Walsh's attorney: Walsh has tapes

[patsfaninpa]

He probably needs indemnity because it's not legal for his to possess these tapes. They belong to the team. You can't just take them with you if you leave the job.

 

[chrisfx811]

Bold statements are starting to leak out of Walsh's camp if you ask me.
Strange that he has tapes in his possession from his time with the Patriots, and they haven't surfaced until now.

I agree, that if he has anything that looks bad on the Pats, they will be deemed guilty in the court of public opinion.
This will force Goodell to either place all blame on the Pats and deny that he knew anything about it, or it will force the league to stand together and acknowledge that these practices were known and likely widespread.

Fwiw, was it against the rules to tape practices in 2002? I'm just saying, that if it wasn't clear in the rules, then by all means taping practices is fair game, imho.

 

[PatriotsReign]

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.

Makes me wonder if someone on the Rams would give Walsh one of their own tapes so Walsh can claim it came from the Patriots.

 

[PatriotsReign]

He probably needs indemnity because it's not legal for his to possess these tapes. They belong to the team. You can't just take them with you if you leave the job.

Someone please tell me how the league and our government can forgive someone for stealing to convict another of a crime? This is not like making a deal with the DA.

 

[JoeSixPat]

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:

And the proof would be that WALSH has the tapes - not the Patriots.

Who's to say that a more likely scenario isn't the fact that Walsh snuck into the practice, taped the practice, the Patriots refused to accept the tapes, fired Walsh - leading him to hold onto the tapes in hopes of blackmail or somehow using them to his advantage?

 

[Truck]

He probably needs indemnity because it's not legal for his to possess these tapes. They belong to the team. You can't just take them with you if you leave the job.

Agree, but whats also weird is if you did something illegal like that, would you voluntarily admit to it?

Would you say "I stole those confidential documents from you but if you don't sue me I'll show them to the press".

If what Matt Walsh says is true; here's his options
1. Burn the tapes and no one ever finds out
2. Hand the tapes over and say you're sorry
3. Ask the former employer permission to give the tapes to the media to embarrass your former employer
4. Give the tapes to the media without asking and get your ass sued off

The idea that #3 would ever occur (if what Walsh says is true) is downright laughable. And the fact that he's actually admitted to the crime; does that mean he can already be sued even if he never shows the evidence?

I think the reason why the NFL was willing to give Walsh indemnification is so that he'd then have no excuse when he couldn't turn up the tape.

 

[chrisfx811]

Someone please tell me how the league and our government can forgive someone for stealing to convict another of a crime? This is not like making a deal with the DA.

They won't be trying to convict the Pats of a crime. Just trying to further tarnish their legacy and further the ****storm of mediots and fans calling for the games to be overturned, which makes it even more ludicrous that he be given indemnity.

Nothing short of BB and/or other active coaches in the league coming out and admitting stuff like this went on all the time would stop the tidal wave of crap that would happen if the Pats are found to have taped more than admitted.

Which, since BB already admitted to having been using videotape since he became coach, kind of only leaves the Rams walk through as their White Whale. The Pats have denied that, so being found lying would be damaging.

 

[SammyBlueCat]

Makes me wonder if someone on the Rams would give Walsh one of their own tapes so Walsh can claim it came from the Patriots.

This idea of yours is reaching but never the less it is interesting.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

Re: PFT: Walsh does indeed have tapes!

Who's to say that a more likely scenario isn't the fact that Walsh snuck into the practice, taped the practice, the Patriots refused to accept the tapes, fired Walsh - leading him to hold onto the tapes in hopes of blackmail or somehow using them to his advantage?

I would buy that expect for the fact that the Patriots would then know that the taping was done (though without their consent) and would not have issued such a strong denial that the taping did not occur at all.

 

[WTE]

Wonder why he was fired.

But he told his friends and family he quit yet collected unemployment. You don't collect unemployment when you quit a job.

Matt Walsh has always been a pathological liar and he knows the Patriots have plenty of dirt to destroy his image if this thing goes further.

That's why he's scared. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[MassPats38]

Indemnification agreements are like any agreements - simply what I will do for you and what the you will do for me. Walsh could easily be covered for damages arising from theft of the videotape and for breach of a confidentiality agreement. This matter is purely civil unless he lies under oath, then it become a criminal matter. I cannot believe any law enforcement agency has interest in investigating a stolen tape (not to mention statutes of limitations on theft charges given the time of theft (2002/2003)).

If this clown is still saying the terms of the indemnification agreement are not right, it starts to sound a little fishy. No agreement will cover perjury on the stand, and I suspect slander/libel claims will similarly not be covered. In short, if you lie on the stand you deal with the damages. Testify honestly and violate a confidentiality agreement in doing so and the NFL picks up the bill. It is a simple issue, so the fact there is all this wrangling tends to make me believe Walsh has nothing to add.

