NFL Appeal oral arguments thread

[Rob0729]

After the Berman hearings, everyone said don't read too much into it because Berman could be playing devil's advocate.

In this case, the judges could be playing that role. Or they think Brady is guilty, but don't have the grounds to overturn Berman.

Let's take a deep breath and see what happens.

 

[ANGR89]

I know everyone is saying the judges drilled Brady's attorneys more, but does anyone know, did his attorneys have great responses that seemed to kind of drop the question they were just asked?

 

[VectorPrime]

This was not like Berman's questioning at all. He was MUCH harsher on the NFL than he was on Kessler. This is nearly the opposite. When the hearing started and they started addressing the facts about the accusation of cheating it looked like this would be a slam dunk! Because, objectively, the facts support Brady and that there was no cheating going on. And more importantly from a legal perspective the facts showed that the Wells Report was fundamentally flawed and wrong in its methods and assumptions. Add on top of that all the crap the NFL said after the report that should not have legally been allowed to play a part in their case against Brady.

So at first this seemed to be going great because again, the facts support Brady. But then when it came turn to question Kessler one of the judges seemed to think the opposite. That the facts support the league. Which is MINDBOGGLING nonsensical. It makes sense if they were to defend the league on the issue of arbitration. That is the only case the NFL has in an objective sense since the facts of the original case support Brady. So the fact that one judge seems to think Brady was guilty right out of the gate is not a good sign. In fact its horrifying to me.

 

[SVN]

After the Berman hearings, everyone said don't read too much into it because Berman could be playing devil's advocate.

In this case, the judges could be playing that role. Or they think Brady is guilty, but don't have the grounds to overturn Berman.

Let's take a deep breath and see what happens.

Yes , but a lot of the legal experts minus munson seemd to think berman favored brady and he will get his suspension overturned. Today the same people wallach, mccann think brady will probably lose. So there is that.

 

[Todd Bradley]

Whether or not Brady *did* it was never supposed to be an issue, but for some reason these N.Y. judges (including Berman) have been very interested in the facts of the original scandal. Probably because the scandal is more interesting than whether Goodell's ruling violated the CBA.

Unfortunately it sounds like these judges think Brady is guilty, where Berman did not. That's not supposed to inform their ultimate ruling, but it probably will...

That to me, is the whole problem.

Brady is guilty of.....what? That he MAY he known something that there's no evidence of? That to me has nothing to do with whether or not they should uphold Berman's ruling.

The judges can think the world is flat, but that has nothing to do with whether or not the sky is blue.

 

[TheFlyingWedge]

This is off to a bad start. Kessler and Brady are getting grilled by the judges. Not liking this one bit

 

[trevrox]

So is Jaz or McNally the Deflategate version of Stan the Caddie?

McNally

 

[Dr Pain]

Judges hit NFL on how punishment can be levied based on phone destruction etc... which came out after the penalty issued. Then asked Brady's side about phone which they had already discounted vs NFL.

 

[Froob]

Is it possible Belichick advised Brady to lose on purpose to motivate the team? Super serial.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Point taken. But where's the outrage over the initial comment I responded to? Is Robertweathers merely the Chargers and his comment nothing more than routine towel stickum?

Mom caught you and not me.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

remember berman tipped his hand by being favorable towards kessler.
parker is certainly favoring the league. same with chin since neither find brady credible.
seems like hiring clement paid off since he destroyed kessler today.

was looking at barty hubbuchs twitter feed, he certainly seems happy!

Well, Parker was always the one who was most likely to vote for the NFL. Given all the snippets coming from him, he doesn't disappoint. The "arbitration is casual" comment was likely in response to the Pash notes issue, etc. saying that in arbitration you don't get the same advantages you do in a courtroom. So it's unfortunate but appears he's going NFL.

Only seen the one tweet on Chin grilling Kessler so far and obviously it stinks - saying evidence is compelling if not overwhelming. But at the same time, 1) that's the only quote we have at the moment, 2) courts have overturned rulings on people they think are guilty quite often for procedural issues. So I'll be curious to see the full transcript here, if that's the only negative thing Chin said or if there are more.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I get the frustration. You worked your ass off on a case. You're in the right. And then some jackwagon judge who doesn't know what he's taking about spouts crap like, "the evidence is overwhelming that he did it."

WTF are you suppose to say to that?

What would I say, as a layman, who is emotionally invested in how the Patriots and Tom Brady are viewed? I'd be as mad as hell and would probably raise my voice and say that the judges had a misconceived and preconceived bias against my position and let them know exactly how I felt.

What should I say, as an attorney who is well, well, well into seven figures of billings on this case? I'd take a deep breath, swallow my anger and say something like, "Respectfully, your honor, I believe that we have articulated a different version of those facts in our Brief and I would be happy to address them now, if it so pleases the court." Then I'd probably go back to my office and break some furniture and punch a few holes in the dry wall.

 

[50-yard-line]

That's actually a misquote.

Hey, I learn something new every day. It seems like an accurate paraphrase, though:

“There is no basis in text, tradition, or even in contemporary practice (if that were enough), for finding in the Constitution a right to demand judicial consideration of newly discovered evidence of innocence brought forward after conviction.”


and this:

"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is “actually” innocent."

But thanks for the clarification, seriously. In any case, I don't want to get off track - I simply found this a good example of how what seems like common sense isn't always the way the courts work.

 

[ANGR89]

This is off to a bad start. Kessler and Brady are getting grilled by the judges. Not liking this one bit

That's what I don't like....you said off to a bad start..but from what I understand this is it, so if they did poorly this is what the judges walk away with to me make their decision....no more chances to sway in other direction

 

[KDPPatsfan85]

I wonder what teams these judges root for. What if Chin was a jets fan? Maybe if that is the case, he should recuse himself.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

After the Berman hearings, everyone said don't read too much into it because Berman could be playing devil's advocate.

In this case, the judges could be playing that role. Or they think Brady is guilty, but don't have the grounds to overturn Berman.

Let's take a deep breath and see what happens.

I'm trying to convince myself of that but stuff like "the evidence is overwhelming that there was tampering" is a bit beyond the pale of "playing devil's advocate." Not to mention, it's ignorant and a great example of what legal argument/discourse is NOT suppose to be like.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

I'm trying to convince myself of that but stuff like "the evidence is overwhelming that there was tampering" is a bit beyond the pale of "playing devil's advocate." Not to mention, it's ignorant and a great example of what legal argument/discourse is NOT suppose to be like.

berman did the same thing - he said somthing like "where's the evidence of tampering? I don't see it" during the hearings.

 

[Ivan]

Point taken. But where's the outrage over the initial comment I responded to? Is Robertweathers merely the Chargers and his comment nothing more than routine towel stickum?

I didn't see it but would have said the same thing regardless. There is a political forum here and absolutely no need for anyone to inject politics into the football forum yet some people can't help themselves and do it anyways. If people want to talk politics take it to the political forum. It's an election year and its going to get really nasty and the best thing for this forum is to keep it separate.

 

[Fencer]

Unfortunately, even if the decision goes the correct way, all the bad guys have saved face. The NFL has saved face for pursuing things this far, the haters have saved face for calling the Pats cheaters, etc.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

berman did the same thing - he said somthing like "where's the evidence of tampering?" during the hearings.

Apparently Judge Chin found it and was very impressed by it.