#DeflateGate (Court of Appeals Reinstates Suspension)

[Donoghus]

My point is more about the refusal than the actual benefit (or detriment) of doing something you're not being compelled to do.

Yeah, I guess I just do not see the point when it goes against what the union probably advised and wanted him to do.  Granted the replacing and destroying of that phone was a horrible idea.  My guess is Brady and the Patriots all thought this was a very small thing and did not take it that seriously.  Then when the punishment came down and Brady saw how bad it was thats when they backtracked and probably tried to do anything they could to get some of those text messages at the time.  Really badly handled by his legal team I think from that part.  Even if he does regularly destroy his old phones when he gets a new one, which makes sense they should not have let him do that in this case.  Horrible advice guilty or innocent.

Isn't it possible that he texted someone something so personal that it would be worse if that got out? Perhaps the perception of "I must be hiding deflategate evidence" is a better alternative for him.

I don't think destroying the phone necessarily means your guilty of this violation. But for all the people saying that he must be hiding something, aren't we all?

I'd be extremely reluctant to give up my cell phone under any circumstances.  Even if I'm innocent.  Just a privacy thing.

Someone pointed out it the other day on Twitter (can't remember who, though), the hypocrisy of some in the media (& beyond)  who were calling out Brady for not giving up his cell phone then criticizing him for the comments he made about Manning in an email.

[knuckleballer]

My point is more about the refusal than the actual benefit (or detriment) of doing something you're not being compelled to do.

Yeah, I guess I just do not see the point when it goes against what the union probably advised and wanted him to do.  Granted the replacing and destroying of that phone was a horrible idea.  My guess is Brady and the Patriots all thought this was a very small thing and did not take it that seriously.  Then when the punishment came down and Brady saw how bad it was thats when they backtracked and probably tried to do anything they could to get some of those text messages at the time.  Really badly handled by his legal team I think from that part.  Even if he does regularly destroy his old phones when he gets a new one, which makes sense they should not have let him do that in this case.  Horrible advice guilty or innocent.

Isn't it possible that he texted someone something so personal that it would be worse if that got out? Perhaps the perception of "I must be hiding deflategate evidence" is a better alternative for him.

I don't think destroying the phone necessarily means your guilty of this violation. But for all the people saying that he must be hiding something, aren't we all?

I'd be extremely reluctant to give up my cell phone under any circumstances.  Even if I'm innocent.  Just a privacy thing.

Someone pointed out it the other day on Twitter (can't remember who, though), the hypocrisy of some in the media (& beyond)  who were calling out Brady for not giving up his cell phone then criticizing him for the comments he made about Manning in an email.

And meanwhile Goodell is refusing to hand over communication between the NFL and Ted Wells. 

And Goodell refused to hand over his private phone in either the Peterson case or Rice case, can't remember which one.

[D.o.s.]

My point is more about the refusal than the actual benefit (or detriment) of doing something you're not being compelled to do.

Yeah, I guess I just do not see the point when it goes against what the union probably advised and wanted him to do.  Granted the replacing and destroying of that phone was a horrible idea.  My guess is Brady and the Patriots all thought this was a very small thing and did not take it that seriously.  Then when the punishment came down and Brady saw how bad it was thats when they backtracked and probably tried to do anything they could to get some of those text messages at the time.  Really badly handled by his legal team I think from that part.  Even if he does regularly destroy his old phones when he gets a new one, which makes sense they should not have let him do that in this case.  Horrible advice guilty or innocent.

Isn't it possible that he texted someone something so personal that it would be worse if that got out? Perhaps the perception of "I must be hiding deflategate evidence" is a better alternative for him.

I don't think destroying the phone necessarily means your guilty of this violation. But for all the people saying that he must be hiding something, aren't we all?

This is pertinent:

State Rep. Todd Courser planned the distribution of a fictional email alleging he had sex with a male prostitute in a bid to conceal his relationship with Rep. Cindy Gamrat, according to audio recordings obtained by The Detroit News.

Courser, a Lapeer Republican, said on one recording the email was designed to create “a complete smear campaign” of exaggerated, false claims about him and Gamrat so a public revelation about the legislators’ relationship would seem “mild by comparison.”

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2015/08/06/recordings-state-rep-asked-aide-hide-relationship/31269315/

And, for the record, I would not give my phone over either -- I was just attempting to reason with the logic from those who would.

[steve]

When the 2 pounds report, the deflator text and the ballboy in the bathroom were reported, I thought the pats did it.

