- Joined
- Sep 7, 2009
- Messages
- 2,489
- Reaction score
- 2,938
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.We still don't know what "destroy" means right? It's the NFL's* term, maybe he just traded it in for his free upgrade?!
Would'nt have the same impactWe still don't know what "destroy" means right? It's the NFL's* term, maybe he just traded it in for his free upgrade?!
yea except for the fact, they never asked for his pictures. They asked for him to show him texts between him and the ball boys. Thats it. thats the only thing they asked for.
I again will say, i was on bradys side until today.
If Brady gave him his phone they would have asked for his computer. If Brady gave them his computer they would have asked for his assistant's phone. On and on, until they finally were told no, then whatever was refused proves no cooperation. They would have just used more out of context stuff to spin with the same no cooperation accusation.
I'm not an aficionado of the law but this seems troublesome:
http://www.atlredline.com/no-destroying-tom-bradys-cell-phone-was-not-okay-1720689663
yea except for the fact, they never asked for his pictures. They asked for him to show him texts between him and the ball boys. Thats it. thats the only thing they asked for.
I again will say, i was on bradys side until today.
What are you talking about? You're responding in a thread in which it's been shown that he gave them all relevant texts from his phone.
OT: anyone else hate our new FB, Twitter , Instagram society? ****ing blows
Stephanie Bradley already covered this. Personal phones don't apply to spoilation in labor cases unless they are part of a CBA. In other words, this guy doesn't know what he is talking about.
I'm in the Brady camp on all of this, but destroying the phone was dumb, dumb, dumb. Anyone with even the most cursory understanding of legal proceedings or PR would have recognized you don't destroy the phone.
And if Brady gave him his computer, Wells would have insisted on searching his house and would have gone through Gisele's lingerie drawer and smelled her dirty laundry.
I don't care if he let Gronk spike the phone, buried it in his yard and built a fountain of himself pissing on Goodell over it. The NFL has no right to ask for text messages. Brady's legal team must agree if they allowed him to refuse to cooperate with that part of the 'investigation.'
Stephanie Bradley already covered this. ......
BS. It was smart, and ethical. If Nixon had a public bonfire on the White House lawn burning the tapes, he would never had to resign... Brady offered to provide his side of communications to Jastremski and McNally that they already had from the company provided phones that contained their end of the conversations. Attorney Yee said they offered to provide that,and did so, as would be done under rules of evidence in legal Discovery.
I wouldn't trust these unspeakable clowns in the NFL Offices. They have now demonstrated plenty of example,s including this "revelation", as examples of pure character assignation
Oh man, that means you might have to call like, 20 or 30 people. How impractical.
This is the part I dont get the most! They say they want the texts between him and them. Well you can certainly see both responses of texts on my phone! So while the whole "destroying " it thing looks bad I would think they have already seen the texts their claiming Brady was trying to hide.
yea except for the fact, they never asked for his pictures. They asked for him to show him texts between him and the ball boys. Thats it. thats the only thing they asked for.
I again will say, i was on bradys side until today.