Quote Originally Posted by sharpe1027 View Post
PB, your not being honest about this. You can't pick one post and say that's all we have been discussing. I am not reverse engineering a crime from a joke, I am explaining how that threat-based joke supports all the other evidence. Of course it is by inference, they didn't break down the door to the bathroom because he stole the balls from the referees and they didn't have a chance. They botched the measurements by not taking more care in how they took them.

Your repeated inference that there is no evidence of a crime, is just flat wrong. Is it iron-clad, no, but there is plenty of evidence.
There is no physical evidence that air was let out of the footballs. The underlying crime does not appear to have occurred. Do you have a murder conviction sustained when someone has not died?

There is a reason we are on charge #3 for Brady. Its because the first two charges had no basis in evidence. The originally reported PSI numbers were bogus. The science in the Wells report to support the charge in the face of more mundane PSI values uses tortured math like it was a budget projection in order to support the original assumption that the PSI values could only be obtained by manual deflation. Even the Wells report, bought and paid for by the NFL, cannot bring itself to call the evidence against Brady clear and convincing. But Goodell's ruling does.

Ask yourself this question:

If this was a game played in September at 75 degrees and dry, are we having this debate? The answer is obviously no.

This is Capone getting busted for tax evasion. Only this time, the judge is sentencing the perpetrator not according to tax evasion statutes, but by organized crime statutes.

And I don't think I am picking one point or post and objecting to the whole based on one contradiction or gap. There are problems with each piece of evidence which we have covered before, repeating them makes for very dull reading, if this is not already dull enough.