Then two things happened. The actual measurements came out and the drop could be explained by the ideal gas law.

But the text and the bathroom visit still looms and the coincidence is tough to swallow.

So let's say that brady conspired in the scheme, that means that either:

A) the deflator takes the balls in the bathroom and decides that for some reason he's not going to take air out this time

B) the deflator takes maaaybe .01 out of the balls

If you believe in the ideal gas law AND you believe that brady is guilty then you must believe in A or B. So which is it?

Option B is ridiculous.

Option A means there is no violation, at least for this game.

Is there an option C? What am I missing?

C) he took a leak

Not sure why that is hard to believe.

Im with you. I want to hear from the people who think brady is lying. I think I just want people to admit that there wasn't even a violation. That seems to get lost in this mess.

[knuckleballer]

When the 2 pounds report, the deflator text and the ballboy in the bathroom were reported, I thought the pats did it.

Then two things happened. The actual measurements came out and the drop could be explained by the ideal gas law.

But the text and the bathroom visit still looms and the coincidence is tough to swallow.

So let's say that brady conspired in the scheme, that means that either:

A) the deflator takes the balls in the bathroom and decides that for some reason he's not going to take air out this time

B) the deflator takes maaaybe .01 out of the balls

If you believe in the ideal gas law AND you believe that brady is guilty then you must believe in A or B. So which is it?

Option B is ridiculous.

Option A means there is no violation, at least for this game.

Is there an option C? What am I missing?

C) he took a leak

Not sure why that is hard to believe.

Im with you. I want to hear from the people who think brady is lying. I think I just want people to admit that there wasn't even a violation. That seems to get lost in this mess.

I've said it a few times already and I'm saying it again.  The balls measured as expected using the gauge the ref said he used.  There was never a reason to be suspicious in the first place other than a lack of knowledge of basic science that we were all taught and tested on when we were in grade school.  The rest has been a fishing expedition where normal innocent behavior is being overanalyzed through a prism of suspected guilt based on ignorance and lies told by the league.

[BudweiserCeltic]

This is old news, but I just found out about it... I mean the apparent independent Wells Report was actually edited and polished by Goodell's lackey Jeff Pash?

http://www.csnne.com/new-england-patriots/will-nfls-lie-about-wells-independence-even-hurt

In a battle about credibility, it's hard for the NFL to hold the moral high ground in all of this.

[steve]

When the 2 pounds report, the deflator text and the ballboy in the bathroom were reported, I thought the pats did it.

Then two things happened. The actual measurements came out and the drop could be explained by the ideal gas law.

But the text and the bathroom visit still looms and the coincidence is tough to swallow.

So let's say that brady conspired in the scheme, that means that either:

A) the deflator takes the balls in the bathroom and decides that for some reason he's not going to take air out this time

B) the deflator takes maaaybe .01 out of the balls

If you believe in the ideal gas law AND you believe that brady is guilty then you must believe in A or B. So which is it?

Option B is ridiculous.

Option A means there is no violation, at least for this game.

Is there an option C? What am I missing?

C) he took a leak

Not sure why that is hard to believe.

Im with you. I want to hear from the people who think brady is lying. I think I just want people to admit that there wasn't even a violation. That seems to get lost in this mess.

I've said it a few times already and I'm saying it again.  The balls measured as expected using the gauge the ref said he used.  There was never a reason to be suspicious in the first place other than a lack of knowledge of basic science that we were all taught and tested on when we were in grade school.  The rest has been a fishing expedition where normal innocent behavior is being overanalyzed through a prism of suspected guilt based on ignorance and lies told by the league.

It's like suspecting someone of robbing a bank, then finding out the money is still in the bank.

After Bill's science press conference, there was no way that the NFL was going to say, "You know what, Bill is right"  So they made the incredible move of taking out the science in the Well's report!

[BballTim]

So, as part of the appeals process, Brady submits some emails completely unrelated to deflategate (in an effort to convince people he's trying to cooperate). Since they were made public (as the rest of the appeal was), he can now claim that he was right to not turn over texts because they'd obviously be leaked, and he was understandably worried that all of his personal (non deflate-gate related) texts, which the investigation *never asked to have* would also be leaked? I hope nobody's seeing anything else when they look at that.

The email release was ordered by Judge Berman, wasn't it?

Yeah but that didnt fit Tim's narrative.

