Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

***Peyton*** · 10-25-2012, 09:54 AM

I agree with Drathdon that Vilma probably isn't completely innocent.

I think he did put 10 grand down on a table and say it was for whoever knocked Favre out of the game.

But I think Greg Williams provided that money.

And mostly, I've just never thought it was worth an entire season, even if the NFL's version of events was exactly right.

AsylumGuido · 10-25-2012, 10:37 AM

(10-25-2012 09:33 AM)Drathdon Wrote: Guido, you know as well as I something happened. You can play it off as a joke gone too far, an off-handed comment not meant seriously, whatever. I'm sure it was not as severe or organized as the NFL wanted to present it to be (and had reason to think it was). But the fact remains, the players are going to claim innocence, regardless, until they can't. Vilma seems to think there is no way to prove it happened in a way that makes him look bad, if at all. Odds are, unless there were hidden cameras, he's probably right, which is why he is so vehement about being innocent. However, if you read every statement made, there is the clear underlying current of doubt that they have. It's always "why don't they show us the evidence they have," which may seem to you to be their attempts to clear their name. But again, every defense attorney knows you get what they have, and then build your case to shoot what they have down in order to prove your innocence... because you cannot prove innocence until you know what they have on you. That, my friend, is the actions of getting a guilty man off. Evidence never matters unless something exists (or might exist) that threatens your case.

It's a slight subtlety that most ignore, but it is clearly on display here. No one innocent needs to see what evidence there is, because nothing can harm them. All these months, the whole conversation has only been about what evidence the NFL has, and why they won't turn it over. Defense attorneys get paid well to know how to do what they do well, and it is not the art of getting the innocent off... they can defend themselves. The more lawyers, motions filed, and legal activity usually belongs to the guilty.

But, hey. Enjoy spinning it however you want. I remember how in denial I was about Vick and fake bottles, Ron Mexico, and dogs too. It's hard to take off the blinders of a fan, and even harder to not believe the work of a good Defense Attorney you want to believe.

Quote:every defense attorney knows you get what they have, and then build your case to shoot what they have down in order to prove your innocence... because you cannot prove innocence until you know what they have on you. That, my friend, is the actions of getting a guilty man off.

It is also the actions of an innocent man. You undoubtedly want to believe he did what Cerullo claimed, regardless of testimony from a dozen others saying he didn't. As much as you feign you have no clue what happened and didn't happen and I would think that you would be overjoyed if this did go to court. Or are you afraid that if it did go to court that Cerullo's vendetta against the Saints might actually have caused him to cook up these lies? Is that it?

AsylumGuido · 10-25-2012, 10:49 AM

(10-25-2012 09:54 AM)Peyton Wrote: I agree with Drathdon that Vilma probably isn't completely innocent.

I think he did put 10 grand down on a table and say it was for whoever knocked Favre out of the game.

But I think Greg Williams provided that money.

And mostly, I've just never thought it was worth an entire season, even if the NFL's version of events was exactly right.

Yes, there has been a rumor floating around since April that Gregg Williams may have used Vilma in one of his quirky motivational stunts. I don't think that is entirely out of the question. But, even if true, that by no means translates into a three year program of bounties targeting specific players for intentional injury as was explained by the league both from day one and when all of the penalties were originally handed down. It also doesn't jive with the statements given by both Cerullo and Williams. Cerullo definitely had reasons to lie and if it was Gregg Williams who pulled the cash stunt (if indeed it happened) then he had reason to lie, as well.

IF Vilma did assist in the stunt he wouldn't be totally innocent, but he most surely wouldn't be guilty of anything resembling what he was punished for. And neither would Sean Payton because how can you lie about there not being a bounty program if there truly wasn't a bounty program, but only an isolated motivational stunt executed in very bad taste?

AsylumGuido · 10-25-2012, 02:01 PM

http://sulia.com/channel/football/f/4c5a...95bc979a9/

Daniel Kaplan
about an hour ago

12 current Saints submitted declarations this wk denying bounty program or that Vilma offered Favre bounty

The players are Roman Harper; Tom Johnson, Malcolm Jenkins, Cameron Jordan, Jabari Greer, Martez Wilson, Patrick Robinson, Scott Shanle, Junior Galette, Ramon Humber, Isa Abdul-Quddus, and Johnny Patrick.
Here is Vilma's lawyer's comment: "Each of the players swears under oath that there was no Bounty Program and that Jonathan never offered any money or incentive of any kind to encourage the injury of an opposing player, including Warner or Favre. Each player was a member of the defensive team at some time from ’09 – ’11 and attended the pre-game meetings where the `bounties’ supposedly happened.”

