I suggest that you read the Court of Appeals decision as it does a great job of summarizing the facts. Off the top of my head: Brady lobbies league for pregame preparation and control of footballs Brady says he likes his balls soft Numerous statements about how the Patriot Way is about meticulous preparation and attention to detail (no way the act of a rogue ball boy) Texts referring to equipment manager as "The Deflator" (evidence of long term cheating) Texts referring to deflating footballs in return for Brady memorabilia (evidence of long term cheating) Texts referring to Brady saying how hard it must be to tamper with balls (evidence of long term cheating) Video of ballboy taking balls into bathroom on way to field before AFCCG Deflated balls at AFCCG Brady has lengthy phone chat with equipment manager the day after story broke for the first time in at least 6 months (cover up) Brady brings equipment manager into QB room after story broke, even though equipment guys don't have access (cover up) Pats deny access to ball boy for follow up interview (cover up) Brady destroys his phone on the day he is to meet with investigators (cover up/noncooperation) All of this = more probable than not that Pats employees tampered with footballs at Brady's direction, which satisfies proof required for league to impose punishment under CBA.
lmao - yea ok. what a hoot. So how do you explain the fact that his previous phone was not destroyed and that he made THAT one available to the investigators. He must have just forgot to destroy that one. pats fans are the worst
Would like to see garpopolos play well haha Nothing better than a qb controversy in New England. Tom wearing uggs crying on the sideline. #freetom Sprinkle some jimmys on it New England
“This conflicts with the fact that the cellphone that [Brady] had used prior to November 6, 2014 was, in fact, available for Mr. Maryman's review. Had Mr. Brady followed what he and his attorneys called his 'ordinary practice,' one would expect that the cellphone that he had used prior to November 6, 2014 would have been destroyed long before Mr. Maryman was hired. No explanation was provided for this anomaly.”
how about the fact that Br*dy and McNally got busted for tampering with footballs in 2004? this wasn't even the first offense for these two. they got off with a stern warning the first time. the only thing they learned from the first offense, is how to better mask the tampering into a more efficient process.
How about the FACT that the investigation asked for specific search terms and all texts from McNally and jestreminski ...no phone, just the terms and dm's from McNally and jestreminski None were provided and br*dy destroys phone (evidence)
To be fair, though, most of what you are parenthetically calling "evidence" is really just the inference you are choosing to draw from the actual evidence. In other words, the evidence is they call this fat slob "the Deflator." The inference is that he was doing it for a long time. A fair inference mind you. The evidence is he destroyed his phone. The inference is there was damaging stuff on it. Keep in mind though, there could be completely benign reasons to destroy your phone that have nothing to do with this. Maybe he didn't want those gerbil videos to go viral, something like that.
To be really fair it might not have been the NFL that Brady was cheating on and he might have decided to destroy his cellphone out of fear that fact would come to light.
I disagree. Texts in which one refers to himself as the Deflator is evidence, in and of itself - it's an incriminating statement. Same goes for texts where Brady is mentioned as knowing how hard the Deflator's job is, and where The Deflator is promised more swag for deflating footballs. Sure, an inference is required to find "guilt", but just about any circumstantial evidence requires some sort of reasonable inference to convince a fact finder of guilt under the lower standard of proof required here. Destruction of the phone ON THE DAY HE MET WITH INVESTIGATORS is especially damning in this regard as it established consciousness of guilt on Brady's part (why destroy it THAT DAY if you have nothing to hide?). A jury found it more probable than not that OJ killed Nicole in his civil trial, based solely on circumstantial evidence, and the same level of proof is being applied here - albeit this is not a murder and I don't mean to imply that what Brady did is anywhere in the same universe of wrongs.
I loved it when Brady held his press conference a year ago wearing that silly stocking cap. A writer asked him, "Tom. did you cheat?" Brady slowly stammered "I...don't... believe so." Probably just me, but were I innocent, the word NO would come out of my mouth quickly and with great emphasis (and I wouldn't have destroyed my cell phone). And regarding your "mild level of fame"claim , I have never heard of ANY person, famous or not, destroying a cell phone, except Brady.
That plus he had no privacy reservation about turning over the phone he had previously, for a while year.
