- Joined
- Sep 13, 2004
- Messages
- 72,680
- Reaction score
- 22,510
They were in court to defend the wells report which they wholeheartedly believed was true.It wasn’t Goodell talking but it was his team. The stuff said that I feel we’re close to lies in court are based around quoting from Wells Report, now the report is completely false so using that seems unethical.
Why wouldn’t they? The owner of the patriots accepted it without contest.
But this is not perjury. It’s presenting a case.Moreover it seems the nfl guys even tried convincing judges that it does not matter about there being no previous player ever suspended over equipment violations. They made misleading statements, misquoted Brady, misquoted by changing words around. For example, reading from Brady’s texts to the equipment guy. Small changes to what was said to make Brady seem complicit in something here..: “ you are good bro” and then saying this is evidence Brady had stuff tampered with and is evidence he was directing the man to deflate... later, Brady’s lawyer points out this is not what was said, he actually was asking the guy a question not making a statement what is actually in the text is :”you good bro”?
The guy says yes I’m a little nervous.
We could go on for months about lawyers being slimy but the topic was perjury. Are you sure you understand what perjury is?Things like that are small beans to some but in a fedeal court, changing someone else’s words around while presenting a case against them in an attempt to make them seem guilty is slimy. A small change but it’s not all











