Re: Not even close -- Margaritaville NFL Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 19:31:21 08/21/15 Fri
Author: Niner
Author Host/IP: 204.126.125.254
Subject: Re: Not even close
In reply to: C-Hawk Watcher 's message, "Wells report showed that Brady KNEW about it" on 10:05:15 08/21/15 Fri

>the text messages from "the deflator" shows Brady knew
>and demanded the balls to be deflated...paid for it!
>
>Combined with Brady getting rid of his cell phone
>RIGHT BEFORE meeting with Wells???? Come on man! This
>is about as believeable as 8 IRS hard drives crashing
>and everything on them unrecoverable at the same time!
>
>This isn't a criminal trial...the standard is not
>"beyond a reasonable doubt"...it's "preponderance of
>the evidence".
>
>For me, reading the report makes Brady guilty beyond a
>resonable doubt...but certainly it meets the
>preponderance of the evidence test.
>
>Besides, tough to prove impartiality...but was the
>process fair....it's up to the union to PROVE it
>wasn't..and I don't see any proof there to show that
>the process was unfair.

Which is why he had to use weasel words. Not sure where you got preponderance of the evidence". That's in the CBA? In the A Peterson case the judge looked at the CBA for his ruling. I would think that's what is being asked here.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

You're way off -- C-Hawk Watcher, 11:06:15 08/24/15 Mon
- Re: You need to look at this legally not emotionally -- Niner, 00:18:39 08/25/15 Tue
  - I am using logic and science..you should try it -- C-Hawk Watcher, 11:39:04 08/26/15 Wed
    - Re: You have to undstand science first -- Niner, 10:37:43 09/03/15 Thu
      - Apparently you don't understand the concept of time -- C-Hawk Watcher, 11:44:51 09/03/15 Thu
        Re: Apparently you don't understand the concept of time -- Niner, 13:15:01 09/03/15 Thu
        I disagre with judge, Sex. harrassment DOES NOT equal intergrity of game -- C-Hawk Watcher, 11:36:07 09/04/15 Fri