Tom Brady Suspended for 4 Games, Pats lose 1st round pick in 2016 and 4th in 2017 & fined $1Million

[R.E.N. Spells Ren]

I would consider giving contradictory and implausible testimony a failure to cooperate. If someone asks you where you were on Monday and you say the moon, you're not being cooperative. We're not privy to Brady's testimony, but "contradictory and implausible testimony" is basically lawyer speak for lying.

Lying is not failing to cooperate, it's lying. So it appears it is just the phone records.

It depends. If I'm actually guilty of breaking company policy, then no, i'm not going to incriminate myself. If I'm not guilty, then perhaps. Let's look at what was actually requested of Brady.



So basically they just asked him to forward them the pertinent text conversations with the involved parties, which would mitigate the potential for snooping or other breaches of privacy that could arise from someone taking possession of your phone. Again, Brady has no requirement to do so. But if my reputation and livelihood is on the line, then yes, I would have no problem exonerating myself by providing that select information.

Yea so we're cut from a different cloth. There's no way in hell I'm giving my phone to my employer, and it would be foolish for you to do so as well. You're sounding like those people who talk to police cuz they're innocent thinking the fact that they're innocent of the crime they're accused of makes it safe.

They already had all his communication with Jamerstki, what else is "pertinent" information? The investigation was slanted from the start....Brady hands them the texts they already have and is accused of withholding

 

[23Barrettcity]

I would consider giving contradictory and implausible testimony a failure to cooperate. If someone asks you where you were on Monday and you say the moon, you're not being cooperative. We're not privy to Brady's testimony, but "contradictory and implausible testimony" is basically lawyer speak for lying.



It depends. If I'm actually guilty of breaking company policy, then no, i'm not going to incriminate myself. If I'm not guilty, then perhaps. Let's look at what was actually requested of Brady.



So basically they just asked him to forward them the pertinent text conversations with the involved parties, which would mitigate the potential for snooping or other breaches of privacy that could arise from someone taking possession of your phone. Again, Brady has no requirement to do so. But if my reputation and livelihood is on the line, then yes, I would have no problem exonerating myself by providing that select information.

Don't waste your time man . They only want to say it's a witch hunt because clearly the nfl wanted there Super Bowl winning team embroiled in a cheating controversy . The pats spending all their time refuting the report and not explaining why they wouldn't let the nfl interview McNally more after more info came out? He lives too far ? Ehh sketchy and then just because Brady doesn't have to give up the phone data , if he wasn't cheating then why would he not forward the required texts ?? @SuperCoolP_Cal explain to me why he would refuse to forward the texts pertinent to the case ? Don't give me the leaks bull , wells said he would of taken forwarded versions of the texts so what was Brady afraid of . Ohh wait because he didn't have to right ?

 

[23Barrettcity]

Lying is not failing to cooperate, it's lying. So it appears it is just the phone records.



Yea so we're cut from a different cloth. There's no way in hell I'm giving my phone to my employer, and it would be foolish for you to do so as well. You're sounding like those people who talk to police cuz they're innocent thinking the fact that they're innocent of the crime they're accused of makes it safe.

They already had all his communication with Jamerstki, what else is "pertinent" information? The investigation was slanted from the start....Brady hands them the texts they already have and is accused of withholding

Wait when did Brady hand them the texts ? And what texts was the investigation asking for that Brady wouldn't forward ? How was the investigation slanted ???? Since when did the pats become the raiders ? Brady the one being smug saying know the rule book to the Ravens

 

[King Kreole]

Yea so we're cut from a different cloth. There's no way in hell I'm giving my phone to my employer, and it would be foolish for you to do so as well. You're sounding like those people who talk to police cuz they're innocent thinking the fact that they're innocent of the crime they're accused of makes it safe.

Brady was not asked to give over his phone to his employer. He was asked to forward select and pertinent conversations. That's the difference between forwarding someone an email and giving them your email address and password.

 

[No1]

@Reggie Rhodes don't quote me my guy. I was done with you the second you tried to argue with @SuperCoolP_Cal that the Pats cannot fire any employee for whatever reason they choose like the default rule in the US is not at-will employment. I can only imagine what else you said in here that is senseless

 

[William F. Russell]

Are the Patriots appealing that 1st round pick too? Anybody know?

The Patriots and Tom Brady will have separate appeals since they were punished separately.

Tom obviously is appealing his suspension.

I'm not sure what Kraft/the Patriots are going to do but they should appeal.

 

[William F. Russell]

@Reggie Rhodes don't quote me my guy. I was done with you the second you tried to argue with @SuperCoolP_Cal that the Pats cannot fire any employee for whatever reason they choose like the default rule in the US is not at-will employment. I can only imagine what else you said in here that is senseless

Edited.

 

[William F. Russell]

Point out what I said that was senseless...

And why can't the Pats fire any employee within their organization? Those ball boys weren't unionized; they were part-time/hourly wage employees.

 

[William F. Russell]

@Reggie Rhodes don't quote me my guy. I was done with you the second you tried to argue with @SuperCoolP_Cal that the Pats cannot fire any employee for whatever reason they choose like the default rule in the US is not at-will employment. I can only imagine what else you said in here that is senseless

If your words and actions were interpreted by the authorities in such a way that it cost your employer over $1 million, you think you’d keep your job? Even if they believed you did nothing wrong?

I doubt that very much.

They fired them because they acted like complete jackwads and the NFL ordered them to suspend them for the entire 2015 season and not allow them on the sidelines or near the balls after that. Why would you keep on ball attendants who are not allowed near the balls?

 

[No1]

Point out what I said that was senseless...

Um....I was defending you about the default of at-will employment...

 

[23Barrettcity]

@Reggie Rhodes don't quote me my guy. I was done with you the second you tried to argue with @SuperCoolP_Cal that the Pats cannot fire any employee for whatever reason they choose like the default rule in the US is not at-will employment. I can only imagine what else you said in here that is senseless

Your right in terms of what at will employment means but it's not as cut and Dry in every state as they can just fire you .

 

[William F. Russell]

Um....I was defending you about the default of at-will employment...

My fault. I misread that. Forgive me.

 

[William F. Russell]

Your right in terms of what at will employment means but it's not as cut and Dry in every state as they can just fire you .

What are you talking about? At-will employment is at-will employment, regardless of what state you're in...either the employer or the employee can terminate without cause.

 

[King Kreole]

@Reggie Rhodes don't quote me my guy. I was done with you the second you tried to argue with @SuperCoolP_Cal that the Pats cannot fire any employee for whatever reason they choose like the default rule in the US is not at-will employment. I can only imagine what else you said in here that is senseless

I want you to tell me what will happen if the New England Patriots fire an employee for refusing to commit an illegal act or for taking time off to recover from a medical procedure.

You are dismissed.

 

[23Barrettcity]

What are you talking about? At-will employment is at-will employment, regardless of what state you're in...either the employer or the employee can terminate without cause.

That's not true a bunch of states have provisions against that
Edit :Thirty-six U.S. states (and the District of Columbia) also recognize an implied contract as an exception to at-will employment.[28] Under the implied contract exception, an employer may not fire an employee "when an implied contract is formed between an employer and employee, even though no express, written instrument regarding the employment relationship exists."[28] Proving the terms of an implied contract is often difficult, and the burden of proof is on the fired employee. Implied employment contracts are most often found when an employer's personnel policies or handbooks indicate that an employee will not be fired except for good cause or specify a process for firing. If the employer fires the employee in violation of an implied employment contract, the employer may be found liable for breach of contract.