Vilma Hearing Today

[NoSaint]

I know a handful of you have been keeping tabs - ill update with anything big coming out of the hearing. All these are tweets from the local paper - so to keep it clean i might just put the actual tweets and shave off all the stuff that would be around it (source, time, etc... its ryan jones and john deshazier for most if not all ::edit: gabe feldman is getting in on it too, with all 3 posting very similar stuff).

 

 

Ginsberg coming back to argument that Vilma was punished for putting money on head of specific players and there's no evidence of that.

 

Berrigan: "...I'm not sure there's a lot of difference."

Berrigan: I do think you exhausted remedies before Mr. Goodell. You were thwarted at every turn by Goodell. Penalties were too harsh

 

Berrigan: "Mr. Ginsberg, I'd like to e candid with you, I'd like to rule in Mr. Vilma's favor."

Judge- "I would like to rule in Vilma's favor. I do think you exhausted your remedies."

 

However, said doesn't know if she can do anything prior to a hearing on 30th

 

Judge thinks process was unfair, punishment excessive, and that RG did not have power to discipline in these cases.

But, judge thinks that players still have to exhaust appeal pending of Prof Burbank's arbitration decision.

 

Judge now discussing defamation suit. She is troubled by preemption argument. Ie, that defamation suit is preempted by CBA.

 

Ginsberg: What Goodell was obligated to do was be neutral or appoint a surrogate arbitrator in his place. He didn't HAVE to be arbitrator

 

 

NFLPA's Kessler is now providing points before NFL's turn. And Kessler is pushing judge to make ruling: "You're fully empowered

 

Kessler: "You don't have to wait for the appeals panel because Mr. Goodell did not wait for the appeals panel."

 

Kessler argues that judge has power to appoint a new arbitrator to decide the case. To send this back to RG would be like "Groundhog Day"

Edited August 10, 2012 by NoSaint

[Captain Hindsight]

interesting to see how it turns out

[NoSaint]

Jeff Darlington ‏@JeffDarlington

The question is no longer whether judge believes Vilma deserves injunction (she does). The question is whether she has the power to do so.

 

HA - a personal note: the judge made a joke that the arbitrator "sliced the salami too thin" making the decision that goodell was in charge on this one.... Kessler just retorted with the following according to the tweets:

 

 

Kessler now channeling Henny Youngman. Arbitrators deciding commish had jurisdiction to hear case "sliced salami so thin it made it bologna"

[NoSaint]

Kessler-in all other conduct detrimental cases,NFL had burden of proof & presented evidence.To extent NFL denies that,they're "making it up"

 

Kessler- this was a "kangaroo court. Fundamentally unfair."

 

Kessler: Unless you have any other questions, I think I've exhausted myself. Judge: Very impressive.

 

[NoSaint]

NFL, as expected, is arguing that even if judge believes punishment was too harsh, the authority came from CBA and is not subject to vacate.

 

Levy addressing point that Goodell "prejudged" players. Says it's called for by CBA that the NFLPA's "intelligent counsel" agreed to

 

Levy- commish was prepared to punish players at same time as coaches, but PA asked them to wait so could do own investigation.They never did

NFL counsel: "The question is whether the commissioner did anything that didn't draw it's essence from the CBA. And the answer is no.

 

Levy- process requires RG to declare guilt of player before hearing appeal. That's not improper and not reason to vacate

 

Judge makes clear,again, that she believes that players adequately participated in appeal before RG.

 

Levy: I accept your judgment that they did not fail to exhaust in appeals hearing. But they need to show Goodell's bias had impact

 

Judge- players were caught between rock and hard place.If they argued case before RG on appeal, they might have lost jutisdictional argument

 

Levy closing by emphasizing that Judge must defer to collectively bargained process. Point of law is to keep courts out of these disputes.

 

Judge wonders if "conduct detrimental" is too broad, a catch-all for commish to discipline

 

Judge again suggesting that this was pay for performance and thus not within commish's jurisdiction.

 

Judge to Levy-does "conduct detrimental" overridevother provisions of CBA? Levy-not for you to decide. Judge- you're making me feel powerless

 

 

One important note from Vilma case: the NFL has now formed its newly-created Appeals Panel, replacing what was Judge Doty in old CBA.

