Walsh's attorney: Walsh has tapes

[Canada's #1 Pats Fan]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_y...bYF?slug=ap-mattwalsh-tapes&prov=ap&type=lgns

Matt Walsh's lawyer asks NFL to protect his client on Spygate tapes
By DAVE GOLDBERG, AP Football Writer
February 15, 2008

NEW YORK (AP) -- The lawyer for former New England Patriots employee Matt Walsh said his client is willing to turn over videotapes he made for the team if the NFL guarantees Walsh protection from lawsuits or other legal action.

Attorney Michael Levy said that to date, the NFL's initial proposals are not sufficient protection for Walsh, who is said to have taped the St. Louis Rams' walkthrough practice the day before they played the Patriots in the 2002 Super Bowl. The Patriots won 20-17.

"Under our proposal, Mr. Walsh is only protected if he in good faith is truthful. And he will be," Levy told The Associated Press on Friday in a telephone interview from his office at the Washington law firm of McKee Nelson.

...

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

Re: PFT: Walsh does indeed have tapes!

but, where are they? walsh has been saying for weeks that he has tapes. this isnt a breaking story. walsh needs to stfu, and show the tapes to the nfl, and stop ****in around. im getting sick of this whole thing.
SHOW US THE TAPES WALSH, OR LEAVE THE F'N COUNTRY
sorry, i feel better now

 

[mrperrino]

Re: PFT: Walsh does indeed have tapes!

What works in the PATS favor is the following:

Matt has to PROVE, PROVE, that whatever footage he has in his possession that the following occurred:

1. Prove The PATS Told him to video tape the footage
2. Prove that Bill and/or staff had knowledge of the footage
3. Prove that the Pats instructed Matt to film the footage

the Pats will easily say the following:

1. "We did not authorize this filiming by our staff"
2. "These tapes were recorded by Matt Walsh and he acted alone"
3. "The PATS had no knowledge of these tapes, nor ever granted Matt Walsh permission to record this footage.
4. No one in the PATS organization authorized nor instructed Matt to video tape this footage
5. THe PATS never knew of these tapes because they never knew Matt was recording the footage on his own....and for Mat Walsh to keep these tapes, could have been for revenge and personal gain....alal secretly record behind the PATS' back, then keep the footage to say the PATS told him to record the footage, thus keeping it for blackmail.....again, disgruntled employee...why wait 7 years? Matt is toast!

So, the Burden of Proof is strictly on Matt Walsh.... He can't simply say, "The Pats told me to video this and that and this and that, here are the tapes to prove it" , because the PATS will deny any knowledge of it, and say Mat Walsh filmed footage without any knowledge of the PATS organization...

Bring it on....Matt Walsh will be the fool on the hill! :rocker:

 

[Delicate Genius]

Re: PFT: Walsh does indeed have tapes!

Well said, mrperrino. Unless Walsh has actual proof that he was told to film something, I don't see what this will do other than lead the same dumb****s to more of their own conclusions that facts don't back up.

 

[PatsFan24]

Re: PFT: Walsh does indeed have tapes!

What works in the PATS favor is the following:

Matt has to PROVE, PROVE, that whatever footage he has in his possession that the following occurred:

1. Prove The PATS Told him to video tape the footage
2. Prove that Bill and/or staff had knowledge of the footage
3. Prove that the Pats instructed Matt to film the footage

the Pats will easily say the following:

1. "We did not authorize this filiming by our staff"
2. "These tapes were recorded by Matt Walsh and he acted alone"
3. "The PATS had no knowledge of these tapes, nor ever granted Matt Walsh permission to record this footage.
4. No one in the PATS organization authorized nor instructed Matt to video tape this footage
5. THe PATS never knew of these tapes because they never knew Matt was recording the footage on his own....and for Mat Walsh to keep these tapes, could have been for revenge and personal gain....alal secretly record behind the PATS' back, then keep the footage to say the PATS told him to record the footage, thus keeping it for blackmail.....again, disgruntled employee...why wait 7 years? Matt is toast!

So, the Burden of Proof is strictly on Matt Walsh.... He can't simply say, "The Pats told me to video this and that and this and that, here are the tapes to prove it" , because the PATS will deny any knowledge of it, and say Mat Walsh filmed footage without any knowledge of the PATS organization...

Bring it on....Matt Walsh will be the fool on the hill! :rocker:

good call.

 

[sanvara]

Re: PFT: Walsh does indeed have tapes!