But anyways I am so sick of this. Brady clearly had some level of guilt. But I still find the punishment imposed on the Patriots egregious. A first round pick when the Wells report specifically exonerates Kraft and Bellicheck? I get a 4 game Brady suspension but I dont get that.

  I don't really see what his comment (or yours) have to do with the part of my post that was bolded. Why would Brady turn over texts about a pool cover in response to a request for texts related to deflate-gate? Why would anyone consider that to be cooperation?

"To try and reconcile the record and fully cooperate with the investigation after I was disciplined in May, we turned over detailed pages of cell phone records and all of the emails that Mr. Wells requested,” Brady wrote. “We even contacted the phone company to see if there was any possible way we could retrieve any/all of the actual text messages from my old phone. In short, we exhausted every possibility to give the NFL everything we could and offered to go thru the identity for every text and phone call during the relevant time. Regardless, the NFL knows that Mr. Wells already had ALL relevant communications with Patriots personnel that either Mr. Wells saw or that I was questioned about in my appeal hearing.”   http://larrybrownsports.com/football/tom-brady-turned-over-emails-cell-phone-records/268756



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


pump* is in the pool cover e-mail

  Ok, so they were in "flood the investigation with reams of irrelevant data" mode after destroying the data that was requested. Got it.

  But how does that fit in with his refusal to comply with the investigation's original request because of the precedent it would set?

From the hearing Ted Wells testified “I did not tell Mr Brady at any time that he would be subject to punishment for not giving … not turning over the documents. I did not say anything like that."



Also from the hearing, there is this exchange between Kessler and Brady

Q. During that time, did they ever tell you that if you didn't turn over some texts or e-mails or respond to that that you were going to be disciplined in any way, you know, that you were going to be violating some, you know, specific policy about that or anything like that? Did they ever tell you that?

A. No.

Q. If you had been informed by them and they said look, this is your duty to cooperate, would you then have produced them no matter what your agents and your counsel said?

A. Yes.

  I don't get the expectation that every request from the investigation needs to be accompanied by a statement about any possible punishments for failure to comply with it. Wouldn't you expect at least some of that responsibility to fall on his own counsel?

[BballTim]

When the 2 pounds report, the deflator text and the ballboy in the bathroom were reported, I thought the pats did it.

Then two things happened. The actual measurements came out and the drop could be explained by the ideal gas law.

But the text and the bathroom visit still looms and the coincidence is tough to swallow.

So let's say that brady conspired in the scheme, that means that either:

A) the deflator takes the balls in the bathroom and decides that for some reason he's not going to take air out this time

B) the deflator takes maaaybe .01 out of the balls

If you believe in the ideal gas law AND you believe that brady is guilty then you must believe in A or B. So which is it?

Option B is ridiculous.

Option A means there is no violation, at least for this game.

Is there an option C? What am I missing?

C) he took a leak

Not sure why that is hard to believe.

Im with you. I want to hear from the people who think brady is lying. I think I just want people to admit that there wasn't even a violation. That seems to get lost in this mess.

  On one hand, you have poorly done measurements that don't prove or discount that a violation occurred. On the other hand, you have a number of texts that imply that such a violation was occurring. You can't really ignore that any more than you can ignore the ideal gas law arguments.

[smicker16]

When the 2 pounds report, the deflator text and the ballboy in the bathroom were reported, I thought the pats did it.

Then two things happened. The actual measurements came out and the drop could be explained by the ideal gas law.

But the text and the bathroom visit still looms and the coincidence is tough to swallow.

So let's say that brady conspired in the scheme, that means that either:

A) the deflator takes the balls in the bathroom and decides that for some reason he's not going to take air out this time

B) the deflator takes maaaybe .01 out of the balls

If you believe in the ideal gas law AND you believe that brady is guilty then you must believe in A or B. So which is it?

Option B is ridiculous.

Option A means there is no violation, at least for this game.

Is there an option C? What am I missing?

C) he took a leak

Not sure why that is hard to believe.

Im with you. I want to hear from the people who think brady is lying. I think I just want people to admit that there wasn't even a violation. That seems to get lost in this mess.

  On one hand, you have poorly done measurements that don't prove or discount that a violation occurred. On the other hand, you have a number of texts that imply that such a violation was occurring. You can't really ignore that any more than you can ignore the ideal gas law arguments.