 

Judge actually chuckled when Kessler suggested league seems to think they could compile evidence and not turn it over to players

 

Kessler- commish can't simply declare everything conduct detrimental and discipline for it.

 

Ginsberg said Vilma's career in jeopardy, reputation has been compromised

 

Andrew Brandt@adbrandt

The new Appeals Panel consists of retired federal judges Fern Smith and Richard Howell and Georgetown Law professor James Oldham.

 

Ginsberg-Vilma learned of susp from ESPN.Can't be proper procedure. (Not clear if he's suggesting different network should've had scoop)

 

Looks like Berrigan won't rule. Will "go back to the drawing board"

 

Ginsberg (Vilma's attorney): "We're not challenging CBA or Goodell's power. We're challenging a unique derailment of that system." ...hmmm.

Edited August 10, 2012 by NoSaint

[NoSaint]

Unless noted (and thats only once that i wanted to explain the joke) everything above this post is just copy and paste off of twitter - not my own commentary. about 95% of it was either the two times pic reporters, or a tulane law professor in the room providing commentary. a few times guys like andrew brandt slipped in (particularly talking about the panel for aug 30). i just thought it read cleaner without @ehiapeit before every statement, when providing this many tweets.

 

My personal take is the end result - still waiting. still right where it was last hearing. August 30th will be a hearing on if goodell can actually hear this on the burbank appeal, and the nfl has been put on notice that the judge doesnt think he should be the one.... if they do rule that goodell is not the one to hear it, vilmas lawyers have filled that pay for performance CAN NOT result in players being suspended per the cba.

 

will be interesting from here. the judge was HIGHLY critical of the nfl at every step of the way.

Edited August 10, 2012 by NoSaint

[erynthered]

Thanks for the run down NoSaint.

 

[Roger Goodell]

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

[Mr. WEO]

NFL, as expected, is arguing that even if judge believes punishment was too harsh, the authority came from CBA and is not subject to vacate.

 

Levy addressing point that Goodell "prejudged" players. Says it's called for by CBA that the NFLPA's "intelligent counsel" agreed to

 

Levy- commish was prepared to punish players at same time as coaches, but PA asked them to wait so could do own investigation.They never did

NFL counsel: "The question is whether the commissioner did anything that didn't draw it's essence from the CBA. And the answer is no.

 

Levy- process requires RG to declare guilt of player before hearing appeal. That's not improper and not reason to vacate

 

Judge makes clear,again, that she believes that players adequately participated in appeal before RG.

 

Levy: I accept your judgment that they did not fail to exhaust in appeals hearing. But they need to show Goodell's bias had impact

 

Judge- players were caught between rock and hard place.If they argued case before RG on appeal, they might have lost jutisdictional argument

 

Levy closing by emphasizing that Judge must defer to collectively bargained process. Point of law is to keep courts out of these disputes.

 

Judge wonders if "conduct detrimental" is too broad, a catch-all for commish to discipline

 

Judge again suggesting that this was pay for performance and thus not within commish's jurisdiction.

 

Judge to Levy-does "conduct detrimental" overridevother provisions of CBA? Levy-not for you to decide. Judge- you're making me feel powerless

 

 

One important note from Vilma case: the NFL has now formed its newly-created Appeals Panel, replacing what was Judge Doty in old CBA.

 

Judge actually chuckled when Kessler suggested league seems to think they could compile evidence and not turn it over to players

 

Kessler- commish can't simply declare everything conduct detrimental and discipline for it.

 

Ginsberg said Vilma's career in jeopardy, reputation has been compromised

 

Andrew Brandt@adbrandt

The new Appeals Panel consists of retired federal judges Fern Smith and Richard Howell and Georgetown Law professor James Oldham.

 

Ginsberg-Vilma learned of susp from ESPN.Can't be proper procedure. (Not clear if he's suggesting different network should've had scoop)

 

Looks like Berrigan won't rule. Will "go back to the drawing board"

 

Ginsberg (Vilma's attorney): "We're not challenging CBA or Goodell's power. We're challenging a unique derailment of that system." ...hmmm.

 

Other than for seemingly her own entertainment, not sure what the point of this hearing was. The Judge seems to raise no points of law and refuses to rule.

[NoSaint]

Other than for seemingly her own entertainment, not sure what the point of this hearing was. The Judge seems to raise no points of law and refuses to rule.

 

honestly, i think it was to pressure them to settle. and especially give the nfl a hand slap.

