You and I believe that, but you're ignoring the fact that there is a scientific report that the NFL arbitrator relied upon which states otherwise. That's in the record, and you can't erase it.
#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
Range was 2 weeks to 2 months.
I think if this panel affirms, we could hear any time.
If there is a reversal though, they owe Berman at least a decent explanation, and that's going to take a bit longer.
As a practical matter, they can string this to the first week of September -- game 1 -- without seriously messing with anyone.
The Wells Report doesn't contain compelling evidence of tampering. The Wells Report doesn't even make the claim that its evidence is compelling.
Stephanie Stradley has a post up.
http://www.stradleylaw.com/snapshot-of-deflategate-2nd-circuit-argument/
http://www.stradleylaw.com/snapshot-of-deflategate-2nd-circuit-argument/
There are all sorts. Some judges like gunslinging up on the bench; I've heard (and again this was just clerk conjecture) that some judges just like to be heard or have fun pushing back on council or being "hot". Who knows? They're all human.
It wouldn't work like that in the Second Circuit. We circulated bench memos before oral arguments. Katzmann's clerk would've briefed him on the particulars before getting his sign off to send that off to the other judges' chambers, and he would've read the other judges' bench memos. I doubt he's read all the science or the transcripts at this point, but he's read the briefs and the underlying opinion.
I clerked for a judge in the 7th Circuit in the late 90's. For a simple case (say a run of the mill search and seizure case or something based on the federal sentencing guidelines) my judge would just read the bench memo we drafted and go from there. Very little prep beforehand and if he wasn't writing the decision--very little work afterward either.
However, for a high profile case (and the Brady - NFL case is pretty darn high profile) he would have read lots of stuff beforehand on his own and would have had his own questions drafted up. He also would have discussed the case extensively with whatever clerk was working that case.
And to the person asking if judges ever asked questions just to F with attorneys, the answer is yes. Not many, but there are some who just love to play bully with a robe and their questions having nothing to do with how they might rule. I always figured these were people who liked to pull the wings off a fly or torture frogs when they were kids just because they could.
But I have no idea if the judge in the Brady case is like that.
Unfortunately, it's all in the eye of the beholder, and it was compelling enough for a former Princeton physics department head and the NFL arbiter, who is the finder of fact in this case.
I hate it too.
That's just another example of Goodell lying. He presents Professor Marlow as an independent scientist called to testify on the quality of Exponent's scientific analysis. Marlow isn't independent at all. Marlow was hired by Wells and contributed to the report. So, in effect, Professor Marlow reviewed Professor Marlow's analysis and conformed Professor Marlow's conclusions.Unfortunately, it's all in the eye of the beholder, and it was compelling enough for a former Princeton physics department head and the NFL arbiter, who is the finder of fact in this case.
I hate it too.
Marlow's conflict-of-interest is on the record. He's credited by name in the Wells Report. “Scientific consultants were engaged to assist the investigative team. These consultants included a team from Exponent, one of the leading scientific and engineering consulting firms in the country, and Dr. Daniel R. Marlow, a tenured professor of Physics at Princeton University and former Chairman of the Physics Department."
This case is really quite amazing. The NFL presumes the Patriots and Tom Brady guilty, then hires an "independent" investigator to prove it. The investigator cherry-picks data and "suspicious" texts, but the numbers still don't quite work, so the "independent" investigator then hires an "independent" scientific analysis company to cook up a bogus statistical analysis. To confirm that analysis they call an "independent" scientist, one of the guys who contributed to the report to "review" it. It'd be kind of comical if so many people didn't believe this joke of an investigation.
Guys, you don't have to prove to me that Deflategate is a scam. I'm not the problem 
This forum is not the problem.
It's compelling to some. Not everyone is equally informed. That's all I'm saying.
This forum is not the problem.It's compelling to some. Not everyone is equally informed. That's all I'm saying.
Thanks for all the write ups and analysis folks. Now don't mind me as I go continuouslygo throw up in my mouth for the rest of the day.
Interesting take from Michael Hurley. DeflateGate Judges Didn’t Even Realize NFL Was Lying To Them In Court
Hurley's bottom line:
The hell? How did I not know this was happening?
And it looks bad for Brady? This is insane.
And it looks bad for Brady? This is insane.
