theogt
Surrealist
- Messages
- 45,846
- Reaction score
- 5,912
Double snaps.superpunk;1936626 said:Oh snap.
Double snaps.superpunk;1936626 said:Oh snap.
WoodysGirl;1936618 said:GOODELL EXPLAINS DESTRUCTION
Posted by Mike Florio on February 1, 2008, 3:52 p.m.
NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell addressed during his annual “state of the league” press conference the question posed recently by Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa.).
Why did the NFL destroy the materials surrendered by the Patriots in the wake of the Spygate scandal? Because the original tape that gave rise to the brouhaha had landed in the hands of Jay Glazer of FOX.
“We thought we had locked it up. And it got out, five days later,” Goodell said.
It’s not a surprise, because it’s really the only semi-plausible explanation that could be offered for intentionally destroying evidence. If/when Goodell is getting grilled by U.S. Senators on the issue, however, he can expect a few of them to be perplexed by the notion that the league office is so unable to secure sensitive information that the better approach is to shred it.
A summary of the rest of the remarks is right here.
Permalink | Comments Back to Top
MEET MATT WALSH
Posted by Mike Florio on February 1, 2008, 12:31 p.m.
Buried in the Friday New York Times article regarding the desire of Senator Arlen Specter are the first on-the-record comments regarding Spygate from Matt Walsh.
Who’s Matt Walsh, you ask? He was an employee of the New England Patriots from 1996 through 2003, spending most of his time there in the video department.
Matt Walsh is now an assistant golf pro in Hawaii. And the Times sent a reporter all the way there to interview him.
As talk goes among some of the folks we know in the NFL media, Walsh knows something. Something big.
We’re not reporting at this time that Walsh knows anything. But we know for a fact that multiple members of the media were chasing Walsh in the wake of Spygate, trying to get him to talk on the record about what he knows. One came fairly close, but it ultimately didn’t happen.
Why? Because Walsh is scared. And rightfully so. He’s scared of getting sued into Mike Tyson-style bolivian.
“After speaking to my lawyers and whatnot, I can’t really talk to you about anything,” Walsh told the Times. “And I can’t show you anything. If someone wanted me to talk and tell them things, I would craft an agreement where they would agree from now until the end of my existence to pay for any legal fees that came up in regards to this, whether I’m sued by the Patriots, the [NFL], anybody else.”
Wow.
Folks, guys don’t say things like that when they don’t know anything, or when they don’t think that what they know is important.
And though we don’t know what Walsh knows, we know what a couple of writers think that he knows. If they’re right, and if Walsh talks, it could have huge ramifications.
We know that our bread is partially buttered by the NFL, and we appreciate the relationship. But every owner, G.M., coach, and player is a steward of a game that hopefully will continue for centuries after we’re all gone. So we’re committed to holding today’s stewards of the game accountable for their actions, even if it makes said stewards of the game upset with us. One way or another, Walsh needs to have a forum to tell what he knows. He might collapse like a wet cracker under cross examination, or his story might be flimsier than a kite made out of Kleenex. But this guy has a story to tell, and it needs to be heard.
“If I ever got brought in for a deposition or something, then I would just face the whole gauntlet of questions,” Walsh said. “There would be things I’d be forced to answer that some people haven’t taken responsibility for.”
Dallas;1936667 said:I would like to add something.
Tyke says it is not a crime to destroy documents and information if there is not a previous ongoing investigation. This is true.
But!!! Don't confuse what could come later. If it is shown in a later investigation that those tapes did contain evidence and the league destroyed them just to hide the fact. That is a crime, and charges would be applied to those involved in destroying the tapes and trying to cover it up.
So - even tho there is not an existing criminal case open now. There could be one open up in the future and these rules would apply to the destruction of evidence.
Discovery, is a strange beast.
WoodysGirl;1936692 said:alsh, we believe, will soon regret saying anything on the record to the Times. His words paint a sufficiently ominous tone to prompt those who support the team to begin to try to discredit him. In this specific case, then, showing the sword will likely have the same net effect as using it.
conner01;1936711 said:there is no crime here folks. the pats broke league rules, not any laws. the league has the right to destroy the tapes if they want to it's their property.
the u.s. senate has much more important issues they should be dealing with than a team trying to steal another teams signals which has been going on in the nfl for ever
Dallas;1936667 said:I would like to add something.
Tyke says it is not a crime to destroy documents and information if there is not a previous ongoing investigation. This is true.
But!!! Don't confuse what could come later. If it is shown in a later investigation that those tapes did contain evidence and the league destroyed them just to hide the fact. That is a crime, and charges would be applied to those involved in destroying the tapes and trying to cover it up.
So - even tho there is not an existing criminal case open now. There could be one open up in the future and these rules would apply to the destruction of evidence.
Discovery, is a strange beast.
video taping a teams signals is not a crime!!!!Dallas;1936667 said:I would like to add something.
Tyke says it is not a crime to destroy documents and information if there is not a previous ongoing investigation. This is true.
But!!! Don't confuse what could come later. If it is shown in a later investigation that those tapes did contain evidence and the league destroyed them just to hide the fact. That is a crime, and charges would be applied to those involved in destroying the tapes and trying to cover it up.
So - even tho there is not an existing criminal case open now. There could be one open up in the future and these rules would apply to the destruction of evidence.
Discovery, is a strange beast.
nyc;1936645 said:That has absolutely no barring on the issue at hand.
If I decide I don't support the law that says I have to drive 55 mph or less, I am able to skirt speeding tickets? I don't think so.
tyke1doe;1935910 said:Just a senator grandstanding.
Congress has no involvement in this issue.
conner01;1936722 said:video taping a teams signals is not a crime!!!!
it violates league rules, but there is no law broken
mmillman;1936731 said:You are joking right? Congress has no involvement in baseball either right?
The NFL is a monopoly that is allowed to function outside normal business parmameters at the will of Congress.
The point is that there may be more on the tapes than is public and shouldn't have been destroyed as evidence. Bonehead or smart move by Goodell we will see.
Rampage;1936743 said:on the espn bottom line it says that "matt walsh has videotapes that could be damaging to the NFL and the Patriot*"
wileedog;1936561 said:Given the governments track record lately, maybe we are better off if they spend their time screwing around with sports.
tyke1doe;1936621 said:But you're missing a crucial point and missing a link.
To the first point, the NFL does not encourage betting.
Rack;1936799 said:You have GOT to be kidding me!
The NFL doesn't encourage gambling?
Why do you think it's mandatory for teams to release injury reports every week?
Why do you think point spreads are spewed regarding every game on ESPN every week?
Why do you think they even post weather reports?
C'mon... you can't POSSIBLY be that naive.