But the clearest text messages of all happen when they talk about exact PSI numbers.  In both of those cases there is the opposite of showing they were illegally deflating footballs.  One time they said the balls were at 16 and the refs screwed them over.  Well the refs could not screw them over if they were illegally deflating footballs after they were measured.  The other one says the balls were supposed to be at 13 PSI, which one again shows nothing illegal.  Both of these things make the deflator comment mean something else besides illegally deflating footballs.  And while the story about weight loss is hard to believe that is an actual thing and the NFL has had programming talking about deflating as in weight loss in the past.

So then what text messages exactly are we talking about here?  And something I was really wondering is when did they take a look at the text messages for both of these two?  It was at least a couple weeks after the AFC Championship game right?  I just find it hard to believe that these two guys never texted anything really specific about it after all of this happened.  But maybe I am missing something there.  They just do not seem to be very careful with what they text each other based on the Brady bashing they did.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

When the 2 pounds report, the deflator text and the ballboy in the bathroom were reported, I thought the pats did it.

Then two things happened. The actual measurements came out and the drop could be explained by the ideal gas law.

But the text and the bathroom visit still looms and the coincidence is tough to swallow.

So let's say that brady conspired in the scheme, that means that either:

A) the deflator takes the balls in the bathroom and decides that for some reason he's not going to take air out this time

B) the deflator takes maaaybe .01 out of the balls

If you believe in the ideal gas law AND you believe that brady is guilty then you must believe in A or B. So which is it?

Option B is ridiculous.

Option A means there is no violation, at least for this game.

Is there an option C? What am I missing?

C) he took a leak

Not sure why that is hard to believe.

Im with you. I want to hear from the people who think brady is lying. I think I just want people to admit that there wasn't even a violation. That seems to get lost in this mess.

  On one hand, you have poorly done measurements that don't prove or discount that a violation occurred. On the other hand, you have a number of texts that imply that such a violation was occurring. You can't really ignore that any more than you can ignore the ideal gas law arguments.

I guess it's about interpretation:

• If (as Brady did after the Jets game) a QB complains that the footballs were overinflated and he wants them deflated—not necessarily to illegal levels, but softer than the illegal 16 psi they were before (guess the league doesn't have a problem with overinflated footballs) ...

• and let's say that QB gets on the equipment guy's case about it ...

• and the equipment guy (as happens with so many of us on the job) gets a little annoyed with that and complains to a co-worker, in the course of which he jokingly refers to himself as Brady's "deflator" ...

then I see nothing that sets off a red flag, nothing that doesn't make sense or seems out of place given the context in which the texts occurred.

If using the word "deflator" is enough evidence for the NFL's high court to conclude that footballs have not simply been brought down to lower (but acceptable) PSI levels, but have in fact been changed to illegally low levels (again, remembering that the NFL apparently has no problem with illegally overinflated footballs), and thus deserving of a severe penalty, then that's a judicial system in need of serious reform.

[Roy H.]

When the 2 pounds report, the deflator text and the ballboy in the bathroom were reported, I thought the pats did it.

Then two things happened. The actual measurements came out and the drop could be explained by the ideal gas law.

But the text and the bathroom visit still looms and the coincidence is tough to swallow.

So let's say that brady conspired in the scheme, that means that either:

A) the deflator takes the balls in the bathroom and decides that for some reason he's not going to take air out this time

B) the deflator takes maaaybe .01 out of the balls

If you believe in the ideal gas law AND you believe that brady is guilty then you must believe in A or B. So which is it?

Option B is ridiculous.

Option A means there is no violation, at least for this game.

Is there an option C? What am I missing?

That's only if you believe that the Wells report got it wrong regarding which gauge was used, and if you further assume that environmental factors led to over 25% of the balls still being outside the scientific range.

 

[knuckleballer]

So, as part of the appeals process, Brady submits some emails completely unrelated to deflategate (in an effort to convince people he's trying to cooperate). Since they were made public (as the rest of the appeal was), he can now claim that he was right to not turn over texts because they'd obviously be leaked, and he was understandably worried that all of his personal (non deflate-gate related) texts, which the investigation *never asked to have* would also be leaked? I hope nobody's seeing anything else when they look at that.

The email release was ordered by Judge Berman, wasn't it?

Yeah but that didnt fit Tim's narrative.

But anyways I am so sick of this. Brady clearly had some level of guilt. But I still find the punishment imposed on the Patriots egregious. A first round pick when the Wells report specifically exonerates Kraft and Bellicheck? I get a 4 game Brady suspension but I dont get that.