The worst part of the current situation from the Pats perspective is the likely impact on the Pats off season. What free agent is going to give the pats a discount to get a chance to go to the Super Bowl given the state of play? Forget about trading our back up QB? The penalty against the Pats is much greater than the picks and likely 4 games for Brady.
I haven't seen a transcript, yet, but if Kessler thinks this is a big deal, he can send a Rule 28(j) letter on it. It might not technically track because it's a record cite instead of a supplemental authority, but that's not a huge deal in practice and Clement would probably be badly served to try to split procedural hairs in response.
I've had one sent by opposing counsel correcting an error I made by relying on the District Court's representation of testimony and I responded by conceding that his representation was more accurate (granted, he was citing a supplemental authority for a different point in the letter as well, and I had to respond because he was wrong on that one).
It's really the sort of thing Kessler should have caught in argument, though.
I've had one sent by opposing counsel correcting an error I made by relying on the District Court's representation of testimony and I responded by conceding that his representation was more accurate (granted, he was citing a supplemental authority for a different point in the letter as well, and I had to respond because he was wrong on that one).
It's really the sort of thing Kessler should have caught in argument, though.
Last edited:
Just wondering -- is this getting a lot of play in the Boston media? Seems relative to about this time last year, very little is being mentioned of this, and it looks like this is potentially an even bigger deal (based on the reports that *are* out there). Was talking to my dad this morning up in Boston, and he says coverage of this has been pretty tame; certainly not the wall-to-wall ESPN treatment this got last year.
But to what end? Folks have been hammering the fact that arbitrator error isn't enough to vacate the finding. So it really doesn't have an effect on either the NFL's or NFLPA's arguments.
There's a reason there was an "if" in the post.
Regardless of what the legal standard is, if the judges thought it important enough to ask a question about, and Clement thought his facts important enough to offer them, then it's the sort of thing that warrants look. It also feeds into the narrative of a party that can't be bothered to even state facts correctly during oral argument, although that dog hunts less when the lawyer is such a known quantity.
Having gone second, though, assuming that this didn't come up in rebuttal, it also highlights Kessler missing it during his own argument.
Regardless of what the legal standard is, if the judges thought it important enough to ask a question about, and Clement thought his facts important enough to offer them, then it's the sort of thing that warrants look. It also feeds into the narrative of a party that can't be bothered to even state facts correctly during oral argument, although that dog hunts less when the lawyer is such a known quantity.
Having gone second, though, assuming that this didn't come up in rebuttal, it also highlights Kessler missing it during his own argument.
Goodell lying about Brady's testimony (and Clement repeating the lie) isn't arbitrator error. It's evidence of arbitrator bias. And fraud.
This is just all so strange to me. I've been to arbitration and the other party lied about some facts and was misleading. We were able to try and correct the record. The arbitrator made a neutral judgment (happened to be in our favor, but that's irrelevant). I just can't imagine a process where the lying party was also the arbitrator. I'm fully aware that the CBA calls for this. I just find it un-American. Fucking Obama.
From today's WaPo:"Here’s one Goodell who scientifically disproved DeflateGate. He’s 12."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2016/03/09/heres-one-goodell-who-scientifically-disproved-deflategate-hes-12/?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_break
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2016/03/09/heres-one-goodell-who-scientifically-disproved-deflategate-hes-12/?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_break
I love the first comment.
Right. Except for proving that the Patriots didn't deflate the balls. Unless the balls were deflated and then were not impacted by the temperature change.
I love leading with "once again", as if, if he keeps repeating it, the laws of logic will change.
And "once again, just because I don't have pictures of him masturbating at the Washington Monument, does not prove that he hasn't been masturbating at the Washington Monument."
Apologies if this was posted somewhere and I missed it. Piggyback's off Sally Jenkins's article.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/03/08/uncorrected-misstatements-could-hurt-nfls-credibility-with-appeals-court/
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/03/08/uncorrected-misstatements-could-hurt-nfls-credibility-with-appeals-court/
Isn't he late to the party with this because his initial take was that the NFL crushed it?
