By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible
It was seen by some as the biggest controversy in history of the NFL. It consumed the media for months and sparked endless debate about one team's overwhelming success. It became a household name. And most importantly, it's name was derived from the biggest government scandal in the history of our country.
But after several months of speculation and suspense, Spygate is finally over.
Ok, it's not officially over, but it should be.
Unfortunately, Arlen Specter is still crying foul, but his motives have nothing do with fixing the integrity of the game. Spygate has provided a stage for him to advance his own political agenda. And now Specter wants a "Mitchell-like" investigation into the wrongdoings of Bill Belichick and the Patriots.
While I initially applauded Specter's actions in questioning how the NFL has handled Spygate, a lengthy governmental investigation into a controversy involving the blatant violation of NFL rules is not only pointless, but a waste of time and valuable tax dollars.
As much as I wanted to uncover unimaginable truths stemming from Spygate, the pseudo-conspiracy has simply dried up. Walsh was the last straw in a depleted investigation and he provided nothing by way of physical evidence. Spygate was reminiscent of intriguing film with a disappointing ending. It simply lacked substance.
In a court of law, Walsh's potential damaging testimony about Bill Belichick and the Patriots would be considered hearsay - and therefore, inadmissible at trial.
But Walsh's long awaited emergence into the spotlight did provide us with something.........
A means to an end.
Showing posts with label Spygate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Spygate. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Monday, February 25, 2008
MATT WALSH TO TALK, THEN WHAT?
By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft BibleThe NFL wants Spygate to be over.
Roger Goodell and the NFL's Competition Committee have expressly stated that their investigation is complete and the league can finally move forward.
But why? Why is Goodell practically ignoring the potentially powerful information Matt Walsh may have that might bolster the claims that Bill Belichick and the Patriots have been cheating for years?
Well if it wasn't for a determined United States Senator, Matt Walsh would be a non-issue. And regardless of his critics, Senator Arlen Specter is not letting down.
In what he claims is a pursuit of justice, Senator Specter is still actively pursuing Matt Walsh's claims and Goodell has reserved the right to open up his investigation and impose more penalties if need be. So, in light of the mass speculation surrounding Matt Walsh and his alleged information, here are some legal ramifications that are sure to pop up should Walsh divulge any information on Spygate.
More Punishment?
Bill Belichick and the Patriots organization have already begun their smear campaign on Matt Wash in an attempt to discredit him as much as possible. Walsh did come out of the wood works after the NFL's initial investigation and his credibility is certainly an issue.
However, if Walsh does have valid information that he can back up with legitimate physical evidence (an actual videotape), Goodell will be forced to take more action against Belichick and the Patriots. The Patriots will certainly argue that Walsh acted in a rogue capacity if he does produce a videotape and the NFL will have to dig deeper to determine the validity of the tape.
Simply put, if Walsh does produce a videotape, Spygate is not going away anytime soon. Belichick could face a suspension and the Patriots organization may have to cough up a lot more money for knowingly hindering a league investigation.
Arlen Specter's Continued Role
Senator Specter is adamant about uncovering a conspiracy. He has threatened to hold a congressional hearing to find out just how deep Spygate really goes. While a hearing on Capitol Hill is unlikely, Specter is refusing to let up in his quest for the truth.
But it is important to understand that Belichick and the Patriots did not break the law in any way. They broke NFL rules. Senator Specter's desired congressional hearing could only be held to determine if the NFL should be stripped of their antitrust exemption.
That said, Specter remains to be a significant player because he seems to be the only authority that wants more information on Spygate. In short, while the NFL retains it's antitrust exemption, government officials like Specter have a ground to stand on.
Future of Matt Walsh
At this point, the only thing keeping Walsh from speaking Goodell or Specter is an indemnification agreement from the NFL. Walsh's lawyer already shot down the NFL's first agreement saying that it left Walsh vulnerable to a possible lawsuit.
Because Walsh signed a confidentiality agreement with the Patriots upon leaving the organization, Walsh could be sued for divulging any information relating to his employment. An indemnification agreement would protect Walsh from any civil liabilities as a result of him talking.
Walsh's information could blow this entire investigation open, especially if he has video evidence. Rumors of a book deal have been circulating, but remember that an indemnification agreement by the NFL would only cover him with respect to his communications to the league about Spygate. Walsh could face a lawsuit if he tries to turn Spygate into a ploy for personal gain.