What works in the PATS favor is the following:

Matt has to PROVE, PROVE, that whatever footage he has in his possession that the following occurred:

1. Prove The PATS Told him to video tape the footage
2. Prove that Bill and/or staff had knowledge of the footage
3. Prove that the Pats instructed Matt to film the footage

the Pats will easily say the following:

1. "We did not authorize this filiming by our staff"
2. "These tapes were recorded by Matt Walsh and he acted alone"
3. "The PATS had no knowledge of these tapes, nor ever granted Matt Walsh permission to record this footage.
4. No one in the PATS organization authorized nor instructed Matt to video tape this footage
5. THe PATS never knew of these tapes because they never knew Matt was recording the footage on his own....and for Mat Walsh to keep these tapes, could have been for revenge and personal gain....alal secretly record behind the PATS' back, then keep the footage to say the PATS told him to record the footage, thus keeping it for blackmail.....again, disgruntled employee...why wait 7 years? Matt is toast!

So, the Burden of Proof is strictly on Matt Walsh.... He can't simply say, "The Pats told me to video this and that and this and that, here are the tapes to prove it" , because the PATS will deny any knowledge of it, and say Mat Walsh filmed footage without any knowledge of the PATS organization...

Bring it on....Matt Walsh will be the fool on the hill! :rocker:

It may come down to testimony under oath and penalty of perjury. All bets are off then.

 

[fair catch fryar]

Re: PFT: Walsh does indeed have tapes!

It may come down to testimony under oath and penalty of perjury. All bets are off then.

Yeah, cause people never lie while under oath.

 

[pats1]

This could get interesting.

 

[JDSal45]

Re: PFT: Walsh does indeed have tapes!

What works in the PATS favor is the following:

Matt has to PROVE, PROVE, that whatever footage he has in his possession that the following occurred:

1. Prove The PATS Told him to video tape the footage
2. Prove that Bill and/or staff had knowledge of the footage
3. Prove that the Pats instructed Matt to film the footage

the Pats will easily say the following:

1. "We did not authorize this filiming by our staff"
2. "These tapes were recorded by Matt Walsh and he acted alone"
3. "The PATS had no knowledge of these tapes, nor ever granted Matt Walsh permission to record this footage.
4. No one in the PATS organization authorized nor instructed Matt to video tape this footage
5. THe PATS never knew of these tapes because they never knew Matt was recording the footage on his own....and for Mat Walsh to keep these tapes, could have been for revenge and personal gain....alal secretly record behind the PATS' back, then keep the footage to say the PATS told him to record the footage, thus keeping it for blackmail.....again, disgruntled employee...why wait 7 years? Matt is toast!

So, the Burden of Proof is strictly on Matt Walsh.... He can't simply say, "The Pats told me to video this and that and this and that, here are the tapes to prove it" , because the PATS will deny any knowledge of it, and say Mat Walsh filmed footage without any knowledge of the PATS organization...

Bring it on....Matt Walsh will be the fool on the hill! :rocker:

I disagree. If he has tapes and was a Patriots employee, the assumption will be he did it on behalf of the Patriots. I don't care what they say, no one will believe otherwise. He doesn't have to prove ****. Simply producing the tapes, people will believe the Patriots did it.

J D Sal

 

[pats1]

Re: PFT: Walsh does indeed have tapes!

I disagree. If he has tapes and was a Patriots employee, the assumption will be he did it on behalf of the Patriots. I don't care what they say, no one will believe otherwise. He doesn't have to prove ****. Simply producing the tapes, people will believe the Patriots did it.

J D Sal

I tend to agree. The Pats saying Walsh was acting alone is a ridiculous defense.

 

[chunga]

If he does have a tape, than we have seen the last game coached for the Patriots by Bill Belichik. Kraft will have no choice but to let him go as it will be the only way to separate the team from the cheating allegations. I don't like it, but it will happen. Very sad. I hope Walsh has nothing.

 

[vyrago]

If he does have a tape, than we have seen the last game coached for the Patriots by Bill Belichik. Kraft will have no choice but to let him go as it will be the only way to separate the team from the cheating allegations. I don't like it, but it will happen. Very sad. I hope Walsh has nothing.

Wonder why he was fired.

 

[pats1]

If he does have a tape, than we have seen the last game coached for the Patriots by Bill Belichik. Kraft will have no choice but to let him go as it will be the only way to separate the team from the cheating allegations. I don't like it, but it will happen. Very sad. I hope Walsh has nothing.

The only thing is, how could have Belichick turned in these tapes to Goodell upon his request if they were in Walsh's possession?

 

[mgm79]

The only thing is, how could have Belichick turned in these tapes to Goodell upon his request if they were in Walsh's possession?

He couldn't have, but it the tapes have the Rams Super bowl walkthrough then we are screwed because the Pats have already denied taping that. And Goddell will have no choice but to bring the hammer down either way because the media will be screaming for blood.