At some level, I still believe mediots in contact with Walsh may have told him it makes for good theater to draw this saga out. Once Specter and Walsh go away, Spygate has no legs which means these mediots will have to actually write something creative rather than catering to Pats haters.

 

[lorijean]

This whole thing smells like a set-up to me. I just cannot believe that Walsh has had these tapes for years and nothing. Something else is going on but I certainly cannot figure it out.

 

[PatriotsReign]

Indemnification agreements are like any agreements - simply what I will do for you and what the you will do for me. Walsh could easily be covered for damages arising from theft of the videotape and for breach of a confidentiality agreement. This matter is purely civil unless he lies under oath, then it become a criminal matter. I cannot believe any law enforcement agency has interest in investigating a stolen tape (not to mention statutes of limitations on theft charges given the time of theft (2002/2003)).

If this clown is still saying the terms of the indemnification agreement are not right, it starts to sound a little fishy. No agreement will cover perjury on the stand, and I suspect slander/libel claims will similarly not be covered. In short, if you lie on the stand you deal with the damages. Testify honestly and violate a confidentiality agreement in doing so and the NFL picks up the bill. It is a simple issue, so the fact there is all this wrangling tends to make me believe Walsh has nothing to add.

At some level, I still believe mediots in contact with Walsh may have told him it makes for good theater to draw this saga out. Once Specter and Walsh go away, Spygate has no legs which means these mediots will have to actually write something creative rather than catering to Pats haters.

With the key words being Pats haters. Anyone who gives credance to this media assault can't be a Pats fan....very good point!

 

[JDSal45]

But he told his friends and family he quit yet collected unemployment. You don't collect unemployment when you quit a job.

Matt Walsh has always been a pathological liar and he knows the Patriots have plenty of dirt to destroy his image if this thing goes further.

That's why he's scared. Nothing more, nothing less.

You don't collect when you're fired either, at least for wrongdoing.

J D Sal

 

[IcyPatriot]

Why does Walsh have the tapes? If he made them for the Patriots then why does he have them? Legally the Patriots win this one ... however, Congress does have their ways.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

The fact that he has tapes, in and of itself, doesn't prove anything.

Heck, we don't even know what's on these tapes. For all we know, Walsh might have just copied stuff that was on the six tapes the Patriots recycled.

Most importantly, though, I honestly believe that there's smoke here, but no fire--precisely because the Patriots issued a denial. Remember what Goodell said: there would be no further punishment unless he could establish that the Patriots had lied to him. If such a tape exists, and they truly were responsible for it, they would be in more trouble for denying it than by not saying anything at all--and they denied doing this back in September.

 

[PatriotsReign]

The fact that he has tapes, in and of itself, doesn't prove anything.

Heck, we don't even know what's on these tapes. For all we know, Walsh might have just copied stuff that was on the six tapes the Patriots recycled.

Most importantly, though, I honestly believe that there's smoke here, but no fire--precisely because the Patriots issued a denial. Remember what Goodell said: there would be no further punishment unless he could establish that the Patriots had lied to him. If such a tape exists, and they truly were responsible for it, they would be in more trouble for denying it than by not saying anything at all--and they denied doing this back in September.

If Walsh or his lawyer is lying, they should be prosecuted. You can't just go around saying anything you please without paying the consequences.

 

[JDSal45]

Why does Walsh have the tapes? If he made them for the Patriots then why does he have them? Legally the Patriots win this one ... however, Congress does have their ways.

I suppose in some theoretical sense yes, the Patriots "win". But I don't know why people keep harping on whether Matt Walsh "stole" the tapes or not. That doesn't really help the Patriots a hell of a lot.

Its like calling the police to report someone stole your marijuana stash. It hurts the Patriots if they HAD these tapes. They are against the league rules and you saw what damage they've already caused. It hardly helps us to say "ya but he STOLE them...." So what? Nobody will care and will probably more just see Walsh as a whistleblower who stole the test results of a new drug from a pharmaceutical company that was going to cause more harm than good to its patients. Just to use an example. Higher good, yada yada yada.

Unfortunate but true. Whether Walsh is a liar, cheat, thief.....none of that really helps us if the public, or more importantly the NFL, believes the tapes were done on behalf of the New England Patriots (if they exist and they're more than what Belichick's already admitted to.....similar to what they did vs. the Jets......and I'm not convinced). If its just tapes of the same thing as the Jets game....well we already KNEW that. If its something more, then there is an issue.

J D Sal

 

[lorijean]

I just don't get why Walsh would be in possession of this tape and not bring it to light just after the Pats won over the Rams or certainly within a year. It is leading me to believe that he never had a tape at that time.

 

[pao]

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

True. Anyone telling themselves any different are just fooling themselves. In the court of public opinion, the most important court imo, they will believe Walsh. This isn't the end either, IF TRUE. There are others out there or with the Pats right now that will eventually tell more, IF TRUE. Imagine if this were another team, like the Jets, how would you be reacting?

pao