BaumerJet Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 I don't know if any of you have heard... News / Release Statement By The NFL On Matt Walsh 04/23/2008 STATEMENT BY THE NFL ON MATT WALSH An agreement has been completed between the NFL and Matt Walsh that will allow Mr. Walsh, a former videotape operator with the New England Patriots, to share with the NFL information about activities occurring during his employment with the club from 1997-2003. Commissioner Goodell will meet with Mr. Walsh in the commissioner’s office on Tuesday, May 13, the earliest date that Mr. Walsh, who lives in Hawaii, will be available on the east coast. The agreement also requires Mr. Walsh to return any tapes and other items in his possession that belong to the Patriots. In return, the NFL and the Patriots have promised not to sue Mr. Walsh. They also will indemnify him for any expenses, including legal fees that he incurs in connection with the interview. Commissioner Goodell determined last September that the Patriots had violated league rules by videotaping opposing coaches' defensive signals during Patriots games throughout Bill Belichick’s tenure as head coach. Coach Belichick admitted to his use of the taping practice on a regular basis as a result of what he said was his misinterpretation of the rule. Commissioner Goodell imposed substantial discipline on Coach Belichick and the club as a result of that practice. The interview with Mr. Walsh will seek to determine whether he has any new information about that videotaping practice or other possible violations of league rules. Following the meeting with Mr. Walsh on May 13, there will be a news media briefing later that day in New York that will be attended by Commissioner Goodell (specific time and location to be provided at a later date). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sperm Edwards Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Why would he need a deal if there's nothing to expose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmike1 Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 The NFL will sweep this under the rug just like they have been doing for months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GandWFan Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 The agreement also requires Mr. Walsh to return any tapes and other items in his possession that belong to the Patriots. And this tells you everything you need to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garb Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Why would he need a deal if there's nothing to expose? He is in posession of stolen property. He has an audio-tape of a meeting between he and Pioli that he taped without Pioli's consent. Another crime. He may want a book deal (of lies) and keep whatever profit he may get without fear of lawsuit. When he shows nothing of signifiance - no one can sue him for defamation. I am shocked that this broke on a Wednesday....thought for sure that with the Draft coming up - they would want to sensationalize even more and drop this news on Friday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PantyHose&Furs Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 He is in posession of stolen property. He has an audio-tape of a meeting between he and Pioli that he taped without Pioli's consent. Another crime. He may want a book deal (of lies) and keep whatever profit he may get without fear of lawsuit. When he shows nothing of signifiance - no one can sue him for defamation. I am shocked that this broke on a Wednesday....thought for sure that with the Draft coming up - they would want to sensationalize even more and drop this news on Friday. Let us not forget that the same rhetoric was spewed when the news broke of the Patriots being in violation of the video taping rule. All I heard was how it was all nonsense. However, at the end of the day whatever the Pats did was enough of a violation to warrant the taking away of a draft choice and fines. No one knows what this guy has or doesn't have. However, there is certainly a chance this guy has more damning evidence versus the Pats. In my view it's even money whether this blows up or blows over. If it blows up it's gonna get interesting and it certainly will taint even more the Patriots legacy. I'm just happy that we'll finally get a judgement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SayNoToDMC Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 You gotta love the commissioner. He leaves no job unfinished and I respect his passion. Now he can destroy the rest of that silly evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaumerJet Posted April 23, 2008 Author Share Posted April 23, 2008 The NFL will sweep this under the rug just like they have been doing for months. Unfortunately MadMike, I have to agree... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 I don't know if any of you have heard... Its about time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 The NFL will sweep this under the rug just like they have been doing for months. Not according to this: http://assets.espn.go.com/media/pdf/080423/agreement.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Moses Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 The agreement also requires Mr. Walsh to return any tapes and other items in his possession that belong to the Patriots. And this tells you everything you need to know. If there is anything incriminating on those tapes the NFL will destroy them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 If there is anything incriminating on those tapes the NFL will destroy them. Please see my prior post. I posted the agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ten Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 If there is anything incriminating on those tapes the NFL will destroy them. pft is reporting that Walsh can keep copies of the evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rillo Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 He is in posession of stolen property. He has an audio-tape of a meeting between he and Pioli that he taped without Pioli's consent. Another crime. He may want a book deal (of lies) and keep whatever profit he may get without fear of lawsuit. When he shows nothing of signifiance - no one can sue him for defamation. I am shocked that this broke on a Wednesday....thought for sure that with the Draft coming up - they would want to sensationalize even more and drop this news on Friday. Where did you hear this? Link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arsis Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 He is in posession of stolen property. He has an audio-tape of a meeting between he and Pioli that he taped without Pioli's consent. Another crime. He may want a book deal (of lies) and keep whatever profit he may get without fear of lawsuit. When he shows nothing of signifiance - no one can sue him for defamation. I am shocked that this broke on a Wednesday....thought for sure that with the Draft coming up - they would want to sensationalize even more and drop this news on Friday. It is a crime to tape a conversation without someone's consent up there? in some places you only need one person's permission to tape a conversation. Meaning you're legally able to tape every conversation that you have. Again, if they told him to do illegal things and break rules, of course he would want to keep evidence that he would lessen a prison sentence or have leverage with. Don't let your Pats bias cloud your judgment here and wait until all the facts come out before making a judgment. This guy could be a clown, this guy could be legit. We may or may not find out on may 14th depending on how open the NFL is with the information it receives. I'd like Arlon Spector to get involved with this only so we can get two