Recent Developments
A $100 million civil suit has been filed by a former Ram's player naming the Patriots, Belichick and owner Robert Kraft as defendants. The suit seeks damages as a direct result of wrongful taping alleged in the complaint.
Walsh's information could be the smoking gun we all have been waiting for. If a tape does exist, the Patriots are headed for serious trouble. A team that flirted with perfection just a few weeks ago may be tarnished for years to come.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
LEGAL LINE PODCAST V - What's The Holdup?
Why hasn't Matt Walsh divulged the information he allegedly has on the Patriots?
Why was the NFL's indemnification agreement not good enough?
And why does Bill Belichick still think he can fool the public?
This week's podcast is an extended one so enjoy my analysis on the continuation of Spygate and what we can expect to see in the future......Just click on the title above or cut and paste the link below to listen.
http://web.mac.com/daniels3636/iWeb/Site/Podcast/Podcast.html
Saturday, February 2, 2008
NFL Conspiracy or a Senator's Hidden Agenda?
By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible
Just when you thought "Spygate" has finally become a thing of the past, the New England Patriots and the NFL have been targeted yet again. This time, Arlen Specter, a Senator from Pennsylvania, has publicly questioned the motives of Roger Goodell and the NFL in their destruction of the videotapes they confiscated from the Patriots earlier in the year.
Conspiracy within the NFL or a cheap publicity stunt?
Senator Specter made headlines this week by questioning Goodell's intentions in handling the investigation surrounding Spygate. In fact, Specter wants to bring Goodell in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee to explain why he destroyed the videotapes related to Spygate.
The notion of destroying evidence immediately translates into an inference of guilt. It leads one to believe that the NFL had something to hide in those tapes. And more importantly, it begs the question - Why did the actual videotapes from Spygate have to be destroyed?
But lets be real here people. We're talking about the NFL, not our nation's national security.
Although these tapes were effectively destroyed and the public will never know exactly what was on those tapes, I'm pretty sure the contents of those tapes would be relatively unimportant to members of the United States Senate.
So why is Senator Specter lambasting Commissioner Goodell and his decision to destroy the videotapes associated with Spygate?
Does he really care what was on those tapes? Doubtful.
Are Specter's constituents concerned about Mr. Goodell's actions? No chance.
Then why does Senator Specter care so much?
The answer is simple.
Senator Specter's number one political contributor is Comcast, a major cable company based out of Philadelphia. Comcast has been unsuccessful in persuading the NFL to allow the "Sunday Ticket" (coverage of every NFL game) and the NFL Network on Comcast's regular cable. Instead, the NFL has insisted on making their product a premium.
Specter has now threatened to strip the NFL of their "anti trust exemption," which permits the league to negotiate it's television contracts for the entire league as opposed to each team negotiating their television deals individually.
Interestingly enough, this is not the first time Specter has attacked the NFL on this issue.
In 2006, Specter publicly denounced the NFL's anti trust exemption and vowed to sponsor legislation that would effectively deprive the NFL from negotiating television contracts for every team.
Specter's public condemnation of Goodell and the NFL has nothing to do with Spygate. It has everything to do with Comcast's desires to get a piece of the billions of dollars the NFL is making off television contracts each year.
And as any shrewd politician would do, Spector chose to cry foul right before the NFL's biggest event. How convenient.
Just when you thought "Spygate" has finally become a thing of the past, the New England Patriots and the NFL have been targeted yet again. This time, Arlen Specter, a Senator from Pennsylvania, has publicly questioned the motives of Roger Goodell and the NFL in their destruction of the videotapes they confiscated from the Patriots earlier in the year.
Conspiracy within the NFL or a cheap publicity stunt?
Senator Specter made headlines this week by questioning Goodell's intentions in handling the investigation surrounding Spygate. In fact, Specter wants to bring Goodell in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee to explain why he destroyed the videotapes related to Spygate.
The notion of destroying evidence immediately translates into an inference of guilt. It leads one to believe that the NFL had something to hide in those tapes. And more importantly, it begs the question - Why did the actual videotapes from Spygate have to be destroyed?
But lets be real here people. We're talking about the NFL, not our nation's national security.
