Statement from Walsh's attorney

Gulp

Anybody else see a problem with these two statements?
The statement released by Walsh's attorney states that Walsh will meet with the NFL on or prior to May 8th. The NFL release states that they are meeting on the 13th.

uh oh

No. The attorney's statement says that Walsh must turn over his materials by May 8. It doesn't saying anything about the interview, which occurs 5 days later.

What if walsh actually taped a piollli belicheck conversation about some damaging information? Nobody has raised that question...

Nope not at all, the NFL says they'll meet w/ him on the 13th and Walsh's party says they have to turn over the material by the 8th. Probably want to go over the material themselves and the question him on it.

Its pretty absurd to grant someone immunity. Now he can just say whatever he wants. I hope the NFL takes it with a grain of salt, because there is nothing stopping this guy from lying/exaggerating the truth.

They need to release the info by the 8th. I think it gives the NFL time to check its accuracy and maybe talk to people in the Pats' organization before a sit down interview

Okay Pats, don’t put your head in the sand like last time… you have to come at this with guns blazing. Deny, refute, and make clear to the whole country exactly what Walsh is.

Mr. Walsh better stay in Hawaii... He is now officially bared from New England...

does this guy look like a smart ass that you would want to slap. "let's see if I can make a career out of nothing>

Thanks to all for setting me straight. I read both statements one after the other and I guess it was too much for me to grasp. Makes perfect sense.....now.

"Its pretty absurd to grant someone immunity. Now he can just say whatever he wants. I hope the NFL takes it with a grain of salt, because there is nothing stopping this guy from lying/exaggerating the truth."

Excellent point. And whatever he says is going to taken by the press, bloggers, fans as the absolute truth. Shame.

Why do I have the feeling that this is going to get a lot worse for the Pats before it gets better ... yeesh.

Bunch of crap

They're granting him *indemnity*, not immunity. Indemnity simply means that--provided he is not intentionally lying--they will cover any costs that arise from his meeting with the NFL.

Moreover, the NFL is only indemnifying him against past actions, and specifically will not indemnify him against breaches of this agreement (in other words, if he releases the material to anyone without league permission, they can--and almost certainly *will*--file suit.

The league should and will only look a the videotape evidence. I do not beleive they will give much credence to his word.

Does it not state that they will also not sue him from this statement.

"The NFL will provide legal indemnification and a release of claims against Mr. Walsh relating to his employment by the Patriots and the Patriots' videotaping operations."

I'm no lawyer though.

I consider this good news. If he has EVIDENCE of Patriots wrongdoing, then it should be dealt with appropriately. If the Pats did something wrong, then I'm glad it won't be swept under the rug. I suspect that he has nothing of substance.

However, the media will grab on to every tidbit like a bunch of starved dogs, even if there's absolutely no evidence, and even if it makes no sense. For example, Easterbrook contends that Goodell destroyed the tapes that Belichick gave him because it further incriminated the Pats. It's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. It's not like Goodell raided Gillette Stadium. Belichick CHOSE what to give to Goodell and what not to give to him.

Who is paying for this hot shot DC lawyer? Anyone asking that question? Certainly not an assistant golf pro.......

DARN!

I was hoping SO much this would happen AFTER this years draft!

Hopefully, He has nothing real. But the precedent for the penalty for video taping has already been set. I'm still outraged that tampering received such a small penalty when compared to the penalty the Pats suffered.

He's going to release a video of a Rams practice or something, and Belichick & co. will come out saying they've never seen it before. Unfortunately this is a battle that will be fought in the media, a game in which Belichick rarely looks good, and the rest of the country will jump to their own conclusions about how the Patriots must have done this otherwise why would Walsh lie and blah blah blah, even though we all know whatever he comes up with will be fabricated and/or done on his end alone, not representative of the team's goals of wishes at the time. Who cares - let's move on to some football in September.

I'm not a lawyer, thank God, but my guess is that Walsh will be sworn in before he is deposed and if he utters any falsehoods he would be liable for perjury regardless of the indemnification.

Mama, I just saw on ESPN that the NFL and the Patriots are picking up Walsh's legal expenses.

I agree, where does an assistant golf pro get a high powered DC attorney who is usually dealing with major political figures and firms. Walsh makes like 50 K a year...is he just going to be paying this lawyer for the rest of his life? Or his someone else who has a vested interest taking care of it? Why are these questions never addressed?

My question is this: Why not set up this deal so that the bum Walsh, can NOT make any money or fortunes of any sort, from this deal. Any monies he is given for his information (which any low-life newspaper or magazine reporter will stoop to) be given to a charity of the NFL's choosing. Now, without any way to make a profit from this deal, directly or indirectly, let him speak. What purpose does he have, other than profit at some level, even if it is notoriety, he still should not profit.

That's what the agreement says. He has to donate any net proceeds to a charity of the NFL's choosing made within five years.

- Chris

The following tells us all we need to know about this agreement, Walsh has nothing but his perception of what happened: The indemnification commitment Walsh receives in paragraph 3(a) applies even if there is “alleged untruthfulness” in Walsh’s disclosures to the NFL, unless there is “intentional untruthfulness.”

Here is the Pats' statement regarding this deal:
http://www.patriots.com/search/index.cfm?ac=searchdetail&pid=31734&pcid=47&rss=1

"The New England Patriots are pleased to learn that Matt Walsh is finally willing to come forward to meet with the NFL. We are eagerly anticipating his honest disclosures to Commissioner Goodell next month and the return of all the materials he took during his time of employment. We fully expect this meeting to conclude the league’s investigation into a damaging and false allegation that was originally levied against the team on the day before this year’s Super Bowl.

It is important to note that there has never been a confidentiality agreement restricting Matt Walsh and no legal protections were ever necessary for him to speak to the NFL, to media outlets or to anyone else regarding his employment with the Patriots. He demanded to be released from responsibility for his statements, and after a frustrating and lengthy negotiation period, a settlement has finally been reached. Walsh has been granted a significant number of privileges through this agreement, none of which the Patriots or the NFL were obligated to give.

At all times, we cooperated fully with the league’s investigation and stand by our initial public statement from Saturday, Feb. 2, 2008: “The suggestion that the New England Patriots recorded the St. Louis Rams’ walkthrough on the day before Super Bowl XXXVI in 2002 is absolutely false.”

The Patriots’ organizational focus at this time is on the NFL Draft and preparing for what we hope will be an exciting 2008 season. We will have no further comments regarding Matt Walsh at this time."

The Patriots don't seem worried at all.

they do have a agreement like that for 5yrs,,BUT!!! here is the "catch-all" while monies would go to NFL Charitys.Walsh has FINAL say on to what ones...But to pay for his legal fees thats a sell-out..plus all travel exp.come on even a convicted murder doesnt get anything that good...plus no former coach;s/employee;s of Pats can come back and sue walsh..also if a 3rd party does decide to sue walsh then NFL agreed to cover any and all legal and travel fee's...

Now Walsh can negotiate his book deal.

He can not be granted immunity if he lies. At least I hope the Patriots would not sign off to that kind of immunity. After all, taking a book page from the feds, that's how you can convict someone when you can't get the goods on him.