Berman would rule against them or that they wouldn't have an unanimous decision at the appellate level. They basically won a 2-2 decision because Berman's vote ultimately carried less weight than the other three judges' decisions. If there was just one more liberal, pro labor judge on the appeal, the NFL would have had a prescient setting loss.
• Does anyone know what the judges' vote of the embank decision was. Considering that the three appeal judges were making the votes, Brady could have had actually had more judges on his side than the NFL during this process and lost.