With the release of Brady’s appeal hearing transcripts (all 10+ hours and 457 pages worth) it appears that the advantage is swinging in Tom’s favor.
Let me first start off by saying I haven’t read the transcript in its entirety, however I will gather together all the facts I have from there and the whole debacle as it has unfolded so far.
On the night of the AFC Championship game referee Walt Anderson first claimed to have used the “logo” gauge (Which read .3-.4 psi. higher than the “non-logo” gauge) when checking game balls prior to the game. Then Wells re-interviews Anderson later, getting him to say he wasn’t sure about which gauge he used. That way Wells gains an advantage to come to the pre-determined conclusion that the balls must have been deflated by Patriots personell. (Wells gets to subtract .4 psi)
During Brady’s appeal, Wells vehemently stood by the the character of Walt Anderson and the integrity of Anderson’s recollections of the procedures performed on the game balls that evening. Even though Anderson originally said he used the “logo” gauge, Anderson must have got that part wrong, so Wells just goes with the second interview where Anderson wasn’t sure, and assumes he used the “non logo” gauge. (Lie #1)
When the Patriots balls were measured at halftime, after being in the officials locker room for 4 minutes (not enough time to effect the psi coming from 40-50° outside temp.) the lowest ball measures 10.9 psi on the ” logo” gauge, when you add in the ideal gas law which predicts a 1.0-1.2 psi drop (from Exponent inc. Findings) that would make a corrected reading of 11.9-12.1 psi on the LOWEST balls psi measurement! (There were only 3 balls that fell outside the range, other 2 were higher)
This led Wells to ignore the science (buried in the footnotes) Because the findings were not conclusive enough to prove someone had tampered with the balls after inspection. (Unless you can get Anderson to say he may have used the “non logo” gauge) Then you can justify charging your client millions to get to a pre-determined conclusion.
Leak #1: Getting public opinion on your side
The NFL office leaked information to Chris Mortensen that 11 of the 12 balls were 2 psi below minimum of 12.5 psi. (None were – a blatant lie) lie #2
Wells also tells Brady during investigation that he (Brady) will not suffer any disiplinary action for not turning over his cell phone. And, of course, we all know that was one of Goodell’s two points for upholding his suspension. (Lie #3 on side of prosecution, in case your keeping score)
Wells also testified that a text conversation between Jim McNally and Jastremski was about “inflation” of footballs after the Jets game and it was interpreted by his (crack) legal team as being about “deflation” (yep 5 million dollars for this) Seriously? (Lie #4)
Let’s get to my last point from Wells’ testimony. He said he conducted the investigation pursuant to the “policy on the integrity of the game, and enforcement of competitive rules.” That’s the other reason for Goodell upholding the suspension. Problem is that the players are not privy to those rules, nor are they bound by them, they are given to Owners and not players. So that’s lie #5 for the league. (There’s many more, I just picked those 5)
Leak #2: Make Brady Look Bad
Bonus lie #6 stemming from league leaking Brady “destroyed” his cell phone instead of turning it over. Leaking it that way would lead you to believe the line of investigation they had all along, this was not an “Independent” investigation. NFL employees do not “wordsmith” drafts of “Independent” investigations.
Brady also did not get a “fair” investigation either, “fair” finds all the facts to come to a conclusion, it doesn’t “pick and chose” to support a pre-determined conclusion.
One thought on “NFL: Deflategate, How Many Lies Does It Take To Punish An Innocent Man??”
Great concise article. A pleasure after all the shoddy biased pro Nfl office propaganda ESPN gas shoveled.
LikeLiked by 1 person