Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,814 Year: 3,071/9,624 Month: 916/1,588 Week: 99/223 Day: 10/17 Hour: 6/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Deflation-gate
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 166 of 466 (765339)
07-27-2015 2:57 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by Percy
07-26-2015 5:30 PM


Re: Black and White Outlook
Culpability isn't in part a function of evidence?
Culpability is about things other than mere liability. Culpability is about the level of guilt assigned to Brady. In addition, other factors can go into the punishment including cooperation or non-cooperation with the investigation, lying to investigators or otherwise impeding the investigation. It is unlikely that ball pressure data is going to be indicative of any of those things. Those things would be determined by other means. In civil matters there is no fifth amendment and even silence can be used to infer guilt and the level of punishment.
But the ball pressure measurements are going to have next to nothing to say about culpability.
But given that we really haven't talked about any range of punishments, I simply don't even see the relevance here. The evidence is used to determine what happened to the required degree of certainty. Based on the which issues are and are not found by the required level of proof, which in this case is "more probable than not", and of course the scale on which they've punished others, punishment is assigned. That is the way I expect things to be done.
hat I said, that the punishment should be appropriate to the evidence.
And what I am suggesting to you is that you appear to be wishing for a standard that nobody uses. (As best as I currently understand) If what you are saying is that we cannot impose a four game suspension using a preponderance of the evidence standard then you are engaged in wishing. If instead you merely mean that there is insufficient evidence to assign blame, then you and I are simply disagreeing about the evidence.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Percy, posted 07-26-2015 5:30 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by Percy, posted 07-27-2015 4:08 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 167 of 466 (765340)
07-27-2015 3:19 PM
Reply to: Message 165 by Percy
07-27-2015 12:14 PM


Re: NFL Revises Policies Regarding Pressure and Handling of Footballs
The article goes on to note that the changes weaken the NFL's case against Brady since it represents an implicit admission that the previous procedures were inadequate.
Inadequate, yes. But in adequate for what purpose? I don't think the NFL is taking the position that the current rules are adequate to prevent tampering since they are arguing that such a thing did happen.
I agree that an argument can be made that the procedures were improved because the previous ones were inadequate to conclusively detect tampering after the fact, But it is an argument that is easily rebutted. Also there do not seem to be any theories that an outsider tampered with the balls.
the articles didn't mention anything about how they would account for the effects of differences...
If the NFL is actually ignorant about these things, they are going to learn very quickly.
If we want to have more fun speculating, how about some theories that the change in procedures is a tip to how the appeal is going to go or when the appeal results will be announced? My guess is that this is the first step in dropping the punishment to zero.
The NFL may take the position that the current evidence lacks a legal strength chain of custody and is thus inadequate to survive a court appeal despite being otherwise sufficient. That stance might allow them to either cave now, or to cave if Brady files an appeal in court. The NFL would then preserve the right to say that they were letting Tom off on a technicality.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by Percy, posted 07-27-2015 12:14 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 168 of 466 (765342)
07-27-2015 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by Percy
07-26-2015 5:30 PM


Re: Black and White Outlook
This is unintelligible, I'm not going to try to untangle it, except to say that all I said was that you didn't respond to Message 126.
I assume that you were posting these things in order to show that I inappropriate held black and white opinions on something that was grey. I wonder how my not responding, or my suggesting that your standard was not the one generally used goes to show that.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Percy, posted 07-26-2015 5:30 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by Percy, posted 07-27-2015 4:17 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 169 of 466 (765345)
07-27-2015 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 166 by NoNukes
07-27-2015 2:57 PM


Re: Black and White Outlook
NoNukes writes:
If what you are saying is that we cannot impose a four game suspension using a preponderance of the evidence standard then you are engaged in wishing.
I'm saying something different, and I can't for the life of me figure out why you're not getting it.
Let's go back to the example I just used. The NFL has decided that based upon a preponderance of the evidence that Brady was more likely than not to have been generally aware that footballs were being deflated, and they have suspended him 4 games. Now next season the NFL catches a quarterback red-handed deflating footballs. The standard is still just a preponderance of the evidence, but the actual evidence is a slam dunk. Should the NFL suspend him 8 games? That would be ridiculously harsh. Should they suspend him 4 games? That would be ridiculously unfair to Brady.
I've been very consistent about this from the very beginning. When I first heard that the Wells report had found Brady guilty I posted that Brady should be suspended 4 games (see Message 100), because I believed the initial news reports that he'd actually been found guilty, that there was actual evidence proving beyond a reasonable doubt that he was involved with tampering with football inflation pressure. But I learned later that the Wells report and the NFL used a lower standard, and that the NFL didn't have that kind of evidence, and so the punishment must be less. And because the evidence measures much, much less than the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt, the punishment must be much, much less.
The NFL is not always saddled with this lack of hard evidence. For example, in the Ray Rice case they didn't have to say that based upon a preponderance of the evidence that it was more likely than not that Ray Rice beat his fiance senseless in the elevator - they had videotape. Ray Rice was suspended indefinitely (later overturned in court because they didn't follow their own rules and (in a technical sense) suspended him twice for the same offense).
The point is that hard evidence can justify hard punishment. Weak evidence cannot. This isn't rocket science.
But given that we really haven't talked about any range of punishments,..
I don't know what thread you've been reading, but it can't be this one. See, for example, my Message 159.
And what I am suggesting to you is that you appear to be wishing for a standard that nobody uses.
You're way out in left field. The entire public debate is about whether the NFL has sufficient evidence to justify so harsh a punishment. You're just going on and on trying to cobble together some chain of minutia to argue that the amount and quality of evidence makes no difference. Well, it does make a difference.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by NoNukes, posted 07-27-2015 2:57 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by NoNukes, posted 07-27-2015 4:47 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 170 of 466 (765348)
07-27-2015 4:17 PM
Reply to: Message 168 by NoNukes
07-27-2015 3:28 PM


