The Commish upholds ruling on the Saints Bounty case

[Guard]

per twitter:

The Pigskin Arch ‏@ThePigskinArch

RT @realfreemancbs: Goodell says in letter to players they have offered no evidence to contradict his earlier rulings.

@ThePigskinArch

Not surprised. RT @realfreemancbs: Goodell upholds player suspensions in Saints case, http://CBSSports.com has learned

 

[Stranger]

On to Phase II. The Commish has until July 5th to respond to Vilma's complaint against him.

And quickly scanning the NFL.com article (below), it looks like the Commish is taking the Guilty until proven innocent approach.

Scott Fujita, Anthony Hargrove, Will Smith and Jonathan Vilma were notified Tuesday that NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has upheld the player discipline that was imposed for their roles in the New Orleans Saints' pay-for-performance "bounty" program.

Vilma has been suspended without pay for the entire 2012 season, Hargrove eight games, Smith four games and Fujita for three games.

"Throughout this entire process, including your appeals, and despite repeated invitations and encouragement to do so, none of you has offered any evidence that would warrant reconsideration of your suspensions. Instead, you elected not to participate meaningfully in the appeal process..." Goodell wrote in a letter to the players.

"Although you claimed to have been 'wrongfully accused with insufficient evidence,' your lawyers elected not to ask a single question of the principal investigators, both of whom were present at the hearing (as your lawyers had requested); you elected not to testify or to make any substantive statement, written or oral, in support of your appeal; you elected not to call a single witness to support your appeal; and you elected not to introduce a single exhibit addressing the merits of your appeal. Instead, your lawyers raised a series of jurisdictional and procedural objections that generally ignore the CBA, in particular its provisions governing 'conduct detrimental' determinations..."

"In sum, I did not make my determinations here lightly. At every stage, I took seriously my responsibilities under the Collective Bargaining Agreement. I determined the discipline for each of you

(1) only after a long, detailed and professional investigation by NFL Security's experienced investigators;

(2) only after the results of that investigation were carefully reviewed by an independent expert, former United States Attorney Mary Jo White;

(3) only after I heard the appeals of the Saints' coaches and staff regarding discipline for their roles in the program;

(4) only after representatives of NFL Security, along with Mr. Pash and Mr. Birch, spoke with Players Association attorneys at length regarding the investigation; and

(5) only after giving each of you multiple opportunities to meet with the NFL investigators and to share with them your version of the events surrounding the program. The suspensions imposed were reasonable action taken to preserve public confidence in, and the integrity of, the game of professional football."

The players and NFL Players Association had previously challenged Goodell's authority to hear the player appeals, but their arguments were rejected by two arbitrators.

"While this decision constitutes my final and binding determination under the CBA, I of course retain the inherent authority to reduce a suspension should facts be brought to my attention warranting the exercise of that discretion," Goodell wrote. "The record confirms that each of you was given multiple chances to meet with me to present your side of the story. You are each still welcome to do so."

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8 ... ger-goodel

 

[-X-]

Not surprised either.



Sent from my SPH-D710 using Xparent Blue Tapatalk 2

 

[Guard]

Well, the Commish pretty much laid the smack down there. I think that was pretty much driving the hammer home.

I think the penalties for players and coaches were pretty harsh, but also, the players did not handle their appeals process very well at all. Probably got some really bad advice from their lawyers on this one. Doubt if they'll find any relief outside of the CBA in a civilian court... especially since their names are probably on the voting register for approving the CBA as it now stands.

 

[Stranger]

Let's hope the next round of CBA negotiators do a better job of creating a judgement system that reflects a reasonable level of due-process.

By the way, if you haven't already read Vilma's complaint, then perhaps this is a good time to do so, as it conflicts with some of what Goodell said in his "ruling".

http://www.scribd.com/doc/98869069/Vilm ... -Complaint

I know lots of people here say they don't care anymore, but just do yourself a favor and get some insight into the bigger picture.

For example, did you know the following?

