A three-judge panel in N.Y. on Thursday during a hearing on Patriots QB Tom Brady's Deflategate punishment "expressed significant doubts" with arguments presented by NFLPA lawyer Jeffrey Kessler, focusing a "significant portion of the hearing on Brady destroying his cellphone before meeting" with NFL investigator Ted Wells last March, according to Ben Volin of the BOSTON GLOBE. Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Judges Robert Katzmann, Barrington Parker Jr. and Denny Chin "questioned the attorneys from both" the NFL and NFLPA, though Kessler "faced a much more intense line of questioning than his counterpart," NFL attorney Paul Clement. Chin said, "The evidence of ball tampering is compelling, if not overwhelming." Parker "found the cellphone destruction to be a significant aspect of Goodell's punishment against Brady." A decision is "not expected for several months" (BOSTON GLOBE, 3/4). USA TODAY's Lorenzo Reyes notes neither Brady nor NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell "was present at the hearing" (USA TODAY, 3/4). In N.Y., Ken Belson notes the three-judge panel "signaled from the outset that, rather than focusing on the question of Goodell's authority, they were more interested in the details of Deflategate." The tension in the courtroom "was palpable." Of the three judges, Parker "was the most critical of Brady's claims." Chin also "seemed to have reservations about Kessler's arguments," while Katzmann "appeared to be the most sympathetic" (N.Y. TIMES, 3/4). NFL Network's Gabe Feldman, "We expected the focus to be more on legal issues. Instead, we got a discussion of the merits, and the judges said they’ll try to decide this expeditiously. That might mean seven, eight, nine, ten months, but the NFL urged them to try to decide it before the new season starts” (“NFL Total Access,” NFL Network, 3/3).
KESSLER NOT PREPARED? ESPN.com's Lester Munson added Kessler "never saw the blindside hit coming." Less than two seconds after he had just "completed the traditional 'May it please the court' opening line," a judge "tossed Kessler aside." The panel of judges "began a series of questions that kept Kessler on the defensive throughout his entire 34-minute presentation." Neither Parker nor Chin "was happy with Kessler's assertion that Brady did not have 'notice' that a failure to cooperate in the league's investigation could result in punishment." Sensing that things were "moving in the NFL's direction," Clement "pounced in a rebuttal argument" (ESPN.com, 3/3). ESPN’s Sal Paolantonio said of the hearing, “It was dramatic, it was much longer than we anticipated, and there was withering aggressive cross-examination by the three-judge panel of Jeffrey Kessler.” ESPN’s Andrew Brandt said, “Completely different atmosphere than what happened with Judge Berman. ... They frankly did not find Tom Brady credible. They went to the appeal hearing, focused a lot on the destruction of the phone, and Jeffrey Kessler ... never seemed to get out his argument. ... Complete opposite treatment than he had in the district court.” Paolantonio added that Kessler “was argumentative" and "on the defensive, raising his voice in response to the three judges.” Paolantonio: "It seems, at this point, that things went very well for the NFL today” (“NFL Live,” ESPN, 3/3).
LOSS FOR WORDS: In N.Y., Gary Myers writes it "became clear" the judges were "questioning Brady's integrity and truthfulness in his explanation of why he destroyed his cell phone, and they generally had Kessler squirming on just about every issue." But it is "often hard to read what the judges are thinking, so it can be dangerous to predict how they will vote" (N.Y. DAILY NEWS, 3/4). YAHOO SPORTS' Dan Wetzel writes Brady for the past eight months has "enjoyed a run of success when battling the charges," though that "may soon come to an end." The possibility of Brady "serving a four-game suspension appears back on the table." Kessler was "apparently flabbergasted by the judge's unexpected view of the evidence." Wetzel: "These are federal appellate judges, not people railing on the Internet. They hold the actual power." For the NFL, this was the "first good day on this case in a long, long time" (SPORTS.YAHOO.com, 3/3).
ARE WE STILL TALKING ABOUT THIS? In California, Jeff Miller writes the situation is "pretty sad when Deflategate has an NFL career that could last longer than Tim Tebow's." Miller: "I don't want to suggest the NFL is in over its head or anything, but, frankly, in trying to sort out something this complicated, I'd feel more confident if the league could first decide some of its lesser issues, like what constitutes a caught pass." Miller adds, "We're now supposed to just believe the assertions being made by a group of men who, for decades, pretended concussions were like the monsters hiding under the beds of children?" Miller added it is "difficult to blindly accept what the NFL tells us is fact" (ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER, 3/4).