Although these tapes were effectively destroyed and the public will never know exactly what was on those tapes, I'm pretty sure the contents of those tapes would be relatively unimportant to members of the United States Senate.
So why is Senator Specter lambasting Commissioner Goodell and his decision to destroy the videotapes associated with Spygate?
Does he really care what was on those tapes? Doubtful.
Are Specter's constituents concerned about Mr. Goodell's actions? No chance.
Then why does Senator Specter care so much?
The answer is simple.
Senator Specter's number one political contributor is Comcast, a major cable company based out of Philadelphia. Comcast has been unsuccessful in persuading the NFL to allow the "Sunday Ticket" (coverage of every NFL game) and the NFL Network on Comcast's regular cable. Instead, the NFL has insisted on making their product a premium.
Specter has now threatened to strip the NFL of their "anti trust exemption," which permits the league to negotiate it's television contracts for the entire league as opposed to each team negotiating their television deals individually.
Interestingly enough, this is not the first time Specter has attacked the NFL on this issue.
In 2006, Specter publicly denounced the NFL's anti trust exemption and vowed to sponsor legislation that would effectively deprive the NFL from negotiating television contracts for every team.
Specter's public condemnation of Goodell and the NFL has nothing to do with Spygate. It has everything to do with Comcast's desires to get a piece of the billions of dollars the NFL is making off television contracts each year.
And as any shrewd politician would do, Spector chose to cry foul right before the NFL's biggest event. How convenient.
Thursday, November 8, 2007
BELICHICK'S 500K FINE: A TAX WRITE OFF?
By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible
By now, NFL fans are well aware of Spygate. Bill Belichick's arrogance finally caught up with him and his inability to follow the rules were exploited in week one of this season. I don't want to dwell on on the specifics of the incident as the media world has already beaten this topic to death.
What I do want to dwell on is the rumor lurking that Belichick might try to "write off" the 500K fine levied by the NFL as a business expense. Would Belichick actually try to pull this off? More importantly, can he legally deduct this fine as a business expense on his tax return?
According to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), "to be deductible, a business expense must be both ordinary and necessary. An ordinary expense is one that is common and accepted in your industry. A necessary expense is one that is helpful and appropriate for your trade or business." Leave it to the IRS to be as vague as possible. You could justify anything as an ordinary and necessary expense under these rules.
It's not inconceivable that one could make the argument that fines are "common and accepted" and "helpful and appropriate" in the NLF. Players and coaches are practically fined on a weekly basis. A fine is the most common form of punishment in the league. They are certainly common and undoubtedly appropriate. If the IRS were to agree with this, Belichick could successfully classify his fine as a business expense.
Tax Attorney Michael Mandale, Managing Partner of the The Mandale Law Firm, a boutique tax controversy resolution firm based out of Philadelphia, feels that Belichick will have no problem writing off the fine. "In my opinion, Belichick's [possible] deduction of the fine is arguably proper in that both his actions and the fine imposed against him are an ordinary and necessary part of the business in the NFL," said Attorney Mandale.
He went on to rationalize his theory by saying; "The organization pays it's coaches with the expectation that they will strive to be the best they can be. Spying on opponents is a direct way for individual coaches to excel and gain the edge that all competitors in the league are aiming for. Not surprisingly, the imposition of fines in all professional sports is an almost everyday occurrence; this particular fine is no exception to the trend."
When I asked if the fine would pass muster under the "necessary" prong required by the IRS, Attorney Mandale said; "In the professional sports industry, spying on opponents is a sometimes necessary business tactic which enhances both the coach's and team's ability to perform. The imposition of fines is simply a method through which the NFL aims to discourage unsportsmanlike conduct by team leaders."
This would make for quite an interesting move by Belichick. The fine was levied on him to punish him for his actions. The rationale of all fines are based on the theory of retribution. But if Belichick is able to write off this fine, he loses nothing financially. Zero monetary loss.
But would the public even find out if Belichick wrote the fine off?
"Every one's tax returns, celebrity or not, are treated by the IRS as confidential," said Attorney Mandale. "If his deduction were to be ruled as unqualified after his initial filing and he chose to seek redress in the courts, eventually, it would become a public record," he said in response to whether the public would ever find out.
