Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by pats1, Feb 15, 2008.
Falls short...what no book deal?? he's got NADA!!! Just a boadtful boob with a big mouth...nothing there....
One way or another we're all gonna hear what this guy knows sooner or later. I'm sure Arlen Sphincter will make sure of that. He just better have some proof. I don't understand, if he's indemnified from the Pats what more can the league offer to him? Any lawyers out there besides Florio who can explain?
now just a little worried what this guy has to say . is he just going to make a statement or has some kinda proof.
who cares im sick of it all and i really am not going to worry about it
I thought I had heard one of the talk shows saying he wanted some kind of protection against perjuring himself as well.
I see Walsh's and his attorney's problem with the NFL's deal. From the article:
How exactly is he going to cash in and get rich by giving up what little evidence he has and telling the truth? Based on what I am reading Walsh wants blanket immunity. I think he basically wants the league to allow him to be free to sell his story to the press.
The more Walsh drags this out ,the less I beleive he has anything tangable. He keeps stalling for time.
This makes sense to me. I think the Assistant Golf Pro realizes if he just comes clean to the NFL he's not going to get much out of it. He wants to be able to tell his "story" to whoever he wants and cash in on it. I guess he realizes a promotion to Head Golf Pro is just too hard, it's easier just to sell out your former employer...
I'm not a lawyer, but wouldn't this mean that he could lie and not be penalized for it?
There is no criminal act whatseover...
Botom line: Matt Walsh MUST and HAS TO RETURN any and all phsycial evidence he may have which he had to obtained by and through the course and scope of his employment with the Patriots, i.e. including but not limited to: any notes, film, videos, memos, reports, film, audio, e-mails, letters, prints, DVD, cassette and VHS or other recordable media, posters, screen shots, etc. etc... which in turn would mean, if MATT WALSH has ANY OF these things in his possession (that he wants to use as evidence against the PATS), then by law, he is in breach of his contract and has in possession STOLEN PROPERTY which he acquired WITHOUT PERMISSION from the Patriots without the Knowledge of the NFL and the PATRIOTS organization, therefore, he would be "screwed" up the river", for THEFT and privileged information...
He HAS to use whetaever he ILLEGALY STOLE and OBTAINED through his EMPLOY with the PATS, (which means if he has anything against the PATS), then he stole their property), and he will be fully prosecuted and the law will side with the Patriots organization....
So, Walsh will NEVER get agreement that the PATS or the NFL won't come after him, because also any "leak" of information and/or tapes or vidoes remotely being similar to his accusations and allegations, will come back to him if he gave it to some 3rd party or made duplicates...since NO ONE NO ONE has this, except good 'ol matt Walsh...so he is BEST to keep quiet because when he meets with GOODELL, Matt Walsh HAS TO RETURN ANY AND ALL PROPERTY back to the PATS, which IMPLICATES WALSH for THEFT and he is over and done....
ALSO, NONE of whatever Walsh has in his possession, or stole or sneaked out before he was fired could EVER be used as evidence as it is inadmissible since it was OBTAINED ILLEGALLY, i.e. like breaking into someones house for evidence, but you had no warrant, toss it out...whatever Matt Walsh has, if anything, is inadmissible for his defense...and there is no criminal activity involved here yet......none.....but UNLESS he RETURNS the stolen property form the PATS, i.e. any video, reports, notes, etc...which the only way he could have obtained it was through and during HIS employ with the PATS...
So Matt Walsh is screwed.... the Pats aren't... they're HOPING matt comes to them, because he has "PATS PROPERTY" which they can use AGAINST WALSH! :rocker::rocker::rocker:
You're right. He is almost certainly going to testify now.
He definitely has something serious. His lawyer knows of it too. And the Federal lawsuit will now prevent him from destroying it.
Belichick is going to get smoked. Goodell will too, for his attempted coverup.
I prefer MRPerino's detailed analysis, but thanks for playing.
Matt Walsh could be compelled to testify in a court of law and receive protection, just as Jeffrey Wigand received protection when he testified against Brown and Williamson.
There is no criminal activity here..it begins though when MATT WALSH HA to bring and fork over ALL he has physical evidence to Goodell EVERYTING, then and only then will they talk, but now Walsh has stolen property and the NFL and the PATS will go after him, too easy! :rocker:
Matt: "Here is the stuff I illegally obatined and stole from the PATS organization....without their knowledge to use as blackmail, it's theft, I know, but I got the goods on them, but am afraid to use them, and If I open my mouth, then they'all all know I stole this and can go to jail....." :rocker::rocker::rocker: Go Pats!
I read the lawsuit. It's clear that Walsh has something and knows a lot about what took place. I'm sure the lawsuit will be amended over time to provide more detail as depositions are taken.
But still not receive any protection from the NFL or the PATS....,there is no criminal act involved, videotaping is not an illegal crime, it's an NFL rule, not federal law.........so there will be no protection for an interview/hearing/independent investigation.....once he has ILLEGAL evidence ILLEGAL PROPERTY from the PATS, he's toast......thus he lands in jail for possession of stolen property, distribution and theft, etc...and we all know MATT does NOT want to land in Federal Jail... :rocker:
No one was targeted to go to prison in the big tobacco lawsuit either. This is all about civil damages. It's a civil case, at least for now.
Where did you read it? I'd like to take a look at it.
you'd have to prove damages...what are the damages? Someone HAS to prove the PATS USED the tapes or video etc DURING THE GAMES...to their advantage, and that is simply not possible....did the PATS vdieo tape, but never used the footage because it was nothing new, or lame? which play was footage on a video actually used? can that be proven? No. the burden of proof is on Matt Walsh....no one else... :rocker:
Pats are fine...it will get busy, but they're fine... :rocker:
Separate names with a comma.