84. Vitt recently stated publicly as follows: “…It cannot be emphasized enough, noneof our players, particularly those who are facing suspensions, ever crossed the white line with theintent to injure an opponent.” Vitt equally forcefully denied that Vilma ever offered $10,000 foran injury to Favre or Warner, or any amount of money for an injury to any player.

87. The NFL failed to produce Vitt to testify at the Appeal Hearing

90. A close friend and associate of Williams’, who has met and spoken extensivelywith Williams, and who was present for at least one communication Williams had with Goodell,claims as follows: Williams never acknowledged that there existed a Bounty Program, Williamshas no information that there existed a Bounty Program, Williams has no information orevidence that Vilma ever offered $10,000 for an injury to Favre or Warner, or any amount of money for an injury to any player.

91.The same close friend and associate has confirmed that Goodell told Williams thatreinstatement depends on Williams’ cooperation with Goodell and that Goodell has put a gagorder on Williams prohibiting his direct communication with any of the Saints players orofficials who have been punished

95. There are serious flaws in both of the alleged Ledger entries.

96. First, Goodell’s allegation against Vilma and the other Saints, and the basis of hisclaim that there is a Bounty Program, is premised upon a charge that Saints players pledgedmoney in advance of games as an award for injuring pre-designated opposing players.

97. The supposed Ledger does not in any way evidence that opposing players weretargeted for injury or that any money was pledged to award an injury to any opposing player.

98. Second, Giants offensive tackle Kareem McKenzie suffered a groin injury duringthe October 18, 2009 game. McKenzie, as game film evidences, suffered the injury attemptingto recover a fumble in a scrum of players. There is no realistic way in which any Saintsdefensive player could have intentionally caused McKenzie’s groin injury in hopes of earning analleged Bounty.

99. Third, after it was publicized, in reaction to the NFL’s leak, that no Bills offensiveplayers could have conceivably been the victim of any bounty during the September 27, 2009game, the NFL revised its leak to Cole and claimed that the Ledger in fact related to a November8, 2009 game against the Carolina Panthers.

100. The NFL’s revised allegation about the Ledger evidenced was equally specious.

101. The only Panthers player injured in the November 8, 2009 game was defensiveplayer Thomas Davis. Davis suffered a knee injury after backpedaling and falling
untouched by any other player

105. Cerullo was an assistant coach with the Saints from 2007 through the 2010season. The Saints terminated Cerullo following various incidents, including disappearing fromthe Club during the 2009 Season and providing a pretextual excuse that was shown to beinaccurate and, again, disappearing from the Club during the week leading up to the Super Bowlin 2010, again giving a pretextual excuse that was shown to be inaccurate. Following the Saints’Super Bowl victory, Cerullo was given a cubic zirconia Super Bowl facsimile ring rather than agenuine Super Bowl ring, for which Cerullo has strenuously and vehemently expressed hisresentment.

106. Cerullo pledged revenge against the Saints, and particularly against Vitt,following his termination.

107. Upon information and belief, Goodell and the NFL relied principally uponCerullo’s statements during its investigation into the alleged Bounty Program.

108. Upon information and belief, the NFL interviewed Cerullo multiple times andbased its disciplinary decisions largely on Cerullo’s statements.

109. According to a close associate of Cerullo’s, who discussed the Bounty Programinvestigation with Cerullo on multiple occasions, Cerullo retracted his previous claims about theBounty Program, including in a communication directly with Goodell that occurred in April2012.

138. Based on multiple factors, including the fact that the NFL could not sustain its burden to justify the suspension because it had no documents or evidence it could legally offer at the Appeal Hearing, because it had failed to produce any witnesses with first-hand knowledge of any of the relevant facts, because it had failed to produce the witnesses requested by Vilma, because Goodell by his words and actions prior to the Appeal Hearing had demonstrated that he could not act as a fair and neutral arbitrator, because the NFL had failed to produce well over 99 per cent of the relevant information it had gathered, because the NFL had failed to produce any exculpatory evidence, because the NFL had provided only altered documents and, even for the altered documents, refused to identify the source of the documents or the dates of their creation, and because even under the CBA Goodell lacked jurisdiction to entertain the Appeal Hearing, Vilma moved Goodell to rescind the suspension and dismiss the proceedings.