ST Alpha - "Which would change the calculus on his actions. The judge didn't play guilty or innocent; he was even more damning." (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 151

In response to "The judge says the NFL f-ed up for not warning Brady what could happen. -- nm" by Spawn

Which would change the calculus on his actions. The judge didn't play guilty or innocent; he was even more damning.

Posted by Will Hunting (aka JoeMetz) Feb 16 '16, 14:45

You are backing a guy who had no process, let a semi-final of his league be a sting operation, and then fucked up so badly that a judge had to step in and tell him to stop fucking up.

Judges typically don't like to get involved in cases they weren't initially supposed to be involved in.

And the science still...ya know, backs the balls being legal at game time.

Responses:

Patriots accepted their sentence. Brady destroyed evidence. These are not the actions of innocent people. -- nm - Spawndroid Feb 16, 15:07 4
- there's a plausible reason to destroy your cell phone when you're a world famous athlete or celebrity. - Mel Profit Feb 16, 15:09 3
  - And I guess The Deflater was rogue? -- (link) - Spawndroid Feb 16, 15:30 2
    - Show me a number that science doesn't explain. You'll be steps ahead of the NFL. -- nm - Will Hunting Feb 16, 15:52
    - Two locker room attendants bitching about the boss. - Mel Profit Feb 16, 15:38

Post a message top

Which would change the calculus on his actions. The judge didn't play guilty or innocent; he was even more damning.

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.