  I don't really see what his comment (or yours) have to do with the part of my post that was bolded. Why would Brady turn over texts about a pool cover in response to a request for texts related to deflate-gate? Why would anyone consider that to be cooperation?

"To try and reconcile the record and fully cooperate with the investigation after I was disciplined in May, we turned over detailed pages of cell phone records and all of the emails that Mr. Wells requested,” Brady wrote. “We even contacted the phone company to see if there was any possible way we could retrieve any/all of the actual text messages from my old phone. In short, we exhausted every possibility to give the NFL everything we could and offered to go thru the identity for every text and phone call during the relevant time. Regardless, the NFL knows that Mr. Wells already had ALL relevant communications with Patriots personnel that either Mr. Wells saw or that I was questioned about in my appeal hearing.”   http://larrybrownsports.com/football/tom-brady-turned-over-emails-cell-phone-records/268756



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


pump* is in the pool cover e-mail

  Ok, so they were in "flood the investigation with reams of irrelevant data" mode after destroying the data that was requested. Got it.

  But how does that fit in with his refusal to comply with the investigation's original request because of the precedent it would set?

From the hearing Ted Wells testified “I did not tell Mr Brady at any time that he would be subject to punishment for not giving … not turning over the documents. I did not say anything like that."



Also from the hearing, there is this exchange between Kessler and Brady

Q. During that time, did they ever tell you that if you didn't turn over some texts or e-mails or respond to that that you were going to be disciplined in any way, you know, that you were going to be violating some, you know, specific policy about that or anything like that? Did they ever tell you that?

A. No.

Q. If you had been informed by them and they said look, this is your duty to cooperate, would you then have produced them no matter what your agents and your counsel said?

A. Yes.

  I don't get the expectation that every request from the investigation needs to be accompanied by a statement about any possible punishments for failure to comply with it. Wouldn't you expect at least some of that responsibility to fall on his own counsel?

No.  There was no legal obligation to turn over the phone or to provide electronic communication.  It was a basic discovery dispute that Wells did not challenge.  It's not the lawyers fault the NFL would use such nonsensical reasoning to determine guilt in absence of real evidence that would be thrown out of every court in the country.

[BballTim]

So, as part of the appeals process, Brady submits some emails completely unrelated to deflategate (in an effort to convince people he's trying to cooperate). Since they were made public (as the rest of the appeal was), he can now claim that he was right to not turn over texts because they'd obviously be leaked, and he was understandably worried that all of his personal (non deflate-gate related) texts, which the investigation *never asked to have* would also be leaked? I hope nobody's seeing anything else when they look at that.

The email release was ordered by Judge Berman, wasn't it?

Yeah but that didnt fit Tim's narrative.

But anyways I am so sick of this. Brady clearly had some level of guilt. But I still find the punishment imposed on the Patriots egregious. A first round pick when the Wells report specifically exonerates Kraft and Bellicheck? I get a 4 game Brady suspension but I dont get that.

  I don't really see what his comment (or yours) have to do with the part of my post that was bolded. Why would Brady turn over texts about a pool cover in response to a request for texts related to deflate-gate? Why would anyone consider that to be cooperation?

"To try and reconcile the record and fully cooperate with the investigation after I was disciplined in May, we turned over detailed pages of cell phone records and all of the emails that Mr. Wells requested,” Brady wrote. “We even contacted the phone company to see if there was any possible way we could retrieve any/all of the actual text messages from my old phone. In short, we exhausted every possibility to give the NFL everything we could and offered to go thru the identity for every text and phone call during the relevant time. Regardless, the NFL knows that Mr. Wells already had ALL relevant communications with Patriots personnel that either Mr. Wells saw or that I was questioned about in my appeal hearing.”   http://larrybrownsports.com/football/tom-brady-turned-over-emails-cell-phone-records/268756



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


pump* is in the pool cover e-mail

  Ok, so they were in "flood the investigation with reams of irrelevant data" mode after destroying the data that was requested. Got it.

  But how does that fit in with his refusal to comply with the investigation's original request because of the precedent it would set?

From the hearing Ted Wells testified “I did not tell Mr Brady at any time that he would be subject to punishment for not giving … not turning over the documents. I did not say anything like that."



Also from the hearing, there is this exchange between Kessler and Brady

Q. During that time, did they ever tell you that if you didn't turn over some texts or e-mails or respond to that that you were going to be disciplined in any way, you know, that you were going to be violating some, you know, specific policy about that or anything like that? Did they ever tell you that?

