Like the Steroid hearings, this baby just won’t go away. Some new tidbit stirs up the dust again. Apparently former Patriots’ videotaping assistant Matt Walsh thinks he holds the key. The question might be, is it authentic or a counterfeit?
Walsh wants immunity and protection from lawsuits (understandable since he would have in his possession materials that don’t belong to him). Okay, that makes sense. But he and the NFL can’t agree. He wants protection from lawsuits even if he is not truthful.
“The two sides traded proposals last week but have yet to reach a resolution. The league’s proposal offered Walsh protection on two conditions. According to commissioner Roger Goodell: “(He) has to tell the truth and he has to return anything he took improperly.”
“Eric Holder, a partner in Covington and Burling, the NFL’s outside law firm, said: “No responsible investigator would offer blanket immunity to a potential witness without a commitment that the witness will be truthful. Any witness who refuses to make that commitment doesn’t deserve immunity.””
Sounds to a reasonable person that Matt Walsh wants freedom to lie without consequences. Sorry, but he does sound like a bitter former employee who sees an opportunity to make a name for himself. If I know I’m telling the truth, all I would need would be freedom from violating my non-disclosure contract. That is it. He wants more, and continues to drag this whole question of whether or not the Patriots taped the Rams’ walkthru in 2002. The Patriots can’t prove they didn’t. Walsh is the only one who claims he can, but he isn’t.
This is similar to the Steroid mess. Clemens can’t prove he didn’t take steroids. But McNamee has provided evidence he has- at great risk to himself. McNamee goes to jail if he lies. This, and the coorboration of Andy & Chuck, make him a despicable though credible witness. He admits previous lies he told to others (when he was not under oath). Roger talks in circles hoping no one realizes that he isn’t answering the question.
The Patriots have answered the question. No evidence has been provided. The only guy who claims to have evidence wants to remove the only thing that would grant him any credibility- penalties for lying. See, though similar these 2 cases have a significant difference. I can’t believe Roger at this point, and neither can I believe Walsh.