This is what all this outraged commentary that he's guilty because he hasn't beat his breasts in public about being innocent miss.
From the position of Brady or any accused player often you're better off not saying anything. This is something that someone like ESPN's Stephen A. Smith missed.
It goes back to Miranda Rights: what you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. Now the kind of rationally ignorant view of Smith, et. al, is if you're innocent you don't care about your Miranda Rights. In truth, MR are not just for the guilty.
That people think differently shows how ignorant about their own Constitution.
Another thing you hear is that Brady must be guilty otherwise he would turn over his cell phone. After all, why would an innocent person not turn over his cell phone? How about no one should do so without probably cause or without due process? These are basic Constitutional principles.;
Anything that Brady says to the League or Ted Wells-who is employed by the NFL not Brady or the Patriots or the NFLPA-is basically incriminating himself. Why should he do that?
Basically, this is a process where Roger Goodell and the league play Judge, Jury, and Executioner. Brady reasonably would rather not take his chances in this court.
I notice that this is the sentiment that you always have when a player doesn't just to submit to what ever punishment the league-baseball, football, or basketball-doles out. A-Rod is still seen as some horrible person because he sued baseball, the Yankees, and the union.
This is due to the rationally ignorant position of the average American who thinks that you simply do what your employer says at least if you play sports. You just defer your own rights.
For once I agree with Donald Trump-Brady should sue. Adrian Peterson did and won.
Meanwhile, Jonathan Vilma says that in his experience-he fought and ultimately won his punishment in Boutygate-Brady should indeed, lawyer up.
"Former Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma knows a little something about winning a fight against Roger Goodell. And Vilma has some advice for Tom Brady."
From the position of Brady or any accused player often you're better off not saying anything. This is something that someone like ESPN's Stephen A. Smith missed.
It goes back to Miranda Rights: what you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. Now the kind of rationally ignorant view of Smith, et. al, is if you're innocent you don't care about your Miranda Rights. In truth, MR are not just for the guilty.
That people think differently shows how ignorant about their own Constitution.
Another thing you hear is that Brady must be guilty otherwise he would turn over his cell phone. After all, why would an innocent person not turn over his cell phone? How about no one should do so without probably cause or without due process? These are basic Constitutional principles.;
Anything that Brady says to the League or Ted Wells-who is employed by the NFL not Brady or the Patriots or the NFLPA-is basically incriminating himself. Why should he do that?
Basically, this is a process where Roger Goodell and the league play Judge, Jury, and Executioner. Brady reasonably would rather not take his chances in this court.
I notice that this is the sentiment that you always have when a player doesn't just to submit to what ever punishment the league-baseball, football, or basketball-doles out. A-Rod is still seen as some horrible person because he sued baseball, the Yankees, and the union.
This is due to the rationally ignorant position of the average American who thinks that you simply do what your employer says at least if you play sports. You just defer your own rights.
For once I agree with Donald Trump-Brady should sue. Adrian Peterson did and won.
Meanwhile, Jonathan Vilma says that in his experience-he fought and ultimately won his punishment in Boutygate-Brady should indeed, lawyer up.
"Former Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma knows a little something about winning a fight against Roger Goodell. And Vilma has some advice for Tom Brady."
"Asked by Ed Werder of ESPN what he’d tell Brady to do, Vilma said he should take the league to court."
“I talked to Jonathan Vilma, who ferociously fought what had until this point been the harshest sanctions ever imposed by the NFL on a team, the Saints, for the bounty accusations,” Werder said on SportsCenter. “And Jonathan Vilma told me, when I asked him what advice he’d give to Tom Brady, he said, ‘I would tell him to fight the emotion of trying to publicly defend yourself, I would lawyer up and I would devise a game plan to beat the NFL in court.'”
"Vilma was initially suspended for the entire 2012 season for the Saints bounty case. But after a protracted legal battle, Vilma and his Saints teammates were able to pressure Goodell to hand control over Bountygate discipline to his predecessor, Paul Tagliabue. Tagliabue rescinded all the players’ suspensions."
"Werder said Vilma believes that a legal battle will be necessary for Brady as well. In Vilma’s view, an appeal under the league’s Collective Bargaining Agreement won’t work, because the CBA gives Goodell the power to either handle the appeal himself or appoint someone of his choosing to hear the appeal. Instead, Vilma thinks Brady will need a federal judge to take his side against Goodell."
“[Vilma] does not believe that the NFL Players Association can successfully defend Tom Brady within the confines of the CBA,” Werder said. “He thinks he’s going to have to go to federal court, as the Saints players did, and in Vilma’s case he not only had union representation, he also had his own private lawyer, Peter Ginsberg, who could at some point be involved in Brady’s defense at some point.”
"A court battle can drag out for a long time, and there’s no guarantee that Brady would win. But if he wants to be on the field for Week One, going to court may be Brady’s best bet."
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/13/jonathan-vilma-to-tom-brady-lawyer-up-and-beat-the-nfl-in-court/
See this is what Marvin Miller- may he not rest in peace, as that means he's truly dead-always tried to drum into people. The relationship between players and the league at least in part is an adversarial relationship. The idea that Brady should just fall on his sword against his own rights is wrongheaded. The idea that 'Oh, you're refusing to speak, well then you're guilty'-is dead wrong.
P.S. I do understand that this is tough for Roger Goodell who I do agree is trying his best. He's kind of damned no matter what he does. He was killed so many times last year for not doing enough with Ray Rice, etc. Now many of us feel he went too far. Overall, I think he's trying to do the right thing for the league.
I love the attitude of Robert Kraft and the Pats. I love that they're totally standing by Brady.
I also love the way Peyton Manning didn't throw Brady under the bus.
"Like I said, I'll speak it as clearly and slowly as I can. He's my friend, he'll always be my friend," Manning said, via ESPN.com, before a fundraiser for the Indianapolis children's hospital named in his honor. "I don't know what happened, I don't have much more than that for you."
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25180383/peyton-manning-not-interested-in-talking-tom-brady-deflategate
See, now that's class. That's a man for you. He's beaten Brady a few times but been beaten a good deal more by him. But he's not going to play this silly game of 'Well, gee, he was cheating. If the balls were heavier we would have won.'
There are a lot of people who could learn from Manning here. To me, if you're a proud competitor you should be ashamed to hide behind such lame excuses as you lost because of ball pressure.
No comments:
Post a Comment