A. No.

Q. If you had been informed by them and they said look, this is your duty to cooperate, would you then have produced them no matter what your agents and your counsel said?

A. Yes.

  I don't get the expectation that every request from the investigation needs to be accompanied by a statement about any possible punishments for failure to comply with it. Wouldn't you expect at least some of that responsibility to fall on his own counsel?

No.  There was no legal obligation to turn over the phone or to provide electronic communication.  It was a basic discovery dispute that Wells did not challenge.  It's not the lawyers fault the NFL would use such nonsensical reasoning to determine guilt in absence of real evidence that would be thrown out of every court in the country.

  This wasn't a court of law. There was no claim that it was, and the punishment was based  on conclusions that contained phrases like "more likely than not". You're trying to apply standards that apparently don't fit the situation.

  And while there was no "legal" obligation to provide the electronic communication, the nfl had apparently punished a player in the past for a lack of cooperation, so it should have been clear that there could be consequences for that action.

[Donoghus]

So, as part of the appeals process, Brady submits some emails completely unrelated to deflategate (in an effort to convince people he's trying to cooperate). Since they were made public (as the rest of the appeal was), he can now claim that he was right to not turn over texts because they'd obviously be leaked, and he was understandably worried that all of his personal (non deflate-gate related) texts, which the investigation *never asked to have* would also be leaked? I hope nobody's seeing anything else when they look at that.

The email release was ordered by Judge Berman, wasn't it?

Yeah but that didnt fit Tim's narrative.

But anyways I am so sick of this. Brady clearly had some level of guilt. But I still find the punishment imposed on the Patriots egregious. A first round pick when the Wells report specifically exonerates Kraft and Bellicheck? I get a 4 game Brady suspension but I dont get that.

  I don't really see what his comment (or yours) have to do with the part of my post that was bolded. Why would Brady turn over texts about a pool cover in response to a request for texts related to deflate-gate? Why would anyone consider that to be cooperation?

"To try and reconcile the record and fully cooperate with the investigation after I was disciplined in May, we turned over detailed pages of cell phone records and all of the emails that Mr. Wells requested,” Brady wrote. “We even contacted the phone company to see if there was any possible way we could retrieve any/all of the actual text messages from my old phone. In short, we exhausted every possibility to give the NFL everything we could and offered to go thru the identity for every text and phone call during the relevant time. Regardless, the NFL knows that Mr. Wells already had ALL relevant communications with Patriots personnel that either Mr. Wells saw or that I was questioned about in my appeal hearing.”   http://larrybrownsports.com/football/tom-brady-turned-over-emails-cell-phone-records/268756



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


pump* is in the pool cover e-mail

  Ok, so they were in "flood the investigation with reams of irrelevant data" mode after destroying the data that was requested. Got it.

  But how does that fit in with his refusal to comply with the investigation's original request because of the precedent it would set?

From the hearing Ted Wells testified “I did not tell Mr Brady at any time that he would be subject to punishment for not giving … not turning over the documents. I did not say anything like that."



Also from the hearing, there is this exchange between Kessler and Brady

Q. During that time, did they ever tell you that if you didn't turn over some texts or e-mails or respond to that that you were going to be disciplined in any way, you know, that you were going to be violating some, you know, specific policy about that or anything like that? Did they ever tell you that?

A. No.

Q. If you had been informed by them and they said look, this is your duty to cooperate, would you then have produced them no matter what your agents and your counsel said?

A. Yes.

  I don't get the expectation that every request from the investigation needs to be accompanied by a statement about any possible punishments for failure to comply with it. Wouldn't you expect at least some of that responsibility to fall on his own counsel?

No.  There was no legal obligation to turn over the phone or to provide electronic communication.  It was a basic discovery dispute that Wells did not challenge.  It's not the lawyers fault the NFL would use such nonsensical reasoning to determine guilt in absence of real evidence that would be thrown out of every court in the country.

  This wasn't a court of law. There was no claim that it was, and the punishment was based  on conclusions that contained phrases like "more likely than not". You're trying to apply standards that apparently don't fit the situation.

  And while there was no "legal" obligation to provide the electronic communication, the nfl had apparently punished a player in the past for a lack of cooperation, so it should have been clear that there could be consequences for that action.

If it was "clear", it would've been spelled out. Heck, the NFL can't even get it straight with this notion.