- Joined
- Mar 21, 2006
- Messages
- 7,939
- Reaction score
- 16,946
Although not as good as Columbo, I forgot to mention the clear #2:
View attachment 13255
Try #1. Not mention having the best TV theme song ever.
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.Although not as good as Columbo, I forgot to mention the clear #2:
View attachment 13255
In order:
Possibly, hell no
I can't escape the feeling that their decision is coming down this week.
I was thinking about this in the shower this morning If Katsman is the one that basically decides when to announce whether or not the other justices will grant the en banc hearing; would he delay if he knew they were going to deny to help Brady? I mean he is human and he has stated this whole thing is utter bullsh*t and against fundamental fairness. Anyway I hope no decision is made till 2017I can't escape the feeling that their decision is coming down this week.
Mike McCann said recently he expects it by the end of this month, so you're probably in the ballpark.I can't escape the feeling that their decision is coming down this week.
yeah me too, and I don't have a good feeling. hope i'm wrong.
Mike McCann said recently he expects it by the end of this month, so you're probably in the ballpark.
Interesting, I wasn't aware of that.
We hope....
Agreed. I don't know whether Kessler has ever argued before an Appeals Court before, but he was clearly flustered by aggressive questioning and lost his cool.
He was "flustered" by questoning by the judges that had no relevance to what the hearing was supposed to be about (facts of the case vs. procedure). That falls on Johnson and Tulumello for not prepping Kessler accordingly. Those two have appellate court experience, yet didn't account for that possibility?
I dunno about that acronym, man. Wouldn't want it on my license plate.IANAL
Thread/brady-court-case newbie! That is, if you havent seen and in fact used IANAL at least three times on this subject. . .. Unless of course you actually are a lawyer.I dunno about that acronym, man. Wouldn't want it on my license plate.
I have no idea what happened between Kessler and his colleagues, as I wasn't in the room, but I have no doubt that they tried to prepare him to the best of their abilities, if he was insisting on stepping outside of his area of expertise. Kessler is a trial lawyer, he is not accustomed to dealing with provocative and even obnoxious questions from Appellate Judges.
I have written so many lengthy posts about Chin's line of questioning that I'm just not going to rehearse them here again. There is little doubt in my mind that Chin, who was a very fine labor lawyer, who was mentored by the late Judith Vladeck, an icon of modern labor law, and who is a fine Judge, was giving Kessler the opening to make the arguments that Olson has now made in his brief regarding the shifting grounds of the NFL's "overwhelming evidence." He's an Appellate Judge and he wasn't going to come right out and say, "Gee, Mr. Kessler, isn't it possible that the NFL has just been making its evidence up as it goes along?" Instead, he asked a provocative question to test Kessler and Kessler got flustered and lost his cool.
Since I have spent so much time on this in other threads, I'm really not ready to get into an argument about it here.
Here's my nominee:Try #1. Not mention having the best TV theme song ever.
Could be...bad sign that nfl hasn't been asked to respond yet?