 

also, when this was scheduled - the appeal committee didnt exist (for the aug 30 date). this is a brand new nfl thing going on with it. waiting on that is a brand new dynamic introduced since this was scheduled was something that hadnt been dealt with legally. the players are also pushing that they shouldnt have to wait, since the nfl isnt waiting with the suspensions.

 

no legal expert, just my impression

Edited August 10, 2012 by NoSaint

[Mr. WEO]

honestly, i think it was to pressure them to settle. and especially give the nfl a hand slap.

 

also, when this was scheduled - the appeal committee didnt exist (for the aug 30 date). this is a brand new nfl thing going on with it. waiting on that is a brand new dynamic introduced since this was scheduled was something that hadnt been dealt with legally. the players are also pushing that they shouldnt have to wait, since the nfl isnt waiting with the suspensions.

 

no legal expert, just my impression

 

I think sheknows she can't rule, or that her ruling would be overturned. The appeal committee is a godsend for her. I would still liked to have heard her actually discuss points of law regarding the CBA, etc. Sounds like she has a personal opinion of the suspension, but she cannot articluate why she would rule against the suspension. "Conduct unbecoming" is as broad as the CBA allowed Goodell to apply it and it would certainly include paying guys to injure people (Vilma may deny specifically that he tried to injure Favre or whatever, but these guys weren't simply getting "payed for performance"--I can't believe anyone really believes that anymore).

[NoSaint]

I think sheknows she can't rule, or that her ruling would be overturned. The appeal committee is a godsend for her. I would still liked to have heard her actually discuss points of law regarding the CBA, etc. Sounds like she has a personal opinion of the suspension, but she cannot articluate why she would rule against the suspension. "Conduct unbecoming" is as broad as the CBA allowed Goodell to apply it and it would certainly include paying guys to injure people (Vilma may deny specifically that he tried to injure Favre or whatever, but these guys weren't simply getting "payed for performance"--I can't believe anyone really believes that anymore).

 

she spoke some on that issue - that its a fine line between a knockout (shakeup of any player) and 10k on favre and has challenged vilmas team repeatedly about it. she agrees to disagree with you it seems at this point.

 

additionally i agree she shouldnt rule as long as the aug 30 appeal is on the docket, as that would mean the remedies of the cba are not yet 100% exhausted. if this appeal is a sham though, as shes characterized everything to this point, she has made it clear she WILL step in at that point.

 

and clearly, ideal over any of that is a settlement.

 

i think vilma sees a glimmer of getting everything overturned though, as if its not considered conduct detrimental, and its just the program thats been admitted, it may not be something that is even eligible for suspensions in the first place. that 10k on favre might be the difference for a huuuuge swing. potentially. again, still a huge mountain to climb for that, but it seems a path does exist to get there after this weeks filings and events.

Edited August 10, 2012 by NoSaint

[NoSaint]

Fresh update of the day -- Berrigan demanding that the NFL demonstrate that they were ready to punish the players on March 21st, along with the coaches as they claimed in the last court appearance, alleging they held off based on an NFLPA request.

 

The week before the NFL issued a memo saying they would not delay for the NFLPA, and a month later made statements that they were still gathering information and not ready to punish.

 

If the NFL cant produce something showing that they agreed to hold off on punishments at the NFLPA request by tomorrow..... Im sure berrigan, who was already none to happy with the nfl, will be pretty upset.

 

Two links describing the issue:

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/08/16/march-21-suddenly-looms-large-over-bounty-case/

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/08/15/judge-in-bounty-case-scrutinizes-key-factual-claim-made-by-nfl/

Edited August 16, 2012 by NoSaint

[NoSaint]

NFL submitted march 7th as the date of request, and the nflpa will seemingly point to a march 14th letter denying that request. its a minor point in the grand scheme, but i dont think it will win the nfl points with a judge that has heavily criticized how they have handled this. to claim that they delayed the punishment due to the nflpa requesting it, when they denied that request...

Edited August 16, 2012 by NoSaint

[Malazan]

Thanks for the information. There's some disturbing things to hear from a court of law.

 

"Judge- you're making me feel powerless"

 

A judge shouldn't feel powerful or powerless. They should know whether they can intercede in a legally binding agreement or not.

[NoSaint]

Thanks for the information. There's some disturbing things to hear from a court of law.

