+- Atlanta Falcons Talk (http://atlantafalconstalk.com)
+-- Forum: Falcons Fans Message Boards (/Forum-Falcons-Fans-Message-Boards)
+--- Forum: Talk About The Falcons & So Much More (/Forum-Talk-About-The-Falcons-So-Much-More)
+--- Thread: NFL: Saints Bounty Thread (/Thread-NFL-Saints-Bounty-Thread)
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 12-12-2012 01:04 PM
Surprise, surprise! Who wants to guess why?
NFL, Tagliabue want to prevent release of bounty hearing transcript
Last week, it was widely believed that the transcript of the Paul Tagliabue-led bounty hearings would be released not long after his decision was issued.
That belief was fueled in large part by the expectation that Tagliabue would issue a ruling that did something less than wipe out the suspensions, resulting in the players pushing the case back to federal court and necessitating a full study of the testimony by Judge Helen Berrigan.
Unless the players who were determined to have engaged in conduct detrimental to the league opt to obtain a full exoneration (which is possible, but would be pricey), the transcripts will for now remain under wraps.
Per a source with knowledge of the situation, both the NFL and Tagliabue are trying to ensure that the testimony never sees the light of day.
One reason is that the testimony from Saints interim head coach Joe Vitt has been described to us as “brutal,” but also compelling and informative.
Coincidentally (or not), one paragraph contained in Tagliabue’s 22-page, single-spaced ruling describes Vitt as not credible.
“Vitt admitted to NFL investigators in 2012 that he ‘fabricated the truth’ when he spoke to an NFL investigator in March 2010 about whether there had been a bounty on [Brett] Favre,” Tagliabue writes. “[Vitt] later claimed that his admitted fabrication was just ‘stretching the truth’ because he failed to describe for investigators the emotionalism of the defensive team meeting the night before the NFC Championship Game. As a result of Vitt’s admissions and conflicting testimonies, I find that any attribution made by him cannot be given particular weight.”
It would be nice to examine his full testimony with our own eyes. Given that the NFL has made this case a matter of public concern, and in light of the fact that the suspensions arise from a desire to ensure public confidence in the game of professional football, the transcripts need to be released.
And I say that knowing that, once they are, I’ll be reading hundreds of pages of questions and answers, scouring through plenty of noting in search of those random, fleeting passages that shed light on the subject.
__________________________________________________
I find it very interesting that Tagliabue basically said that he ignored all of Vitt's testimony because of his stretching the truth in 2010, yet used Cerullo's testimony to support Goodell's claims even after Cerullo was repeatedly discredited under cross examination.
The farce continues.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - phocis850 - 12-12-2012 01:09 PM
Can I close this thread yet?
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 12-12-2012 01:11 PM
New Orleans Saints LB Jonathan Vilma won't challenge Paul Tagliabue's decision in bounty case
New Orleans Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma does not intend to challenge former NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue's decision to vacate his suspension, according to Vilma's filing in U.S. District Court on Wednesday. But Vilma did ask to lift the stay of the discovery process in his defamation lawsuit against current NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell.
If Judge Helen "Ginger" Berrigan lifts the stay on the suit and begins discovery, then Vilma's legal team could request all of the evidence the NFL claims to have in the bounty investigation.
"Commissioner Tagliabue's rationalization of Commissioner Goodell's actions does nothing to rectify the harm done by the baseless allegations lodged against Jonathan," Peter Ginsberg, Vilma's lawyer, said Tuesday. "Jonathan has a right and every intention to pursue proving what really occurred and we look forward to returning to a public forum where the true facts can see the light of day.
"We call upon Commissioner Tagliabue to release the transcripts of the proceedings held before him so that they are available as we go forward. Finally, it is regrettable that the NFL continues unjustifiably to attack the New Orleans Saints, an organization comprised of decent and honest people who continue to stand strong in the face of these baseless attacks."
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - RFlagg - 12-12-2012 01:13 PM
(12-12-2012 01:09 PM)phocis850 Wrote: Can I close this thread yet?
For God's sake yes. Put us out of our misery and ban any further talk on the bounty case, violations result in an instant 24 hour ban.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 12-12-2012 01:16 PM
(12-12-2012 01:09 PM)phocis850 Wrote: Can I close this thread yet?
Why would you want to close the thread? This is all just now getting started. Now that all the the appeal crap is over the real action can begin. This is about to get even bigger as the spotlight now gets to shine on Goodell and the league.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 12-12-2012 01:18 PM
(12-12-2012 01:13 PM)RFlagg Wrote: For God's sake yes. Put us out of our misery and ban any further talk on the bounty case, violations result in an instant 24 hour ban.
You can simply stay out of the thread. The alleged bounty case is just getting rolling and there are many of us still intently following and intelligently discussing the continuous news.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - ATLBound - 12-12-2012 01:42 PM
(12-12-2012 11:52 AM)AsylumGuido Wrote: Ginsberg had exactly the same concerns on Mike & Mike this morning. He pointed out that Cerullo was repeatedly discredited during cross examination. He referred to Cerullo's claim that Vilma placed $10,000 cash on a table before the Cardinals game as a bounty on Warner. He said that is why they want the transcripts of the hearing to be made public. Even though Cerullo was totally discredited, Tagliabue still used his testimony to support all of Goodell's findings in his report, yet not one tme mentions anything about Cerullo being discredited on the stand.
Im not saying youre wrong but Im pretty sure its common to not talk about the proceedings of a high profile case in the media, especially with him being a part of it. If the media was allowed in the courtroom, then I have seen the media mention something along those lines, but not a "judge" and that was pretty much Tags position....a judge
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 12-12-2012 02:02 PM
(12-12-2012 01:42 PM)ATLBound Wrote: Im not saying youre wrong but Im pretty sure its common to not talk about the proceedings of a high profile case in the media, especially with him being a part of it. If the media was allowed in the courtroom, then I have seen the media mention something along those lines, but not a "judge" and that was pretty much Tags position....a judge
This is true, but he did make a point to say "that any attribution made by him cannot be given particular weight", in reference to Joe Vitt. Seems to be a bit of inconsistency there.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - mdrake34 - 12-12-2012 02:38 PM
![[Image: funniest_gif_ever.gif]](http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/funniest_gif_ever.gif)
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - ATLBound - 12-12-2012 02:46 PM
(12-12-2012 02:02 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote: This is true, but he did make a point to say "that any attribution made by him cannot be given particular weight", in reference to Joe Vitt. Seems to be a bit of inconsistency there.Well thats true. No rebuttal from me there.