Brady 4 Game Suspension Upheld

[pbmax]

Roger gave himself a literal vote of confidence.

Also this: http://deadspin.com/nfl-upholds-tom-...ion-1720647254

Brady directed that the cell phone he had used for the prior four months be destroyed. He did so even though he was aware that the investigators had requested access to text messages and other electronic information that had been stored on that phone. During the four months that the cell phone was in use, Brady had exchanged nearly 10,000 text messages, none of which can now be retrieved from that device. The destruction of the cell phone was not disclosed until June 18, almost four months after the investigators had first sought electronic information from Brady.

Its sweet poetic justice that Roger is going to lose this in Court while Brady looks very guilty.

[pbmax]

Ben VolinVerified @BenVolin
Brady's explanation for destroying his phone: He always does this when he gets a new phone

[pbmax]

Jim Trotter ‏@JimTrotter_NFL 1h1 hour ago
Tom Brady has authorized the NFLPA to appeal his case in federal court, per source.

Chris B. Brown ‏@smartfootball 46s46 seconds ago
Here's the complaint for the preemptive lawsuit the NFL filed in the Southern District of New York vs the NFLPA http://smartfootball.com/wp-content/...filed-7-28.pdf …


Translation: the NFL knew this was going to the Courts, and Brady probably did too.

[pbmax]

Ian Rapoport ‏@RapSheet 19m19 minutes ago
Interesting. @judybattista says the sides were moving close to a 1-game suspension settlement. But Brady wanted records sealed. NFL wouldn’t

Ian Rapoport ‏@RapSheet 4m4 minutes ago
PA response RT @GeorgeAtallah: Any report that suggests two sides were coming close on a settlement in the Brady matter is rubbish.

Ross TuckerVerified account
‏@RossTuckerNFL
Why would Brady want records sealed if nothing to hide?

Chris B. Brown ‏@smartfootball 10m10 minutes ago
OK, everyone send me your bank statements and college transcripts. I'm discreet, I swear. http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Pri...ven-if/127461/ …

Robert Klemko ‏@RobertKlemko 14m14 minutes ago
Tom Brady's not a moron. After phone destruction revelation, obvious next question: Who was he protecting?


During playoffs, everyone was convinced Brady did something to violate the spirit, if not the letter of the rules. After the Wells Report, no one believed the science anymore and thought Goodell overreacted. Now everyone is convinced Brady is guilty of something.

[esoxx]

Good

[King Friday]

I don't think Brady has an automatic win in court on this one.

If he had not destroyed the phone and simply denied access based on any number of "excuses" that could be legally argued in court...he's probably in the clear without much of a problem.

However, the cover up OFTEN winds up costing far more than what the original offense ever would have. It appears that there won't be an exception to that in this case.

[MadScientist]

I could actually get that Brady has his old phone destroyed when he gets a new one, because people would try to grab the data off it and with his celebrity status that would be a big problem. However it just happens to be the day he met with Wells, and he only had the phone for 4 months. Switching phones is a pain, and 4 months is not a normal upgrade cycle. Just way to suspicious to believe that it was a coincidence. If that was the best defense he had, I'm half surprised that Goodell didn't give him 6 games.

[pbmax]

Brady's agent/lawyer says they turned over "unprecedented" documents about his electronic communications. I suspect there are details about what was and wasn't exchanged that we will learn about eventually.

[Joemailman]

Is there anything in the CBA which says a player must turn over personal records to the NFL to aid in an investigation of said player?

[King Friday]

Brady's agent/lawyer says they turned over "unprecedented" documents about his electronic communications. I suspect there are details about what was and wasn't exchanged that we will learn about eventually.

Documents? Did they photocopy pictures of the phone in pieces?

[Guiness]

Is there anything in the CBA which says a player must turn over personal records to the NFL to aid in an investigation of said player?

Yes, there definitely are. Too lazy to go looking for a reference, but I know there is something in the CBA about it.

[pbmax]

Generally speaking, as an employee you have a duty to turn over records related to the business if you wish to stay employed (company owns the work product, etc.) But what the CBA says I don't know.

[pbmax]

ProFootballTalk ‏@ProFootballTalk 2h2 hours ago
NFL offered Tom Brady "at least 50 percent reduction" in exchange for admission of guilt http://wp.me/p14QSB-9OqO

"Mr. Brady? You can have my answer now, if you like. My final offer is this: nothing."

[pbmax]

Documents? Did they photocopy pictures of the phone in pieces?

No idea. Not much of this makes sense. If you believe Yee (his agent) they were not allowed access to the documentation the Wells report had about its investigation.

[Guiness]

this genie is absolutely NOT going back in the bottle

[Harlan Huckleby]

I'm waiting for the Trump connection to come out.

This is a stupid video, do not watch.



This is now officially ugly. Leaking that Brady smashed his phone was nasty.
But it's not over 'till Brady says it's over. Goodell may wake up next to his horse's severed head.

[Joemailman]

“I also disagree with yesterday’s narrative surrounding my cellphone,” Brady wrote. “I replaced my broken Samsung phone with a new iPhone 6 AFTER my attorneys made it clear to the NFL that my actual phone device would not be subjected to investigation under ANY circumstances. As a member of a union, I was under no obligation to set a new precedent going forward, nor was I made aware at any time during Mr. Wells investigation, that failing to subject my cell phone to investigation would result in ANY discipline."

I'm guessing this will be the crux of his defense in court.

[pbmax]

I'm guessing this will be the crux of his defense in court.

The NFLPA won the last case (don't remember which player) on a due process claim. Employers are not obligated to follow due process exactly as it applies to the Court system, but they must follow the spirit of the law. If Brady was not granted access to documents and witnesses, they'll argue that as well.

[pbmax]

Brady on what documentation they turned over:

“To try and reconcile the record and fully cooperate with the investigation after I was disciplined in May, we turned over detailed pages of cell phone records and all of the emails that Mr. Wells requested. We even contacted the phone company to see if there was any possible way we could retrieve any/all of the actual text messages from my old phone. In short, we exhausted every possibility to give the NFL everything we could and offered to go thru the identity for every text and phone call during the relevant time. Regardless, the NFL knows that Mr. Wells already had ALL relevant communications with Patriots personnel that either Mr. Wells saw or that I was questioned about in my appeal hearing. There is no ‘smoking gun’ and this controversy is manufactured to distract from the fact they have zero evidence of wrongdoing.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...nothing-wrong/

I was under the impression that cell phone companies kept data longer than that, but perhaps not for months.

But the question remains, did Brady destroy evidence or did the NFL simply leak that action to help sway the public to their side?

[pbmax]

What Brady offered, but was declined by the NFL:

Specifically, it can be found at footnote 11 on page 12 [of NFL statement upholding suspension]: “After the hearing and after the submission of post-hearing briefs, Mr. Brady’s certified agents offered to provide a spreadsheet that would identify all of the individuals with whom Mr. Brady had exchanged text messages during [the relevant time] period; the agents suggested that the League could contact those individuals and request production of any relevant text messages that they retained. Aside from the fact that, under Article 46, Section 2(f) of the CBA, such information could and should have been provided long before the hearing, the approach suggested in the agents’ letter — which would require tracking down numerous individuals and seeking consent from each to retrieve from their cellphones detailed information about their text message communications during the relevant period — is simply not practical.”

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...text-messages/