Sports agent/lawyer for the NHLMarciano490 said:
I don't even know who this is or supposed to be? Is it someone whose opinion means a damn?
Sports agent/lawyer for the NHLMarciano490 said:
I don't even know who this is or supposed to be? Is it someone whose opinion means a damn?
“@walsha: The notion that a professional sports league believes it has the legal right to a players cell phone is ridiculous.”
Phone numbers would be attached to texts sent, not sure about IMessage because that can be just an Apple ID username.DrewDawg said:
Also, the NFL could say that they would have no way of knowing if that list was complete.
WayBackVazquez said:
Well, he's right about that.
drbretto said:And, this is very important, Brady was under investigation from the NFL. Not the FBI. They weren't getting the phone. He made that clear. So when it comes time for a new phone, there's no reason not to be business as usual. Because, again, this is important, fuck the NFL.
He is an annoying NHL agent.Marciano490 said:
I don't even know who this is or supposed to be? Is it someone whose opinion means a damn?
Eh, there was no way that the NFL was getting the phone without Brady's consent. Destroying it has zero upside. Putting it in a safe is a much better plan. And in no circumstance would a judge allow a wholesale fishing expedition into his personal data. At worst it would be a fight over search terms related to the facts at issue. This isn't rocket science. It happens all the time.dcmissle said:The phone is likely an enormous fuck up by Yee -- and maybe Kessler too.
If I am Yee, I anticipate heat destroy it. So I insist he out it in a fireproof safe in my office to which only TB has the combination.
I don't know why Kessler let him get into this in the hearing. I would have just said, we are not producing the phone. Period.
Only caveat is if what was on the phone was so incriminating, TB just had to destroy it.
cornwalls@6 said:Not the context I was referring to. If you had quoted the entire post, I was referring to Goodell including in his statement today, and asking if that could somehow be used against him the federal appeal. If that was a stupid, wishful question, happy to to take the beating for it. Well aware that the sting angle has been thoroughly examined in many other posts.
amarshal2 said:
What? Remove their framing of the question and consider this framing:
"We will provide you with a list of every person Brady texted during the time frame you request. That way, if there's anybody connected to the Patriots whose phone you have not already reviewed that you would like to contact to see the texts you'll be able to do that."
joe dokes said:
Phrased that way, yes it is ridiculous. But there is a duty to cooperate in an investigation.
wibi said:
Which one is business as usual? Him destroying the latest cell phone or him not destroying the one from November?
scotian1 said:Not sure why but I feel even more disappointed with Robert Kraft now.
WayBackVazquez said:
But they don't just want people connected to the patriots. They pretty much had access to all their phones. They want to know if Brady talked about game balls with his dad, Mark Wahlberg, his dry cleaner...
"The Commissioner’s decision is deeply disappointing, but not surprising because the appeal process was thoroughly lacking in procedural fairness.
Most importantly, neither Tom nor the Patriots did anything wrong. And the NFL has no evidence that anything inappropriate occurred.
The appeal process was a sham, resulting in the Commissioner rubber-stamping his own decision. For example, the Wells investigative team was given over 100 days to conduct its investigation. Just days prior to the appeal hearing, we were notified that we would only have four hours to present a defense; therefore, we didn’t have enough time to examine important witnesses. Likewise, it was represented to the public that the Wells team was ‘independent’; however, when we requested documents from Wells, our request was rejected on the basis of privilege. We therefore had no idea as to what Wells found from other witnesses, nor did we know what those other witnesses said.
These are just two examples of how the Commissioner failed to ensure a fair process.
Additionally, the science in the Wells Report was junk. It has been thoroughly discredited by independent third parties.
Finally, as to the issue of cooperation, we presented the Commissioner with an unprecedented amount of electronic data, all of which is incontrovertible. I do not think that any private citizen would have agreed to provide anyone with the amount of information that Tom was willing to reveal to the Commissioner. Tom was completely transparent. All of the electronic information was ignored; we don’t know why. The extent to which Tom opened up his private life to the Commissioner will become clear in the coming days.
The Commissioner’s decision and discipline has no precedent in all of NFL history. His decision alters the competitive balance of the upcoming season. The decision is wrong and has no basis, and it diminishes the integrity of the game.”
SeoulSoxFan said:
May your team make the playoffs. Unless it's the Jets.
drbretto said:
Which one from november now? I feel like I'm missing a bit of info here.
wibi said:
You are missing the point I'm trying to make. I'm not says its unbelievable for Brady to destroy his SIM card or phone (BTW if your SIM keeps your pictures you have a weird phone) but its unbelievable that a majority of the population (or even a significant minority) destroy their old phone when they get a new one. Using me as a reference was because I work in a highly security conscious environment where people would actually have security and safety reasons to destroy their phones and yet no one I know actually does.
drbretto said:
Which one from november now? I feel like I'm missing a bit of info here.
Marciano490 said:
Which implies they were going to read through all his text messages; those to his wife, baby momma, kids, parents, etc. I know you know this, but just spelling out what an obscene ask that is.
WayBackVazquez said:
But they don't just want people connected to the patriots. They pretty much had access to all their phones. They want to know if Brady talked about game balls with his dad, Mark Wahlberg, his dry cleaner...
The extent to which Tom opened up his private life to the Commissioner will become clear in the coming days.
troparra said:
There is another real conclusion. Brady wanted to protect his privacy.
soxhop411 said:Statement from Tom Brady's agent, Don Yee:
Tom was completely transparent. All of the electronic information was ignored; we don’t know why. The extent to which Tom opened up his private life to the Commissioner will become clear in the coming days.
The Commissioner’s decision and discipline has no precedent in all of NFL history. His decision alters the competitive balance of the upcoming season. The decision is wrong and has no basis, and it diminishes the integrity of the game.”
Corsi said:
Statement from Tom Brady's agent, Don Yee:
amarshal2 said:
IANAL but this is a straw man that I'm guessing no judge would ever allow under any circumstances.
Weren't most of the texts from Dorito dink early in 2014 and weren't those used as the basis for finding guilt?wibi said:
amarshal2 said:
IANAL but this is a straw man that I'm guessing no judge would ever allow under any circumstances.
I agree.joe dokes said:
And mine. Unfortunately -- because reactions are just that -- mine tended towards the bolded.
PBDWake said:So, let me ask a different question. The NFL has maintained that they gave Brady the option of only allowing access to DFG-related items, and that he could pre-screen everything, but we've never actually heard what the NFL considers "related to DFG".
That will be ignored by 90% of the media and 99% of football fans.Drocca said:
That is an extremely well-written, persuasive statement.
ifmanis5 said:Love the statement. RG will get his salad tossed in court.
cshea said:Hope the Brady camp follows trough on the "coming days" statement. Hopefully they've got the goods.
I don't know how dumb it is. The outcome of this process was pre-determined. Any information provided by Brady to the NFL would be acknowledged only if harmful to him and completely ignored/disregarded if it supported his innocence. There was no upside in providing them anything aside from fulfilling some basic standard of cooperation.NatetheGreat said:
If the phone contained exculpatory evidence and Brady destroyed it anyway, that's just dumb. I'm assuming he isn't dumb, and that the phone therefore didn't contain anything he thought would help. Which isn't the same as somehow proving it contained incriminating evidence
DrewDawg said:
It appears Tomase didn't like it:
John Tomase @jtomase 4m4 minutes ago
If I'm Tom Brady, I'm telling Don Yee to practice writing statements to himself and then sticking them in his Trapper Keeper for eternity.
joe dokes said:
Phrased that way, yes it is ridiculous. But there is a duty to cooperate in an investigation.
There is? And that extends to cell phones?