Re: Black and White Outlook
NoNukes writes:
I assume that you were posting these things in order to show that I inappropriate held black and white opinions on something that was grey.
You're *still* arguing for black and white approaches. Look at what you just said in your earlier Message 167. You in essence say that as far as the evidence is concerned you don't think it matters by how far the standard of "more probable than not" is exceeded when it comes to meting out punishement:
Nonukes in Message 167 writes:
But given that we really haven't talked about any range of punishments, I simply don't even see the relevance here. The evidence is used to determine what happened to the required degree of certainty. Based on the which issues are and are not found by the required level of proof, which in this case is "more probable than not", and of course the scale on which they've punished others, punishment is assigned. That is the way I expect things to be done.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by NoNukes, posted 07-27-2015 3:28 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by NoNukes, posted 07-27-2015 4:38 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 171 of 466 (765350)
07-27-2015 4:38 PM
Reply to: Message 170 by Percy
07-27-2015 4:17 PM


Re: Black and White Outlook
You're *still* arguing for black and white approaches. Look at what you just said in your earlier Message 167. You in essence say that as far as the evidence is concerned you don't think it matters by how far the standard of "more probable than not" is exceeded when it comes to meting out punishement:
Even if I am wrong, when I say "I don't think it matters" that means I am describing the standard approach, so why would I waffle about that? It is also the case that I am just fine with the standard approach. I think it has been vetted over serious civil and administrative matters and that it's just fine for deciding whether Brady is going to start the first game of the season.
Are there limits to the punishments I think are appropriate for a preponderance of the evidence standard. Yes. Criminal penalties that include time in jail or inappropriate. But for fining OJ millions of dollars? Preponderance of the evidence is just fine. No sliding scale based on the amount of exceeding the preponderance is necessary.
You feel differently, then that's your opinion.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by Percy, posted 07-27-2015 4:17 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 172 of 466 (765351)
07-27-2015 4:47 PM
Reply to: Message 169 by Percy
07-27-2015 4:08 PM


Re: Black and White Outlook
Let's go back to the example I just used. The NFL has decided that based upon a preponderance of the evidence that Brady was more likely than not to have been generally aware that footballs were being deflated, and they have suspended him 4 games. Now next season the NFL catches a quarterback red-handed deflating footballs. The standard is still just a preponderance of the evidence, but the actual evidence is a slam dunk. Should the NFL suspend him 8 games? That would be ridiculously harsh. Should they suspend him 4 games? That would be ridiculously unfair to Brady.
Whatever punishment Brady gets is just fine for the next person who does the same thing. What if the next person does the same thing Brady was found to have done, but does a great job of covering his tracks, but is ultimately caught? Does the difficulty in finding evidence in such a case mean a lighter suspension? I certainly don't buy that.
And then there are the factors surrounding the investigation which might be similar to aggravating factors. Are they the same?
Let's forget the standard of evidence for just a second. And let's try to forget the players involved.
Hypothetical Quarterback A (Bart Star) knows that the equipment dudes are tampering with the balls but says nothing. Quarterback B (Dan Fouts) lets the air out of the balls himself on the sidelines. If those two acts are distinguishable, then different punishments can result. I'm fine with that. Now what penalty should quarterback A get? That's a different, a quite complicated issue.
Now let's reintroduce Brady and the particular findings made for Brady generally knowing that the balls were being deflated. Whose suspension can we use for a direct comparison Brady's suspension? Isn't the answer nobody? We don't know what the penalty is for a QB found to be deflating balls on the sidelines. So if 4 games is too many, then IMO, it is because of the lack of any general standard for punishment in the NFL. About some future guy who might do something worse? How can we make that comparison?
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by Percy, posted 07-27-2015 4:08 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by Percy, posted 07-28-2015 11:17 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 173 of 466 (765376)
07-28-2015 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 172 by NoNukes
07-27-2015 4:47 PM


