Va_Pats_Fan
Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2006
- Messages
- 1,443
- Reaction score
- 355
The legal profession can frequently turn out two things: Those without integrity and politicians.
I'm confused. Thats only 1 thing.
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.The legal profession can frequently turn out two things: Those without integrity and politicians.
Is Ted Wells done because of his gross lack of integrity in Defamegate? Ha! Chances are much MUCH better Ted Wells will be the next Senator from NY versus being harmed from Defamegate. The legal profession can frequently turn out two things: Those without integrity and politicians.
So unless some wild, unlikely, rare miracle of just desserts strike this crumb, in all likelihood at worst this slime will continue to collect huge payouts for railroading people by way of lying and framing. He'll then retire to a beach house in a very exclusive area (and probably right next to the Goodell's mansion/beach house).
Just is what it is my friends. Yet a tangible revenge we can hope for is the Patriots win the SB and Brady uses the bully pulpit of the spectacle to throw a few tiny 'chop chop' jabs his way, and make that slimy water walker choke on his chateau lafite rothschild in silent rage (add in there Goodell being drowned out with super loud boos just for being on the stage -- then watching his smarmy hideous face turn boiled lobster red ).
The judge asked at the hearing last week if the NFL had a smoking gun and the lawyer said there is no smoking gun. So, no.Just curious. Is there any possibility of him coming up with a smoking gun if he hasn't by now? Could the NFL be hiding 'stuff' until the most opportune moment? Seems, in my opinion, the NFL is basing their whole case on his report.
But, from my understanding, it's not the evidence that's on trial here. It is whether the NFL had the authority to punish Brady under the current CBA. Right? If so, what smoking gun evidence could Well's have in his pocket? The hidden CBA rule printed on the back of Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa?
Kidding aside, what evidence would change how Berman would decide whether the NFL was or was not permitted to punish Tom Brady? And if the evidence existed why would the NFL allow themselves to be slapped around in court only to drop the "gotcha" piece on Berman's desk at the last possible moment?
Wells had nothing to begin with, so why should we be surprised to see them contrive another self-serving lie?Just curious. Is there any possibility of him coming up with a smoking gun if he hasn't by now? Could the NFL be hiding 'stuff' until the most opportune moment? Seems, in my opinion, the NFL is basing their whole case on his report.
Furthermore, due to the release of the appeals transcript and evidence of Wells not truly being an "independent" investigator while the NFL claimed he was and he himself angrily proclaimed himself as independent in a press conference... could Wells sue the NFL for loss of potential money? The ******* part of me would kind of like to see that.
I have to guess that at this point no respectable party/company would dream of hiring Wells due to the fallout of deflategate and the hit to Wells' reputation. Then again people still hire Exponent even after they swore cigarette smoke has no adverse affect.
Perhaps I'm wrong and just hoping, maybe some lawyer types could chime in.
which I don't get because he seemed almost unbalanced in that conference call. I don't think I'd want hom representing me no matter how expensive or well connected he is.Wells' career as a purportedly independent investigator could be done. However, he's still a high-paid litigator.
which I don't get because he seemed almost unbalanced in that conference call. I don't think I'd want hom representing me no matter how expensive or well connected he is.
two things: Those without integrity and politicians. Same thing, no?
Q. Mike, I was disappointed to learn (from another publication) that some in the NFL believe the league has "way more" evidence against the Patriots, which you haven't discussed. Given the potential existence of this secret evidence, is it possible we'll see perjury charges filed against Tom Brady? Has the league based punishment on secret evidence in the past? -- Mark P. (Cambridge, Massachusetts)
A. Mark, I don't think this is about any "secret evidence." The way I interpreted the anonymous quote referred to here is that there are some in the NFL who believe that there have been push-the-envelope type things happening in the Patriots' organization for some time; thus, because of that belief, it's easier for them to accept the shaky findings of the Wells report and assume the worst (thinking there is even more there). In the end, with fairness in mind, all we can go on is direct evidence and I'd ask anyone the same question that Judge Berman has: What direct evidence is there that Tom Brady was involved in a "scheme" to deflate footballs? I haven't seen any.
Most of the bad stuff Wells has done in all this amount to being vigorous and sneaky in advancing the interests of his client.
For a litigator, those are virtues.
Crafting a pitifully lame report isn't a virtue.
there are some in the NFL who believe that there have been push-the-envelope type things happening in the Patriots' organization for some time;
A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.
I keep hearing this kind of thing:
Where does this come from? Because of Camera-placement-gate?
| 25 | 4K |
| 12 | 18K |
| 82 | 14K |
| 4 | 3K |
From our archive - this week all-time:
May 23 - June 7 (Through 26yrs)










