NFL: Saints Bounty Thread

[TeamPlayer1]

Ornstein only said it was "in jest" after the e-mail came to light. His e-mail did not mention in jest.

[pauliwood]

I bet that if joked about killing somebody, or hiring somebody else to kill somebody, I would go to real jail.

[AsylumGuido]

(05-16-2012 12:34 PM)Falconidae Wrote:  See the post I quoted above. Payton himself has not been quoted as saying was/could or that it was a joke.

And why should I believe Ornstein?

That was from a source that had to be in the interview room when Payton was being questioned by the league. It had to be his attorney. And Jeff Duncan would not have published that if he had believed it was valid.

And why shouldn't you trust Ornstein? He has nothing to gain or lose.

None of this means that Goodell is/was lying. All it means is that he may have been misled on the validity of his supposed evidence. Once again, the sudden resignation of the lead investigator on this case, Joe Hummel, just as the player penalties was being announced may be coincidence, but it could also mean he disagreed with the validity of the evidence.

Michael Silver, a journalist from California with Yahoo Sports who broke the William's tape story, said he interviewed several people who had been questioned by the league during their investigation:

NFL needs to publicly release evidence of players' bounty involvement if it exists

"I've also had conversations with several knowledgeable sources who question the way the league conducted its investigation, including one person interviewed by an NFL security official before the league released its report. I've heard stories of disingenuous promises and of investigators who actively sought only information that they deemed incriminating while ignoring any evidence to the contrary.

Obviously, the people with whom I've spoken have an interest in portraying the penalties as unjust, and I'm certainly not in position to judge the legitimacy of the NFL's investigation. The findings could be airtight, paper-thin or somewhere in between."

Oh, and one would assume that part of Payton's punishment would be to not reply on the subject. He is already facing a full season suspension. I'd imagine he'll do whatever he is instructed.

[AsylumGuido]

(05-16-2012 01:13 PM)pauliwood Wrote:  I bet that if joked about killing somebody, or hiring somebody else to kill somebody, I would go to real jail.

No you wouldn't. It is called freedom of speech. It would have to be proven beyond a shadow of doubt that your intent was serious if hiring someone. Likewise, just saying you want to kill someone is not a crime. I have heard people on some of these forums say they hoped the Saints team plane would crash.

While not funny to most, it is clearly not meant to be taken as a truthful statement.

[AsylumGuido]

(05-16-2012 01:12 PM)TeamPlayer1 Wrote:  Ornstein only said it was "in jest" after the e-mail came to light. His e-mail did not mention in jest.

If it is an ongoing joke why would you have to include a "just kidding"? That the point of an ongoing joke. It doesn't stand alone.

And just because his interview was after the email became public it doesn't mean he wasn't telling truth. Also, don't forget he volunteered the info on the email where he said the same type of thing about Newton.

[Falconidae]

(05-16-2012 01:19 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  That was from a source that had to be in the interview room when Payton was being questioned by the league. It had to be his attorney. And Jeff Duncan would not have published that if he had believed it was valid.

And why shouldn't you trust Ornstein? He has nothing to gain or lose.

None of this means that Goodell is/was lying. All it means is that he may have been misled on the validity of his supposed evidence. Once again, the sudden resignation of the lead investigator on this case, Joe Hummel, just as the player penalties was being announced may be coincidence, but it could also mean he disagreed with the validity of the evidence.

Michael Silver, a journalist from California with Yahoo Sports who broke the William's tape story, said he interviewed several people who had been questioned by the league during their investigation:

NFL needs to publicly release evidence of players' bounty involvement if it exists

"I've also had conversations with several knowledgeable sources who question the way the league conducted its investigation, including one person interviewed by an NFL security official before the league released its report. I've heard stories of disingenuous promises and of investigators who actively sought only information that they deemed incriminating while ignoring any evidence to the contrary.

Obviously, the people with whom I've spoken have an interest in portraying the penalties as unjust, and I'm certainly not in position to judge the legitimacy of the NFL's investigation. The findings could be airtight, paper-thin or somewhere in between."

Oh, and one would assume that part of Payton's punishment would be to not reply on the subject. He is already facing a full season suspension. I'd imagine he'll do whatever he is instructed.

And you accuse others of making outrageous assumptions. You have no idea who the source was.

And the article you quoted doesn't say what you claim- there is no dispute of what Payton said when presented the email. There's no "Payton meant that it could be about a bounty"

Ornstein could go back to prison if he's found to be involved in illegal act, he has plenty of reason to lie.

If it was a 3 year old running joke, why didn't Payton say that?

Again, if there isn't evidence, then every major player is involved is acting against their own best interest.

[phocis850]

I have less respect for that franchise today than I did yesterday. Nothing has changed except Guido posting the same stuff over and over again.

Here's the deal. Post something after the hearings and about the hearings. All this other stuff is just nonsense.

[pauliwood]

(05-16-2012 01:27 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  No you wouldn't. It is called freedom of speech. It would have to be proven beyond a shadow of doubt that your intent was serious if hiring someone. Likewise, just saying you want to kill someone is not a crime. I have heard people on some of these forums say they hoped the Saints team plane would crash.

While not funny to most, it is clearly not meant to be taken as a truthful statement.

Say bomb in an airport, I dare you.

[JDaveG]

(05-16-2012 02:09 PM)pauliwood Wrote:  Say bomb in an airport, I dare you.

And then assert your first amendment rights with the arresting officers......

[ATLBound]

Guido has provided a statement from Ornstein and I applaud you for that but there still is no statement from Payton.

Your reasoning you gave is because Payton was punished and decided to cooperate

BUT thats is the worst excuse because

What about before he was punished or while he was interviewed?