By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Neodegenerate said:
mornelithe said:

You say that as if the Judge had the authority to overturn it on the facts.  Which is not the case (Legally, via precedent, he could only overturn via procedural flaws).  However, Berman's statements during the hearing should point out to people how little evidence of wrongdoing the NFL actually had.


You are right that he didn't have the authority to, but that doesn't change that he had the option to not say anything on the actual findings and elected to specify.  It may have been an attempt to strengthen his ruling against appeal, but the judgment doesn't change without the statement imo.

He did have the option, however, you fail to understand that by even commenting on it, puts it under scrutiny in an appeal (which the NFL has already elected to pursue).  If the Judge's decision was perceived in any way to be based off of faulty evidence, that's an EASY case to win upon appeal.

It's arguable that the Judge knew what his decision would be days before he actually released his ruling, however, if you consider that he had to take time to articulate every single point (for it to be solid under appeal scrutiny), it makes sense.  The NFL's final statement to the Judge was 5-pages.  Berman's ruling is 40-pages.  Should tell you how much effort they have to put into crossing the T's and Dotting the I's.