sides to a story rather than the hush hush one from the nfl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 I think Garb is talking about this: By early 2003, Walsh had fallen out of favor with his boss, Scott Pioli, the vice president of player personnel. In his final act with the team, Walsh secretly audiotaped Pioli criticizing his job performance during a meeting in Pioli's office, according to an account Pioli gave the Globe last month and from others familiar with the incident. A coworker who witnessed the taping alerted Pioli, who went to Walsh's desk after he left for the day, retrieved the tape, and listened to the unauthorized recording. Pioli fired Walsh the next day. (Walsh's lawyer has called Pioli's account a "complete fabrication.") Walsh told friends the Patriots dismissed him because he was close to qualifying for retirement benefits. He suggested he might sue the team for wrongful termination, but he never did. http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2008/03/10/to_some_a_vindictive_videotaper/ BTW: Massachusetts does not have a one party consent law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyLV Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 He is in posession of stolen property. He has an audio-tape of a meeting between he and Pioli that he taped without Pioli's consent. Another crime. He may want a book deal (of lies) and keep whatever profit he may get without fear of lawsuit. When he shows nothing of signifiance - no one can sue him for defamation. I am shocked that this broke on a Wednesday....thought for sure that with the Draft coming up - they would want to sensationalize even more and drop this news on Friday. Maybe it is a crime in Mass, but in most states it is NOT illegal to tape a conversation as long as ONE of the parties knows that the conversation is being taped. The wording of this release truly suggests that the NFL will sweep whatever information that he has under the rug. Even is he does have tapes of the walk through (which I believe he does) the NFL will do whatever they can to not let that out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Maybe it is a crime in Mass, but in most states it is NOT illegal to tape a conversation as long as ONE of the parties knows that the conversation is being taped. The wording of this release truly suggests that the NFL will sweep whatever information that he has under the rug. Even is he does have tapes of the walk through (which I believe he does) the NFL will do whatever they can to not let that out. Did you read the pdf I posted? Not that it matters but it's illegal to tape conversations in Massachusetts without both party's consent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arsis Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Did you read the pdf I posted? Not that it matters but it's illegal to tape conversations in Massachusetts without both party's consent. Overly liberal bastards. really, I can't tape my own conversations? really? **** that ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSJ Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Overly liberal bastards. really, I can't tape my own conversations? really? **** that ****. It is like that in most states. CT is like that too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arsis Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 It is like that in most states. CT is like that too. It could be like that everyone, doesn't make it any less dumb. Like they're really going to send someone to jail for recording his own conversations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Overly liberal bastards. really, I can't tape my own conversations? really? **** that ****. You can tape your conversations all you want. You just can't use them in court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaumerJet Posted April 23, 2008 Author Share Posted April 23, 2008 Not according to this: http://assets.espn.go.com/media/pdf/080423/agreement.pdf HOLY SNAP! Did anyone not read Subsection 1- Paragraph B: Not withstanding the foregoing, for a reasonable period of time following the Effective Date, Walsh's counsel may retain one copy of each Document (the "Counsel Copies"). Further, upon reasonable request, the NFL shall make any Tangible Property that has been returned by Walsh available to Walsh or his counsel, including (to the extent reasonablly requested) possession thereof. However: (i) in no event shall any Tangible Property (or copy thereof) in the possession or control of Walsh or such counsel be used for any commercial purposes or in any manner that could reasonably be expected to be disparaging to the NFL (including the Club) or the NFL'S or the Club's current and former owners or employees (provided that such owners or employees are known by Walsh ot own (or have owned), or be employed by (or have been employed by) the NFL or the club) (the "Prohibited Uses"); (ii) in no event shall any copies of any documents in the possession or control of Walsh or his cousel be further copied without the NFL's prior written consent, in each and every case, not to be unreasonably withheld (other than in respect of Prohibited Uses, as to which the NFL may withhold its consent in its sole discression). Oh snap! This means if I work for the media, I can request to see the copy, report on the copy but not show the copy without written consent of the NFL - Sorry Bill... And he gets to keep a copy? - Sorry Garb! DAAAAAAAMMMMNNNNNN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 HOLY SNAP! Did anyone not read Subsection 1- Paragraph B: Oh snap! This means if I work for the media, I can request to see the copy, report on the copy but not show the copy without written consent of the NFL - Sorry Bill... And he gets to keep a copy? - Sorry Garb! DAAAAAAAMMMMNNNNNN! Thats a pretty good agreement right? Some of the comments in this thread about the NFL covering up everything are absurd. May 13th is going to be interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenn212 Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 In the famous words of Malcolm X: "The chickens have come home to roost" or even better We will have justice by "Any means neccesary" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaumerJet Posted April 24, 2008 Author Share Posted April 24, 2008 Thats a pretty good agreement right? Some of the comments in this thread about the NFL covering up everything are absurd. May 13th is going to be interesting. Not just interesting, the beginning of a very long & arduous view into this by the media. I do not think Goodell just putting the "there's nothing much to see" twist on this closing the door. The media will instantly build this up - especially since they can report on all of the information... WOW! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted April 24, 2008 Share Posted April 24, 2008 Not just interesting, the beginning of a very long & arduous view into this by the media. I do not think Goodell just putting the "there's nothing much to see" twist on this closing the door. The media will instantly build this up - especially since they can report on all of the information... WOW! The media is going to beat this to death as they have been doing it for over a year. Truce? Lets wait until My 13 to see what Walsh has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arsis Posted April 24, 2008 Share Posted April 24, 2008 The media is going to beat this to death as they have been doing it for over a year. Truce? Lets wait until My 13 to see what Walsh has. I could live with waiting the 2ish weeks to see what he has before I make an uninformed comments about it. But then again, I'm actually one of the more level headed fans on this site. Which says something bad about the rest of you ****ers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.