Brady 4 Game Suspension Upheld

[pbmax]

The funny part of all this is that after the appeal, none of the details will matter. Stunned as I am that the science of it didn't play a larger part, no one is really disputing that the arbitrator can weigh evidence as they see fit.

This is going to come down, as smuggler suggested much earlier, to deference to arbitration in labor contract disputes versus the NFL being internally consistent and adhering to the spirit of due process.

[pbmax]

What's wrong with that charge exactly? Is it the NFL's duty to seek out the data that Brady made difficult, if not impossible, to retrieve? Does it matter to the issue of what Brady did that there might be an alternative way of getting the data?

Previous instance of not supplying your phone to NFL investigation was a $25,000 fine. (see Favre v. Jet Masseuse, 2012)

And yes, if there is an alternative method to obtain data, then obstruction and lack of cooperation cease to be major issues.

[mraynrand]

And yes, if there is an alternative method to obtain data, then obstruction and lack of cooperation cease to be major issues.

this is what you believe? amazing

[sharpe1027]

You know the fall and the stairs (+ gravity) caused the injury. The method of football pressure loss is still being debated. In the former, the location and method of injury is known. In the latter both are unknown.

This seems to miss the point, but can we just end the analogy discussion? The scientific evidence for whether a needle was used is inconclusive either way. Agree to move on?

[pbmax]

really PB?

loss of pressure = fall/injury. There are various possible explanations for the loss of pressure as for the fall. The point being that the result on it's own is insufficient to determine cause.

The point in this case is that the loss of pressure isn't definitive, so it can't rule in or out claims either way. Have to look elsewhere.

That's fair. I was going to say the fall/injuries/stairs gives you location and time frame, but I guess that could fit as many scenarios as Gillette Stadium between pre-game and halftime.

[sharpe1027]

Previous instance of not supplying your phone to NFL investigation was a $25,000 fine. (see Favre v. Jet Masseuse, 2012)

And yes, if there is an alternative method to obtain data, then obstruction and lack of cooperation cease to be major issues.

Wow.

[pbmax]

This seems to miss the point, but can we just end the analogy discussion? The scientific evidence for whether a needle was used is inconclusive either way. Agree to move on?

I agree to move on if we change that to scientific evidence for whether anything was used is inconclusive.

[sharpe1027]

I agree to move on if we change that to scientific evidence for whether anything was used is inconclusive.

Agreed.

[pbmax]

this is what you believe? amazing

Wow.

Maybe I am missing something, but no its not a major issue in this case.

Wells asked for copies of any text messages or phone records to be supplied by Brady's side. He specifically said he did not need the phone. If Brady recovers them from AT&T's mail server and the recipients of text messages, what is the substantive difference?

[sharpe1027]

Maybe I am missing something, but no its not a major issue in this case.

Wells asked for copies of any text messages or phone records to be supplied by Brady's side. He specifically said he did not need the phone. If Brady recovers them from AT&T's mail server and the recipients of text messages, what is the substantive difference?

If Brady had recovered them from the AT&T mail server, we would not be having this discussion.

[sharpe1027]

If Brady was truly innocent (and once he decided to provide phone records in the first place) he had every incentive to make sure that the NFL had all of his phone records. Especially the ones around the relevant time period.

He did not do this. He actually went out of his way to provide partial evidence and obstruct the NFL's investigation. What logical conclusion does this suggest?

[mraynrand]

If Brady was truly innocent (and once he decided to provide phone records in the first place) he had every incentive to make sure that the NFL had all of his phone records. Especially the ones around the relevant time period.

He did not do this. He actually went out of his way to provide partial evidence and obstruct the NFL's investigation. What logical conclusion does this suggest?

It all depends on your political affiliation - are you a Jets fan or a Patriots fan?

[sharpe1027]

It all depends on your political affiliation - are you a Jets fan or a Patriots fan?

Honestly, I most certainly have an unconscious bias against the Pats. Still, I believe that it is not as open and shut as PB has stated.

[pbmax]

He has presented the NFL with his email collection. Text messages were traced to receiving phone numbers and Brady supplied the identities (or was prepared to). 28 individuals among those receiving text messages were associated with football.

http://deadspin.com/the-full-story-of-tom-bradys-destroyed-cell-phone-1722190784

As for the emails Wells originally requested, Brady had more luck in finding these. On June 3 his forensic examiner catalogued all 5,317 emails Brady sent or received between Sept. 1, 2014 and March 1, 2015. These emails were searched for the following terms:

k-ball, kball, gage, air-pump, airpump, needle, pin, PSI, pounds per square inch, 12.5, bladder, McNally, Bird, 1 pound, 1 lb, one pound, one lb, 2 pound, 2 lb, two pound, two lb, gaug* [the * means that all variations of “gaug” were included, such as gauge, gauging, gauged etc.], pump*, inflat*, deflat*, (game OR kick*) ball ~2 [this means Brady’s emails were searched to see whether the words “game” or “kick*” were found within two words of “ball”], (prep* OR rub*) AND (ball OR football) ~10, (investigat* OR meet* OR discuss* OR question) AND (championship OR Jan* 18 OR 1/18), investigat* AND (ball OR football OR Ind* OR Colts) ~10, (equilib* OR atmosphere* OR climat* OR environment* OR test* OR experiment) AND (ball OR football) ~10
All the emails that came up in those searches were submitted as evidence in the ongoing suit, and we are still working our way through all of them (you can get a taste here). But from the forensic examiner’s report it seems like none of them were particularly relevant. For instance, the word bladder was found twice, both times referring to the human body, and the only time “one pound” was used was when discussing eating protein. A bunch of finance emails are included, as Brady discussed the economic concepts of deflation or inflation with others.

The phone messages records recovered matched the one's reported by the Wells Report except for 3 additional messages not highlighted.

Of course, Wells wasn’t solely looking for Brady’s communication with Jastremski and McNally, but also whether he had used a variety of deflation-related terms with anybody else. And as pointed out in the NFL’s questioning of Brady, there are also three texts exchanged with Jastremski on February 7 that do not appear in the Wells Report:

Q. Let’s look back at NFL Exhibit 96, the letter from Mr. Yee to Commissioner Goodell. And I’m directing your attention to page 3 of the letter in the middle of the page. After Number 2, Jastremski, toward the end of that paragraph, it says, “The phone bills also show three text message exchanges on February 7, 2015 between 8:21 p.m. and 8:33 p.m. These occurred after the Super Bowl and were not mentioned or referenced in the Wells report.”

Elsewhere, it was reported by his agent that the 28 people contacted by text beyond the three known Patriots employees were known to them and they submitted those records to the League prior to or during the appeal. Goodell responded that "is simply not practical".

[pbmax]

If Brady was truly innocent (and once he decided to provide phone records in the first place) he had every incentive to make sure that the NFL had all of his phone records. Especially the ones around the relevant time period.

He did not do this. He actually went out of his way to provide partial evidence and obstruct the NFL's investigation. What logical conclusion does this suggest?

Because this case has legal ramifications for other parties. No one else had turned over phone data before and it would set a precedent. The prior punishment for this, in the only known case, was Favre's phone and it was $25,000 fine and embarrassment served.