As a reminder, here is what Goodell wrote to Vilma upholding the appeal, according to NFL Oct 9 press release: "I also find that you engaged in conduct detrimental by offering a substantial financial incentive to any member of the defensive unit who knocked Brett Favre out of the Saints’ 2009 NFC playoff game against the Vikings."

***Peyton*** · (This post was last modified: 10-25-2012 02:47 PM by Peyton.)

Those 12 Saints that submitted declarations do raise two interesting questions.

1. Why is their testimony given no weight?

2. If Roger thinks they are all lying to protect their teammate, why didn't he punish any of them? I thought a big part of the reason the others were punished was the fact they were less than forthcoming.

ATLBound · 10-25-2012, 02:26 PM

(10-25-2012 02:04 PM)Peyton Wrote: Those 12 Saints that submitted declarations do raise an interesting question.

1. Why is their testimony given no weight?

2. If Roger thinks they are all lying to protect their teammate, why didn't he punish any of them? I thought a big part of the reason the others were punished was the fact they were less than forthcoming.

The answer to number 1 is either Goodell is stubborn and way too deep or he has some sort of evidence to say otherwise

The answer to number 2 is I don't think he can hand out more punishments after the fact or maybe not willing to.

AsylumGuido · 10-25-2012, 05:39 PM

(10-25-2012 02:04 PM)Peyton Wrote: Those 12 Saints that submitted declarations do raise two interesting questions.

1. Why is their testimony given no weight?

2. If Roger thinks they are all lying to protect their teammate, why didn't he punish any of them? I thought a big part of the reason the others were punished was the fact they were less than forthcoming.

These 12 are in addition to seven other players and Vitt himself that testified in court during the restraining order hearing before Judge Berrigan. That now makes 20 players (including Vilma) and one coach that have all sworn under penalty of perjury that there were no bounties and that Vilma never offered anything to have any player injured.

This is a subject we have discussed in here, Peyton, and one that has frustrated me to no end. There are some around here that are convinced that all of the Saints are lying and Cerullo is telling the truth.

I have asked those exact same questions.

mdrake34 · 10-25-2012, 05:41 PM

(10-25-2012 05:39 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote: These 12 are in addition to seven other players and Vitt himself that testified in court during the restraining order hearing before Judge Berrigan. That now makes 20 players (including Vilma) and one coach that have all sworn under penalty of perjury that there were no bounties and that Vilma never offered anything to have any player injured.

This is a subject we have discussed in here, Peyton, and one that has frustrated me to no end. There are some around here that are convinced that all of the Saints are lying and Cerullo is telling the truth.

I have asked those exact same questions.

Why have Payton, Williams, and Loomis taken their punishments instead of fighting and appealing if they're totally innocent? You don't accept punishment if you're not guilty.

AsylumGuido · 10-25-2012, 05:45 PM

(10-25-2012 02:26 PM)ATLBound Wrote: The answer to number 1 is either Goodell is stubborn and way too deep or he has some sort of evidence to say otherwise

The answer to number 2 is I don't think he can hand out more punishments after the fact or maybe not willing to.

I think you have it nailed in number one there. Goodell IS in way to deep. He sold the farm early on in believing everything that Cerullo claimed. I have heard that the entire investigation was approached with the end result already decided by persons that were "interviewed". I feel that is why the lead investigator, Joe Hummel, resigned when the player punishments were announced and that is why he has been served a subpena by Vilma's lawyer in the defamation case. I think he had issues about how things were handled.

AsylumGuido · 10-25-2012, 05:51 PM

(10-25-2012 05:41 PM)mdrake34 Wrote: Why have Payton, Williams, and Loomis taken their punishments instead of fighting and appealing if they're totally innocent? You don't accept punishment if you're not guilty.

I have explained that ad nauseum, as well. They have no union and zero leverage. They were told in their letters that they will be considered for reinstatement when their suspensions end. Their best hope is the players. It has already been reported that Tom Benson is going to ask for Payton's reinstatement if the players win their case.

Oh, and you mentioned "You don't accept punishment if you're not guilty." That's why the players are not accepting their punishment because they have leverage through the union and obviously fully believe that they are not guilty.