 

[JDSal45]

The only thing is, how could have Belichick turned in these tapes to Goodell upon his request if they were in Walsh's possession?

What if he only made a copy, not the original?

J D Sal

 

[pats1]

What if he only made a copy, not the original?

J D Sal

Yeah, but why would he keep it for this long? Is this like Brian McNamee keeping Clemens' syringes in a Miller Lite can for 10 years?

 

[Va_Pats_Fan]

Re: PFT: Walsh does indeed have tapes!

What works in the PATS favor is the following:

Matt has to PROVE, PROVE, that whatever footage he has in his possession that the following occurred:

1. Prove The PATS Told him to video tape the footage
2. Prove that Bill and/or staff had knowledge of the footage
3. Prove that the Pats instructed Matt to film the footage

the Pats will easily say the following:

1. "We did not authorize this filiming by our staff"
2. "These tapes were recorded by Matt Walsh and he acted alone"
3. "The PATS had no knowledge of these tapes, nor ever granted Matt Walsh permission to record this footage.
4. No one in the PATS organization authorized nor instructed Matt to video tape this footage
5. THe PATS never knew of these tapes because they never knew Matt was recording the footage on his own....and for Mat Walsh to keep these tapes, could have been for revenge and personal gain....alal secretly record behind the PATS' back, then keep the footage to say the PATS told him to record the footage, thus keeping it for blackmail.....again, disgruntled employee...why wait 7 years? Matt is toast!

So, the Burden of Proof is strictly on Matt Walsh.... He can't simply say, "The Pats told me to video this and that and this and that, here are the tapes to prove it" , because the PATS will deny any knowledge of it, and say Mat Walsh filmed footage without any knowledge of the PATS organization...

Bring it on....Matt Walsh will be the fool on the hill! :rocker:

You just said the same thing in 5 different ways. Unfortunately, once the tapes (if they do exist) come out, since he was an employee of the company, the burden of proof would be on the Pats to prove that he acted alone.

 

[PatriotsReign]

Re: PFT: Walsh does indeed have tapes!

It may come down to testimony under oath and penalty of perjury. All bets are off then.

Of course all bets would not be off. It would then be his word against the Patriots. The Patriots and the NFL have been collecting information on Mr Walsh and he is a know liar.

There is no way his testimony alone would result in anything.

 

[PatriotsReign]

If he does have a tape, than we have seen the last game coached for the Patriots by Bill Belichik. Kraft will have no choice but to let him go as it will be the only way to separate the team from the cheating allegations. I don't like it, but it will happen. Very sad. I hope Walsh has nothing.

For the league's sake, Walsh better have nothing. PFT and other sources have said there is a rumor that is highly likely that if BB were made a sacrificial lamb in this farce, he would blow the perverbial whistle on everything he knows about cheating in the NFL and those who participated.

Personally, I believe this rumor and I would just LOVE to see BB step up and Blow up the league if they go after him in the witch hunt. I would cheer the man on every single step of the way!

 

[MassPats38]

Assuming for the sake of argument Belichick ordered a pervasive cheating endeavor, do you honestly believe, with all the compartmentalized security (people in the Pats organization know their jobs but not the jobs of other people or groups in the organization) he would actually leave this Kaiser Sose character in a position to expose the illegal endeavor? Only if they are complete morons. Belichick may be arrogant (believe what you want about the videotaping violation-he liked doing things his way and thought the rule was stupid-he was obvious, not sneaky, in his videotaping), but he is not stupid.

The court of public opinion will never believe Belichick, not if he hooks himself to a polygraph, not if he says he has nothing to confess before being burned at the stake. Could a garden variety idiot like Walsh, a low level, video media guy who would be aware of the Rams practice schedule by virtue of media bulletins, unilaterally tape that practice in an effort to enhance his position with the organization? Uh, yeah. Don't forget the fact that the Pats played the Rams well (24-17) during the season, so where is the motivation to engage in something Belichik clearly could get caught and embarrassed doing? This ploy is not the sidelines stuff, it is the stuff that kills a team's desire to win and creates scandal right before the Superbowl. It tells a team the coach believes the team is outmatched and cannot honestly win the game. That would be stupid.

Walsh has nothing. If the Pats thought he had videos, he would likely be sued long ago for theft of team property and violation of his employment agreement. If Walsh was able to sneak these smoking gun videos out, there would be no chain of custody implicating him and he would have leaked them to the media for a big payday (and given the love of the mediots for the Pats, somebody would have paid that tab). Something about Walsh does not scream love of the NFL and its competitive balance. This guy is therefore the NFL's equivalent of Geraldo Rivera's Al Capone vault episode - a huge amount of wasted attention that will result in absolutely nothing but lost time.