SPYGATE IS FAR FROM OVER...a new update..

[Cliff]

If I had consensual sex with a woman and she later claimed rape, bringing shame to my name and causing me limitless headaches, I would certainly defend myself. Part of my defense would be bringing up stuff like, the fact that she's accused 2 other guys of raping her, she wrote bad checks in a different state a few years ago, etc. Character is important in the law's eyes, especially when two parties are essentially calling the other a liar.

Right, and I understand that concept. However, even in your example you use things that are relevant.

I can't comprehend how "He played a dangerous prank in 1999" helps their case other than distracting people from the actual issue.

It is my understanding that the stadium is fairly empty at this point. A guy sitting in the stands, even if he was "Death Blow/Cry Cry Again" discrete, would probably arouse suspicion from the typically paranoid NFL coaching staff.

I guess it just depends on how empty it actually was. They apparently weren't *that* paranoid if they're now saying the guy was able to get the footage and use it against them ...

Sounds to me that this guy is a bad person, and it's important to their case that the world understands things through their eyes.

Right, I totally get that. The example where he's recording his boss without his knowledge is great. If they had other examples of him going against the team's wishes or recording something without the team's knowledge, I wouldn't even question it.

This particular example is absurd though. Maybe if he had played a prank on one of the players that injured them it'd be a different story ...

I guess my point is;
If they're having to dig that deep to give examples of this guy's quality, maybe he's not all that bad?

Now, I will admit that I'm not 100% up to date with this whole "spygate" fiasco, but if the best you can come up with is a recording and a 13 year old prank with the kind of resources a company like an NFL team has at their disposal, maybe there IS something to this story? (aside from people blowing it out of proportion because they're jealous that their team isn't the constant contender the Pats are)

If the prank is one of the best examples they have of this man's "horrible" behavior, I am not impressed.

[VikingMachine]

The example where he's recording his boss without his knowledge is great.

Although to my knowledge this has never been proven, only alleged. Even if he did tape the conversation, is that really a big deal? If he thought that his boss was being inappropriate, harassing or whatever is it inappropriate? What if a student audiotapes their teacher swearing at the class, is the student now a "bad kid" for doing that?? Its completely legal by the way to audio tape a conversation like that, there is no presumption of privacy. I think that its just another way they are trying to discredit him, kinda like the 13 year old story. It seems a bit silly to me.

At the same time I dont think that this whole investigation needs to continue, lets just be done with it I say.

[Colinito]

Even if he did tape the conversation, is that really a big deal?

Yes.

Reminds me of Costanza when he got caught sleeping with the maid at his office. Was that wrong? If someone would have told me....

[OJVIKE]

seems to me that if the nfl and or the pats dont kiss this guys a_ _ there could be some type of price to pay question is is he pissed at anyone?? and is he willing to say he was told to tape those things he (has taped)if they even exist..time will tell..i still have a problem with goodall destroying the other pats tapes and other things he had destroyed why?? if it was of insignificents and didnt matter then why must is be destroyed?? why not release it to prove that it really was nothing??i know other teams have done this sort of thing also ...or so people have said...baseball has its steriods(clemens) the nfl has spygate(pats)this is why this is far from over just look at what the press and our government is doing to pro sports ..they cant wait for a player to make a mistake so they can become the next big story.

[Mr. X]

i still have a problem with goodall destroying the other pats tapes and other things he had destroyed why??

He didn't want them leaked to the media. Jay Glazer of Fox Sports had a copy of one of the tapes literally within 24 hours of the story breaking.

[Mr. X]

Massachusetts is a two-party consent state.

Twelve states require the consent of all parties to record [before recording] a telephone conversation. These laws are called “two-party consent” statutes. Those jurisdictions are California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington.

Even if Mass was a one-party consent law, I doubt you will find many employers there who will tolerate employees taping telephone calls with supervisors.

[VikingMachine]

Massachusetts is a two-party consent state.
Even if Mass was a one-party consent law, I doubt you will find many employers there who will tolerate employees taping telephone calls with supervisors.

No but it depends on the situation. If my employer was threatening me or harassing me or asking me to do something illegal for example I might be inclined to tape it.....or maybe not. I am just saying that I can think of scenarios and plenty of them where that might happen....doesnt mean hes a "bad guy".

[OJVIKE]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=A ... &type=lgns. heres the new news.

[Minniman]

He didn't want them leaked to the media. Jay Glazer of Fox Sports had a copy of one of the tapes literally within 24 hours of the story breaking.

That's a pretty poor excuse. There are safety deposit boxes that I am sure he could control. This was evidence of cheating, and it should not have been destroyed.

What if a student audiotapes their teacher swearing at the class, is the student now a "bad kid" for doing that??

It isn't illegal to swear. In fact, it is a constituationally recognized inalianable right (which is an oxymoron of sorts in itself). Perhaps the student should be doing something else in class other than playing with his iPhone. I get your point though.

No but it depends on the situation. If my employer was threatening me or harassing me or asking me to do something illegal for example I might be inclined to tape it.....or maybe not. I am just saying that I can think of scenarios and plenty of them where that might happen....doesnt mean hes a "bad guy".

I agree, and at this point, we don't know who is telling the more accurate story.

One should consider this, if this was arson rather than taping games, would so many people be so willing to take the side of the Patriots? If an organization was already caught setting fires to empty warehouses, and someone in the organization said they had evidence of of the organization setting fire to the competition's factory, I am certain that people would take him seriously.

It makes on wonder if cheating in professional sports would violate federal laws.