Matt Walsh's lawyer asks NFL to protect his client on Spygate tapes
Associated Press
NEW YORK -- The lawyer for former New England Patriots employee Matt Walsh said his client is willing to turn over videotapes he made for the team if the NFL guarantees Walsh protection from lawsuits or other legal action.
Attorney Michael Levy said that to date, the NFL's initial proposals are not sufficient protection for Walsh, who is said to have taped the St. Louis Rams' walkthrough practice the day before they played the Patriots in the 2002 Super Bowl. The Patriots won 20-17.
"Under our proposal, Mr. Walsh is only protected if he in good faith is truthful. And he will be," Levy told The Associated Press on Friday in a telephone interview from his office at the Washington law firm of McKee Nelson.
"The NFL's proposal is not full indemnification. It is highly conditional and still leaves Mr. Walsh vulnerable. I have asked the NFL to provide Mr. Walsh with the necessary legal protections so that he can come forward with the truth without fear of retaliation and litigation. To best serve the interest of the public and everyone involved, I am hopeful that the NFL will do so promptly."
NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has said he's offered Walsh a deal whereby "he has to tell the truth and he has to return anything he took improperly" in return for indemnity.
"No one wants to talk to Matt Walsh more than we do," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said Friday.
"But his demand to be released from all responsibility even if his comments are not truthful is unprecedented and unreasonable. The NFL and the Patriots have assured Mr. Walsh's lawyer that there will be no adverse consequences for his client if Mr. Walsh truthfully shares what he knows. Why does he need any more protection than that?"
Walsh, now a golf pro in Maui, did video work for the Patriots when they won the first of their three Super Bowl after the 2001 season.
Goodell said Walsh was not interviewed as part of the NFL's investigation into "Spygate," which involved the NFL confiscating tapes from a Patriots employee who recorded the New York Jets' defensive signals from the sideline during the opening game of the 2007 season.
As a result of that investigation, New England coach Bill Belichick was fined $500,000 and the team was fined $250,000 and forfeited its 2008 first-round draft choice.
Six confiscated tapes and other documents pertaining to the Patriots' taping were subsequently destroyed by the league. Goodell has defended the destruction of the tapes.
Levy, who is continuing to negotiate with the NFL on Walsh's behalf, also objected to NFL security's investigation of his client.
"Sending a former FBI agent to investigate his professional and personal life has not left Mr. Walsh feeling confident that the National Football League simply wants to encourage him to come forward with whatever information he has," Levy said.
Goodell met this week with Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter and disclosed for the first time that the taping may have gone back to 2000, when Belichick first became coach of the Patriots. The commissioner said Belichick told him in their meeting last September that he believed the taping was legal. "We agreed to disagree," the commissioner said.
Specter, the senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary committee, said after the meeting that he would continue to investigate the taping episodes. He has said he also would like to speak with Walsh.
Goodell said he could reopen the investigation.
"If there is new information that is credible, new material that could be credible that would help us, yes, we'll look at it," he said.
But Eric Holder, a partner in Covington & Burling, the NFL's outside law firm, suggested the NFL might remain reluctant to meet Walsh's current terms.
"No responsible investigator would offer blanket immunity to a potential witness without a commitment that the witness will be truthful," Holder said. "Any witness who refuses to make that commitment doesn't deserve immunity."
Copyright 2008 by The Associated Press
__________________
Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
I sincerely doubt this will ever break - if it might even threaten to cost the league respect and/or money, they'll make it 'go away' - but if it does, and Belichick is exposed... it'll be even better than this year's Super Bowl!
NEW ORLEANS (AP) -- A lawsuit filed Friday by a former St. Louis Rams player and others seeks millions of dollars in damages from the alleged taping of Rams practices by the New England Patriots before the 2002 Super Bowl. The Patriots won the game 20-17 in the Superdome. The $100 million suit, filed on behalf of former Rams player Willie Gary in U.S. District Court in New Orleans, names the Patriots, team owner Robert Kraft and head coach Bill Belichick.
What is the big deal anyways. So he taped it, it's a fricken practice, not like he paid someone off to lose the game.
The big deal is that Billicheat told Goodell that ALL of the tapes had been turned over and that NONE of the Superbowl games were involved. This was the first time around when he got his hand slapped for 500k the team for 250k and the loss of a first round pick.
Do you think that secretly taping the WALK THROUGH the day before the SUPER BOWL GAME didn't give the Patriots an advantage at all?
The Patriots beat the Rams that year 20-17.
The point is that it is blatant cheating not just in one instance but multiple this decade by supposedly "The Greatest Team Ever!"
Its just deserves for the Patriots their decade of "domination" will be forever tainted it couldn't have happened to a more arrogant coach and team. Have some HUMBLE PIE Patriots fans!
__________________
Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
Not sure what sounds better, "cheaters" or "biggest disappointment in the history of the NFL". I got it! "Biggest disappointment in the history of the NFL, who also cheated".
Anyone saying "whats the big deal", well leave barry bonds alone then.
Patriot Gate....
Linear Mode
