NFL: Saints Bounty Thread

[juraitwaluzka]

(05-20-2012 11:18 AM)mdrake34 Wrote:  Jdave, try as you might, but your mastery of constitutional law public figure-defamation principles is clearly blinded by your attempts to smear the good honorable folks in NO. You're obviously on Herr Fuehrer Gooddell's payroll, a mere pawn in the great plot to ruin the greatest team in the NFL and level the playing field for everyone else.

Clearly.

[AsylumGuido]

(05-20-2012 07:22 AM)JDaveG Wrote:  Hmmmm, guess who has two thumbs and is feeling pretty good about his legal analysis right about now....





......THIS guy!

Yes, very well done, Dave. But, as we both agreed, Vilma doesn't have to win the suit to come out a winner.

[AsylumGuido]

(05-20-2012 11:18 AM)mdrake34 Wrote:  Jdave, try as you might, but your mastery of constitutional law public figure-defamation principles is clearly blinded by your attempts to smear the good honorable folks in NO. You're obviously on Herr Fuehrer Gooddell's payroll, a mere pawn in the great plot to ruin the greatest team in the NFL and level the playing field for everyone else.

This may be true, as well. We may continue to let y'all tag along as second best.

[Falconidae]

(05-20-2012 06:03 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  Yes, very well done, Dave. But, as we both agreed, Vilma doesn't have to win the suit to come out a winner.

What Vilma said in his lawsuit is:
that he never “pledged” and “never paid, or intended to pay” $10,000 or any amount of money as an incentive to knock Brett Favre or Kurt Warner out of 2009 playoff games, or any other player in any other game.

Same thing as in his tweets. What he didn't say is: I never offered to pay 10K to knock Farve out. What he's undoubtedly going to claim, if there is proof that he indeed said that, will be " Hey, I was just overexcited in a pre-game speech, it was hyperbole, I didn't mean it."


He has to know there's no way he can win this lawsuit, unless Goodell has no proof whatsoever, which is really unlikely. If Goodell has just one source that Goodell "believed", there's no way for Vilma to win.
I'm wondering if Vilma thinks there's just one or two "snitches" and it will be his word against theirs? Or if he just wants to find out who it was?

[TeamPlayer1]

(05-20-2012 06:03 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  Yes, very well done, Dave. But, as we both agreed, Vilma doesn't have to win the suit to come out a winner.

Once again, let me get this straight. If Vilma's one year ban stands, he is a winner?

[phocis850]

(05-20-2012 08:33 PM)TeamPlayer1 Wrote:  Once again, let me get this straight. If Vilma's one year ban stands, he is a winner?

Clearly... no bounty against him.

[Drathdon]

(05-20-2012 07:38 PM)Falconidae Wrote:  I'm wondering if Vilma thinks there's just one or two "snitches" and it will be his word against theirs? Or if he just wants to find out who it was?

I'm not one to wish ill will, but what if this is the case, and he then goes after them? I mean publicly flips his lid over lost millions and attacks them on camera?
Oh man, could this get any better?

[AsylumGuido]

(05-20-2012 08:33 PM)TeamPlayer1 Wrote:  Once again, let me get this straight. If Vilma's one year ban stands, he is a winner?

No. But he doesn't have to win the suit. Goodell claimed Vilma fully participated in a bounty plan, including paying money for injury to players, collecting money for injuring players and working with Williams to operate the plan.

IF Goodell made his decision to suspend Vilma based upon his beliefs that all of the above were true and it turns out that his assumptions were incorrect then Vilma will clear his name. And, I have no doubt his suspension would be overturned. Under these circumstances he would still lose the case.

The more I think about it the more I believe that Goodell thought that he was doing the right thing, but that it was based upon incorrect information.

[AsylumGuido]

(05-20-2012 07:38 PM)Falconidae Wrote:  I'm wondering if Vilma thinks there's just one or two "snitches" and it will be his word against theirs? Or if he just wants to find out who it was?

No. I believe he knows he didn't do what he was accused of doing so someone out there is either lying or has presented some sort of faulty evidence. If he knew he was guilty it would be stupid to bring suit. There is no way a smart lawyer would let him do that and his lawyer is one of the best there is.

[AsylumGuido]

(05-21-2012 04:04 AM)Drathdon Wrote:  I'm not one to wish ill will, but what if this is the case, and he then goes after them? I mean publicly flips his lid over lost millions and attacks them on camera?
Oh man, could this get any better?

Yes, it could get better. He could clear his name and keep the Jonathon Vilma Foundation working for the children of Haiti. Now it is time to wait and see what happens.