Judge Berman Again Expresses Doubts In NFL's Case Against Tom Brady
BOSTON (CBS) -- While Wednesday's meeting in court between Tom Brady's side and Roger Goodell's side lacked the production value of last week's fireworks, it was nevertheless a momentous day in the courtroom.
Judge Richard Berman heard arguments from both sides' lawyers, and again he expressed serious doubts with the very foundation of the NFL's case against Brady.
According to the New York Daily News' Stephen Brown, aka last week's live-tweeter, Berman remains unconvinced of the conclusions reached by Ted Wells as well as the NFL's interpretation of the Wells report.
Berman hit the NFL hard yet again, and again had problems with language of Wells Report and appeal process
— Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 19, 2015
The NFLPA argued, on behalf of Brady, that Wells concluded only that Brady was "generally aware" of the deflation of footballs, whereas Goodell's ruling to uphold the suspension referenced that Brady "approved of, consented to, and provided inducements in support of ... a scheme to tamper with the game balls."
Berman: "There is a bit of a quantum leap from the finding of Mr. Wells to the finding of Mr. Goodell." (from general awareness to scheme)
— Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 19, 2015
Berman also noted that Wells' report did not actually find Brady "generally aware" of a football deflation plan on the night of the AFC Championship Game, which was the only incident for which Brady was suspended.
Berman: Brady's "general awareness" described by Wells didn't refer specifically to AFC championship. Said that was "conspicuously absent."
— Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 19, 2015
Nash, for NFL, countered that entire Wells Report revolved around that game, so that should be assumed. Berman seemed skeptical.
— Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 19, 2015
Nash: "Brady was not just generally aware. He was involved." Berman: "Why doesn't it say that?"
— Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 19, 2015
Berman to Nash: "Where else does Mr. Wells say Mr. Brady was generally aware (of deflation) in that game?"
— Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 19, 2015
Jeffrey Kessler, in his oral argument, took a shot at the NFL for the complete lack of knowledge of basic science -- something that could have easily explained the deflation level in the Patriots' footballs as well as the deflation level in the Colts' footballs.
Kessler: "No one in the NFL knew anything about the ideal gas law, which is surprising because I think I studied that in 9th grade."
— Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 19, 2015
Judge Berman, however, did not spend much focus on the scientific argument.
The NFL's argument remained consistent: Goodell acted within the powers granted to him by the collective-bargaining agreement, and there is simply no recourse for Brady.
He called Brady and the NFLPA simply a "disappointed grievant."
— Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 19, 2015
Nash: "The finding of the commissioner are entitled to deference."
— Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 19, 2015
According to Brown, Berman also asked what the basis was for Goodell to settle on a four-game suspension.
Berman: "Which of the four games were for ball tampering and which were for non cooperation?"
— Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 19, 2015
Berman: "The next time someone tampers with a ball but cooperates, what suspension would he get?"
— Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 19, 2015
These questions from Berman were likely spurred from the NFLPA's filing, which noted that no player has ever before been suspended for non-cooperation.
Berman also took aim at the NFL for likening Brady's alleged actions to a player taking performance-enhancing drugs.
Berman: "I don't see how four games (for deflation, non cooperation) is comparable to using steroids and a masking agent."
— Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 19, 2015
Berman appears to have given due consideration to the NFLPA's case, because he also pressed the NFL to explain why Brady's side was no allowed to call Jeff Pash as a witness during Brady's appeal hearing. The NFLPA took umbrage with the inability to question Pash, considering Pash was named as a co-lead investigator and also edited the report before its public release. Pash is the NFL's executive vice president and general counsel.
Berman: "I don't understand the thinking to not allow Mr. Pash as a witness. Who else but Pash had the opportunity to edit the Wells Report?
— Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 19, 2015
Berman: The NFL "cannot just conclude they cannot have a witness bc testimony would be cumulative."
— Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 19, 2015
Berman: "I believe some arbitration awards have been vacated" because a witness was not allowed to be called without explanation.
— Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 19, 2015
Berman: "There are some basic procedures of fairness that have to be followed.... You got to let someone make their case."
— Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 19, 2015
Nash called Pash "not relevant." Called the issue a "red herring" and said Brady team opted not to seek his testimony when it had 2nd chance
— Stephen Brown (@PPVSRB) August 19, 2015
Berman set a date of Aug. 31 for the two sides to meet again in court. Brady and Goodell will both be required to attend, if the sides are unable to reach a settlement before that date.
Scott Zolak and Marc Bertrand discussed the news from the courthouse, listen below: