APAs Judge Helen G. Berrigan tries to sift through conflicting submissions regarding a specific factual question she raised last week with the parties in the bounty cases, there’s one important point to keep in mind regarding the affidavit from Browns linebacker Scott Fujita.
Its contents mesh with statements Fujita made during a June interview with the Associated Press.
In his affidavit, submitted on Friday to Judge Berrigan, Fujita said that he had a telephone conversation with Commissioner Roger Goodell on roughly March 20, 2012. Fujita testified that Goodell “told me he would be coming down hard with punishments on the Saints coaches, but that with respect to Saints players, he was not quite sure what he had on them, and that player punishments therefore would take some time.”
If accurate, Fujita’s testimony would refute the claim that Goodell was prepared to discipline the players along with the non-players on March 21, and that Goodell delayed disciplining the players only because the NFLPA had requested the delay.
In June, Fujita mentioned the March phone conversation to the AP, explaining that Goodell said “he would have no problem coming down hard on Saints coaches, but that when it comes to players, he’s not quite sure what he’s got.”
The only difference comes from the timing. The AP characterizes, but doesn’t quote, Fujita as claiming the call occurred in “early March.” The NFL first disclosed the bounty program publicly on Friday, March 2.
The fact that Fujita gave the same version on two different occasions is hardly dispositive. But consistency is potentially relevant when trying to sift through differing versions of reality.
Again, we’re not saying anyone has intentionally failed to tell the truth. Perceptions can be skewed and memories can be faulty. Here, the point is that the version Fujita gave before the question was raised by the judge meshes with the version he gave after. Given the importance of the issues and the inevitability of an appeal, it makes sense for Judge Berrigan to conduct an evidentiary hearing, at which time all of the key witnesses would show up and testify regarding their perceptions and memories as to the question of whether Goodell did or didn’t make a decision about player discipline as of March 21.
It’s still not completely clear why that’s even an issue in the litigation. But the judge made it an issue by asking the parties last week to identify the date on which the NFLPA supposedly asked the NFL to delay reaching a decision as to player discipline.
Hopefully, the delay for getting an answer on whether the bounty suspensions will be upheld won’t last much longer.
Channel Finder
The reason this is an issue is that the judge is grasping at straws trying to “find any way to rule in favor” of Vilma. She is just as desprate as Vilma and the NFLPA to undo the deal that was agreed to.
I thinks it finally starting to sink in to everyone that the Saints players have been telling the truth all along, while it is Goodell that has been untruthful.
He has lied about how many pages of “evidence” he had. He leaked two different journal entries that were quickly disproven. He lied about a admission statement that was proved later to NOT be an admission statement.
I’m hoping so much that the judge finds that he lied under oath. When will the owners realize that he is the one tarnishing the image of the league? Anyone could negotiate sponsor deals and TV contracts. But he has embarressed the league with his personal vendetta and exagerrated claims
Fujita says “on or about March 20th”.
AP “characterizes” that Fujita said the call was in early March.
Bottom line – both dates (or any date inbetween) – is prior to March 21st.
End of story.
Just when you thought Goodell hit a home run over the fence, Fujita climbs the wall and robs him. Oh wait, wrong sport.
If Goddell told the players that he has not decided yet if there was enough info to punish them before March 21st then the judge will allow the Vilma defamation lawsuit against Goddell and the league to proceed because Goddell was on tv slandering Vilma and the other players before he had even decided that they were guilty of something. Vilma and the others will win. Goddell screwed up by going to the media and slandering Vilma and the others before he even saw enough evidence that they indeed did something wrong.
I have to agree – this really looks like Goodell is about to be publicly embarrassed for over-stating his evidence, and slandering the players in advance of making his own determination of guilt. If he’s no longer the Commish by the end of the season, I won’t be surprised.
Where are all Roger’s apologist? What nobody wants to touch this one? Roger lied under oath, and will be spending a year or two in jail. It’s over for the Commish.
Mike, “It’s still not completely clear why that’s even an issue in the litigation.”
Open eyes, look screen, and read:
“stull60060 says: Aug 19, 2012 5:59 PM”
****************
This is why this is important. If Goodell went on TV and slandered Vilma before he had conducted his “investigation” it is probative of two points in contention.
First, it is probative in the current injunction hearing, because it goes to whether or not Goodell was an impartial arbiter and whether he suspended the players based on the findings of an “investigation” or if he had decided to suspend the players regardless of what the ensuing “investigation” revealed. If Goodell was not a fair arbiter of the initial player suspensions and had made up his mind regarding the suspensions prior to the findings of the NFL’s own investigation, then the whole “appeals” process was also a sham and the suspensions can be overturned on that point alone. Ergo, Goodell loses.
Second, it is probative in the Defamation claims by Vilma, because Goodell would have not had the results of the “investigation” at the time he slandered Vilma. Goodell would therefore lose the Defamation case.
This Judge is getting her ducks in a row and the end result will be a big win for Vilma and a big loss for Goodell. Hopefully in the end the result will also be a big win for the game of football.
This whole thing is based on Goodell publicly announcing as fact that Vilma put up 10 grand to intentionally injure another player. He intentionally manipulated the public’s outrage to support his severe punishments without having clear evidence to support his claims. What’s worse is he still doesn’t. He’s no longer concerned about the truth. Goodell, the accuser and executioner, is only concerned with making his punishments stick even if Vilma is actually innocent. Although the current CBA allows him to abuse his power, it’s still wrong in the eyes of most people, including a Federal Judge.
Perhaps goodell knew by the 20th that vilma would get a sebere punishment but wasnt ready to decide on all players.
Fujita-”Thats my stiry and I’m sticking to it”
Most lie’rs stick to them, even in the face of disproveing facts.
Documents sent from Smith to NFL and phone records from NFLPA to NFL are facts. Where are Fujita’s corroboratreing facts ? Florio won’t get as many hits with the facts, so he goes with the garbage that no one else will write. Why is that?
“Where are all the roger apologists? What, nobody wants to touch this one?”
Maybe they’re sick of saying over and over that the players agreed to the CBA and the judge’s biased decision will be overturned in a nanosecond at the appeals court. You suckers can have your fun.
I hope Vilma has someone else paying his legal bill, because after all of this and the subsequent appeal process he will be broke and will not have a lot of money to live on in retirement.
Please! This cannot just be me. Roger Goodell has made up his mind and now is doing EVERYTHING he can to make it fit. I do not believe for a moment he is outright lying. I think he believes he is correct and now is trying to make the facts fit what he has already ruled on. I KNOW he told Fujita that he had not decided on the players by 3/21, period!
While I think RG is doing what he thinks might be in the best interest of the NFL, to try and exclude these players ( anybody) from basic due process and to face and challenge the evidence should never be allowed in any circumstance…..
I can only hope that a judge of REAL law can make a ruling and bring this all back to a fair process.
In further news, Judge Judy wants to know whether Roger Goodell wears boxers or briefs because boxers are lillegal in Luweeseeana. judge judy has her mind made up but she’s looking for something…….anything…..that won’t make her look so foolish to the Federal Appeals Court when they overrule her personal bias. What a loser, she wants to be able to keep her position but also wants to rule for the criminals.