It'll be pretty funny if a 7th grader can figure this out but three federal appellate judge's can't.
http://nesn.com/2016/03/roger-goodell-nfl-arent-smarter-than-a-seventh-grader-and-heres-proof/
http://nesn.com/2016/03/roger-goodell-nfl-arent-smarter-than-a-seventh-grader-and-heres-proof/
A lot of pissing into the wind at this point, but this paragraph highlights something that needed more emphasis:
The League’s lawyers have refused to release the interview notes of the seven League witnesses to halftime gauging. They have also refused to release their communications with Exponent. There is no privilege or confidentiality around any of these communications — they were not attorney-client communications and they were not attorney “work product” (a term used to refer to materials prepared by lawyers in anticipation of litigation). These communications were made as part of what was supposed to be a transparent, independent fact-finding mission — not a mission to prepare for litigation. The NFL’s lawyers’ claim of a “work product” privilege for these interview notes is most curious. Unless there was a prejudgment that the investigation would find violations — the only circumstance that might lead to anticipated future litigation — there would be no reason at the time of the interviews to anticipate any litigation. In all events, the League has the right to waive any claims of privilege, and yet has held tight to this critical information.
And they missed the best part of McNally wasn't furtive in leaving at beginning of the game.
They let the guy walk out at halftime all alone again after they "knew" someone had tampered with the balls.
Come on Wells Report in Context. Get back on your game. ;-)
They let the guy walk out at halftime all alone again after they "knew" someone had tampered with the balls.
Come on Wells Report in Context. Get back on your game. ;-)
True, but they did get into the mysterious number of footballs in the Pats ballbag at halftime.
When we were down there fall of 2014 the kids wanted to put their feet in, but the water looked pretty freaking nasty at the time so I did not allow.
Sadly I think it's a forgone conclusion that Brady serves 4 games for a ridiculous witch hunt suspension. I'm sure that once this is over the NFL will get right on that HGH investigation too.
We shall see but this is far from a foregone conclusion even if the NFL prevails in Appeals...there has been much rumbling that even in that circumstance Brady would likely face either no suspension or a vastly reduced suspension.
If you are basing this on media reports, then you are basing it on nothing.
That's crazy talk. Yes, the suit may be much more than Brady and some light footballs now, but the NFL still needs to keep up appearances. Also, the league office has gained way too much goodwill from fans of the rest of the league (and the owners) to back off of the suspension now. If the NFL wins, there will be no negotiating and there will be no reduction...unless Brady is willing to admit guilt, which also isn't happening.
Also, if I remember correctly from our companion legal thread, the league likely didn't request a stay of Berman's decision because they knew it would be denied. The judge would take the irreparable harm of Tom Brady into account - i.e. if Brady won on appeal, he couldn't get those 4 games back.
How could they ask? Because the rules allow them to. The likelihood of it being granted would be low, because of what you note, but they could ask. I think it's Rule 8, but WBV would know better.
Yes, they could ask (yes, FRAP 8), yes, it would be denied by both the district court and the COA, and yes, saying the NFL "chose not to" is basically meaningless because of the preceding.
Which is what I was trying to get at with my 'how could they' comment. Yes technically they could ask for a stay but given the situation it would be so utterly useless that even the NFL wouldn't try it. The larger point being that King doesn't know what he's talking about as this does not suggest any softening on the NFL's stance re: Brady's suspension.
The curse strikes again
Colts linebacker D’Qwell Jackson was arrested in February 2015 for allegedly assaulting a pizza delivery driver during an argument over a parking spot and faced a non-jury trial on a simple assault charge this month to resolve the issue.
It has been resolved and Jackson has been found guilty of simple assault. Stephen Holder of the Indianapolis Star reports that Jackson turned down a plea deal and will be sentenced on the misdemeanor offense on April 6.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/03/14/dqwell-jackson-found-guilty-of-simple-assault/
Colts linebacker D’Qwell Jackson was arrested in February 2015 for allegedly assaulting a pizza delivery driver during an argument over a parking spot and faced a non-jury trial on a simple assault charge this month to resolve the issue.
It has been resolved and Jackson has been found guilty of simple assault. Stephen Holder of the Indianapolis Star reports that Jackson turned down a plea deal and will be sentenced on the misdemeanor offense on April 6.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/03/14/dqwell-jackson-found-guilty-of-simple-assault/
I'd gladly trade the various indignities and misfortunes the Colts and Ravens have suffered for Roger Goodell being inflicted with elephantiasis of the testes.
Last edited:
D'Qwell actually came out in the media and corrected the record, saying he did not notice anything strange about the football he intercepted, which went against the stories leaked by the Colts and/or NFL.
I don't think this is curse related. He just done f-d up
I don't think this is curse related. He just done f-d up