 

"Judge- you're making me feel powerless"

 

A judge shouldn't feel powerful or powerless. They should know whether they can intercede in a legally binding agreement or not.

 

I've seen that line played up as more or less an affectionate ribbing between her and the lawyer - meaning exactly what you implied it should (she's used it a few times smiling and laughing over the course of this). It's her way of saying good job to the nfl. Her and Kessler have a few similar back and forth jokes on the nflpa side

Edited August 17, 2012 by NoSaint

[NoSaint]

Fujita has filed a sworn statement that on march 20th goodell told him player punishments were still tbd, but the coaches were about to get hit.

 

Directly disputes the nfl filing yesterday that they were ready to punish but waiting to do so by request of the nflpa.

 

Nflpa also weighing in:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/08/17/smith-fujita-dispute-goodells-sworn-statement-on-march-21-issue/

 

 

I'll be curious to see at what point the nfl reps (roger?) will start making likewise sworn statements.

 

[Mr. WEO]

Fujita has filed a sworn statement that on march 20th goodell told him player punishments were still tbd, but the coaches were about to get hit.

 

Directly disputes the nfl filing yesterday that they were ready to punish but waiting to do so by request of the nflpa.

 

Nflpa also weighing in:

http://profootballta...march-21-issue/

 

 

I'll be curious to see at what point the nfl reps (roger?) will start making likewise sworn statements.

 

He already did: http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8275952/nfl-files-evidence-backing-commissioner-roger-goodell-jonathan-vilma-case

 

I heard months ago on the radio that he waited to hand down the penalties on the players at the request of the NFLPA. Fujita's memory is easily jarred by his lawsuit. Imagine that.

[NoSaint]

He already did: http://espn.go.com/n...than-vilma-case

 

I heard months ago on the radio that he waited to hand down the penalties on the players at the request of the NFLPA. Fujita's memory is easily jarred by his lawsuit. Imagine that.

 

i missed that he had a sworn statement in the packet.

 

the week prior to the march 21st date he had informed the nflpa that he wasnt going to hold off based on their request, and in april he made public statements that he was still in the process of making up his mind. odd that on March 21st he was ready to go. the nflpa is also fighting this one. with de smith saying he was denied any access to the information they had, and never made any agreement with goodell. i know its a minor tangent in the grand scheme possibly. definitely not trying to make a mountain out of a molehill here by any means, just reporting the updates from the deadline that passed at noon today.

 

edit: an interesting situation arising is that if he had decided at that point, it might burn up the credibility of his impartial arbitration as he later said he hadnt finished investigating which would be an issue in the cba suit.... if he hadnt decided at that point, his statements about vilma may fall outside of the scope of his job and become grounds to actually hear the defamation suit. (thats the most laymens translation of the legal explanation i just heard is)

 

ginsberg and the nflpa seem to be hoping this is a route they can push where the nfl is essentially forced to choose the lesser of two evils to admit to.

Edited August 17, 2012 by NoSaint

[Mr. WEO]

i missed that he had a sworn statement in the packet.

 

the week prior to the march 21st date he had informed the nflpa that he wasnt going to hold off based on their request, and in april he made public statements that he was still in the process of making up his mind. odd that on March 21st he was ready to go. the nflpa is also fighting this one. with de smith saying he was denied any access to the information they had, and never made any agreement with goodell. i know its a minor tangent in the grand scheme possibly. definitely not trying to make a mountain out of a molehill here by any means, just reporting the updates from the deadline that passed at noon today.

 

edit: an interesting situation arising is that if he had decided at that point, it might burn up the credibility of his impartial arbitration as he later said he hadnt finished investigating which would be an issue in the cba suit.... if he hadnt decided at that point, his statements about vilma may fall outside of the scope of his job and become grounds to actually hear the defamation suit. (thats the most laymens translation of the legal explanation i just heard is)

 

ginsberg and the nflpa seem to be hoping this is a route they can push where the nfl is essentially forced to choose the lesser of two evils to admit to.

 

Again, I heard back then he was holding off to let the NFLPA do some sort of investigation. If he was ready on the the 21st to penalize the players, then his investigation was doen. Sounds like he was letting the union do whatever they were going to do. By saying in April he hadn't made up his mind could mean he was waiting for the union to do their due diligence. He was mearly delaying his judgement of them.