Attorney Mandale feels it is likely that the IRS will allow the write off. "The NFL hands out fines on a regular basis. There is no doubt the IRS will see a tax write off of this kind as an ordinary and necessary expense within the NFL," said Attorney Mandale.
Belichick and the Patriots will also lose a draft pick in next year's draft. A draft pick and a hefty fine - Was it enough? Not if Belichick is able to itemize the fine as a business expense on his tax return.
Will we ever find out the truth? Probably not.
But if Belichick's arrogance is any indication, the IRS may be the deciders of his punishment, or lack thereof.
Attorney Michael Mandale can be contacted at:
The Mandale Law Firm, P.C.
1310 Industrial Blvd., Ste. 200
Southampton, PA 18966
http://www.mandalelaw.com/
1-888-LIEN-FIX
(215)-355-1687
By now, NFL fans are well aware of Spygate. Bill Belichick's arrogance finally caught up with him and his inability to follow the rules were exploited in week one of this season. I don't want to dwell on on the specifics of the incident as the media world has already beaten this topic to death.
What I do want to dwell on is the rumor lurking that Belichick might try to "write off" the 500K fine levied by the NFL as a business expense. Would Belichick actually try to pull this off? More importantly, can he legally deduct this fine as a business expense on his tax return?
According to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), "to be deductible, a business expense must be both ordinary and necessary. An ordinary expense is one that is common and accepted in your industry. A necessary expense is one that is helpful and appropriate for your trade or business." Leave it to the IRS to be as vague as possible. You could justify anything as an ordinary and necessary expense under these rules.
It's not inconceivable that one could make the argument that fines are "common and accepted" and "helpful and appropriate" in the NLF. Players and coaches are practically fined on a weekly basis. A fine is the most common form of punishment in the league. They are certainly common and undoubtedly appropriate. If the IRS were to agree with this, Belichick could successfully classify his fine as a business expense.
Tax Attorney Michael Mandale, Managing Partner of the The Mandale Law Firm, a boutique tax controversy resolution firm based out of Philadelphia, feels that Belichick will have no problem writing off the fine. "In my opinion, Belichick's [possible] deduction of the fine is arguably proper in that both his actions and the fine imposed against him are an ordinary and necessary part of the business in the NFL," said Attorney Mandale.
He went on to rationalize his theory by saying; "The organization pays it's coaches with the expectation that they will strive to be the best they can be. Spying on opponents is a direct way for individual coaches to excel and gain the edge that all competitors in the league are aiming for. Not surprisingly, the imposition of fines in all professional sports is an almost everyday occurrence; this particular fine is no exception to the trend."
When I asked if the fine would pass muster under the "necessary" prong required by the IRS, Attorney Mandale said; "In the professional sports industry, spying on opponents is a sometimes necessary business tactic which enhances both the coach's and team's ability to perform. The imposition of fines is simply a method through which the NFL aims to discourage unsportsmanlike conduct by team leaders."
This would make for quite an interesting move by Belichick. The fine was levied on him to punish him for his actions. The rationale of all fines are based on the theory of retribution. But if Belichick is able to write off this fine, he loses nothing financially. Zero monetary loss.
But would the public even find out if Belichick wrote the fine off?
"Every one's tax returns, celebrity or not, are treated by the IRS as confidential," said Attorney Mandale. "If his deduction were to be ruled as unqualified after his initial filing and he chose to seek redress in the courts, eventually, it would become a public record," he said in response to whether the public would ever find out.
Attorney Mandale feels it is likely that the IRS will allow the write off. "The NFL hands out fines on a regular basis. There is no doubt the IRS will see a tax write off of this kind as an ordinary and necessary expense within the NFL," said Attorney Mandale.
Belichick and the Patriots will also lose a draft pick in next year's draft. A draft pick and a hefty fine - Was it enough? Not if Belichick is able to itemize the fine as a business expense on his tax return.
Will we ever find out the truth? Probably not.
But if Belichick's arrogance is any indication, the IRS may be the deciders of his punishment, or lack thereof.
Attorney Michael Mandale can be contacted at:
The Mandale Law Firm, P.C.
1310 Industrial Blvd., Ste. 200
Southampton, PA 18966
http://www.mandalelaw.com/
1-888-LIEN-FIX
(215)-355-1687
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