Re: Black and White Outlook
NoNukes writes:
Hypothetical Quarterback A (Bart Star) knows that the equipment dudes are tampering with the balls but says nothing. Quarterback B (Dan Fouts) lets the air out of the balls himself on the sidelines. If those two acts are distinguishable, then different punishments can result. I'm fine with that. Now what penalty should quarterback A get? That's a different, a quite complicated issue.
Well, at least we agree that "if those two acts are distinguishable," whatever punishment Starr gets (two r's), it should not be the same as Fouts.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by NoNukes, posted 07-27-2015 4:47 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2578
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 174 of 466 (765384)
07-28-2015 12:48 PM
Reply to: Message 165 by Percy
07-27-2015 12:14 PM


Re: NFL Revises Policies Regarding Pressure and Handling of Footballs
Percy notes
NFL Nation's Kevin Seifert today reports the NFL has "produced a detailed process for measuring pregame football inflation, fortified its chain of custody for balls during warm-ups and arranged for random halftime and postgame testing."
I wonder if this will also impact the kicking units. Kickers like to overinflate. Over the decades, despite moving the kickoff back to the 35, kickers have still been easily kicking beyond the end zone. Also long field goals are seemingly made more often....
They probably wont be too happy about this.

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by Percy, posted 07-27-2015 12:14 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by NoNukes, posted 07-28-2015 1:04 PM xongsmith has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 175 of 466 (765389)
07-28-2015 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by xongsmith
07-28-2015 12:48 PM


Re: NFL Revises Policies Regarding Pressure and Handling of Footballs
They probably wont be too happy about this.
Kickers may be unhappy. But wasn't the idea behind moving the ball to the 35 yard line to get more exciting run backs? Maybe that will happen.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by xongsmith, posted 07-28-2015 12:48 PM xongsmith has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 176 of 466 (765412)
07-28-2015 5:39 PM


I heard on the radio this afternoon that the appeal verdict had been upheld. There was some supposedly new evidence that Brady had destroyed the phone that was allegedly used to communicate with the equipment folks.
That sounds kind like a smoke screen to me, but it may be an effective one to raise in a court appeal.
Also, the NFL has filed a suit in federal court seeking to have their decision confirmed. I did not expect that...
Roger Goodell upholds Tom Brady suspension

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by Percy, posted 07-28-2015 6:08 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 177 of 466 (765414)
07-28-2015 6:08 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by NoNukes
07-28-2015 5:39 PM


Brady Destroys Cell Phone
NoNukes writes:
That sounds kind like a smoke screen to me,...
Agreed. They did access the cell phone data of the two Patriot equipment guys, and incriminating texts from Brady did not show up.
I do find destroying the cell phone disturbing and suspicious, but I also have some questions to throw out to anyone reading this thread. Is it common for people to destroy their old cell phones after getting a new one? (I still have my old cell phone from 2003.) Do cell phones really remember every text you ever sent? Can you delete an old text message, or is it just removed from the list but remains in memory? Does that text message history go away when you get a new cell phone, or does it transfer over like your contact list? Given that Brady's cell phone could contain confidential financial and legal information, do lawyers perhaps always advise clients with significant net worths to destroy their old cell phones? (So that they're not sitting for years on a shelf in a closet just waiting to be burgled.)
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by NoNukes, posted 07-28-2015 5:39 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by xongsmith, posted 07-28-2015 8:07 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 179 by NoNukes, posted 07-28-2015 11:02 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 180 by NoNukes, posted 07-29-2015 12:46 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 187 by Stile, posted 07-30-2015 9:34 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2578
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 178 of 466 (765419)
07-28-2015 8:07 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by Percy
07-28-2015 6:08 PM


Re: Brady Destroys Cell Phone
Percy asks
do lawyers perhaps always advise clients with significant net worths to destroy their old cell phones?
Kidnapping Tom & Gisele's children would be a major kidnap!!

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by Percy, posted 07-28-2015 6:08 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 179 of 466 (765423)
07-28-2015 11:02 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by Percy
07-28-2015 6:08 PM


Re: Brady Destroys Cell Phone
I also have some questions to throw out to anyone reading this thread. Is it common for people to destroy their old cell phones after getting a new one? (I still have my old cell phone from 2003.) Do cell phones really remember every text you ever sent? Can you delete an old text message, or is it just removed from the list but remains in memory?
I cannot answer many of the questions. I do have some old phones sitting around. I would imagine that the erasure does not immediately make text messages unrecoverable via forensic examination until the memory is reused.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by Percy, posted 07-28-2015 6:08 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 180 of 466 (765447)
07-29-2015 12:46 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by Percy
07-28-2015 6:08 PM


Re: Brady Destroys Cell Phone
During civil litigation, usually the first shot across the bow are orders to preserve evidence. If Brady's phone had exculpatory evidence or damning evidence and the action had kicked off with a legal suit, destroying that evidence would be inexcusable and would likely result in sanctions. But that is not what happened here. Still, it seems the issue is now going to court and that it is likely that Brady's phone would be subpoenaed if it still existed.
Yeah, Brady could have coincidentally gotten a new phone.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by Percy, posted 07-28-2015 6:08 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by xongsmith, posted 07-29-2015 2:13 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024