Thread: Ex-Bears, Ex-Saint Brown on Player Punishments: "Dead wrong"

Originally Posted by nelliewilson

Most likely the issue of the bounty will be avoided in court. Vilma will claim that he was wrongfully suspended. The NFL will say they have the right to suspend him since he signed the contract where it mentioned suspensions and fines will be dealt to players/coaches who knowingly do something that could be considered against league policy. It probably is a somewhat vague statement but that is purposefully done so the league has the power.

As for the bounty:
My wife's a forensic accountant for a firm that specializes in divorce cases. Tracking money is their forte. I asked her about because I didn't think that there would be proof or that anyone would be caught red handed. But she said it's rather simple. Their bank accounts are scrutinized and any withdrawal, such as $10,000, are flagged. Unless Vilma has a receipt for buying some toy worth 10 grand he's up the creek. He can claim he lost it in a poker game but that would mean other people would also have to claim that they won the money from him and give dates to when they won the money and how much they won. Then that time period would be analyzed and all of the payments would have to coincide with the dates and specific amounts of money won/lost. Several people would have to take part in the lie. Chances are Vilma didn't just pull that much cash out of the bank at once. More likely he wrote a check (or several small checks) in which a paper trail would appear or small amounts were taken out. Either way he'd have to account for everything. You'd think it would be easy to hide it but it's really not.

Of course, it would also depend on how good the prosecution is. My guess is that the NFL's 12 elite lawyers are able to make a fool of Vilma's one defense lawyer. And the judge could rule either way. Nothing is guaranteed in a court of law. Not in America at least. But the league has the advantage. Without a doubt.

From where I'm sitting this is how I think it will likely play out though.

The only question, then, would be where the money trail went, especially if Vilma paid it out in cash or some such shit as that. Obviously, they have proven this with independent investigators and all of that, but if the league can't prove that Vilma wrote any checks to, let's say, any of the defenders on the Saints, the prosecutors might find it difficult to prove.

That being said, I don't think it's going to come down to that. I think the Saints are going to take one up the ass for this transgression.

Originally Posted by Dagan81

The only question, then, would be where the money trail went, especially if Vilma paid it out in cash or some such shit as that. Obviously, they have proven this with independent investigators and all of that, but if the league can't prove that Vilma wrote any checks to, let's say, any of the defenders on the Saints, the prosecutors might find it difficult to prove.

That being said, I don't think it's going to come down to that.I think the Saints are going to take one up the ass for this transgression.

The league claims he put forth 10 grand for the bounty. If he can explain what exactly his income was spent on he's fine. Vilma would have to prove what he spent 10g's on. If he can't, then the judge is going to favor the league.

Even if Vilma predicted that he would have to account for the money he put up it's possible he could have made small withdrawals of cash from his bank here and there but for how much money we are talking about it would have to be several hundreds of dollars at a time. All of a sudden he is 'spending' several hundreds of dollars more each month. That would raise a few red flags and he would have to prove that he spent it on something other than the bounty which would be difficult. Not impossible, but very difficult.

Bottom line, Vilma and the Saints are in a tough position. I don't think the team is going to stick their necks out too far for him though. I bet they try to move passed it as fast as possible and stop the bleeding.

Originally Posted by nelliewilson

The league claims he put forth 10 grand for the bounty. If he can explain what exactly his income was spent on he's fine. Vilma would have to prove what he spent 10g's on. If he can't, then the judge is going to favor the league.

Even if Vilma predicted that he would have to account for the money he put up it's possible he could have made small withdrawals of cash from his bank here and there but for how much money we are talking about it would have to be several hundreds of dollars at a time. All of a sudden he is 'spending' several hundreds of dollars more each month. That would raise a few red flags and he would have to prove that he spent it on something other than the bounty which would be difficult. Not impossible, but very difficult.

Bottom line, Vilma and the Saints are in a tough position. I don't think the team is going to stick their necks out too far for him though. I bet they try to move passed it as fast as possible and stop the bleeding.

One thing to take into account, too, is that these players are known to spend thousands of dollars at the drop of a hat. It's like my great-uncle once said to me a couple of years ago when I was spending the night at his house down in Cleveland, TN: most pro athletes go broke within five years of retiring from their sport. Vilma is probably like that, in that he haphazardly spends money whenever he sees something he likes or wants. We may never know the details of how he divvyed out the money, but for all intents and purposes, the burden is on him, and for once, I think the sentimental thing of "innocent until proven guilty" probably is not working in his favor, much as it probably should seeing as how this is America and all American citizens are given the benefit of the doubt in a court of law.

Originally Posted by nelliewilson

Most likely the issue of the bounty will be avoided in court. Vilma will claim that he was wrongfully suspended. The NFL will say they have the right to suspend him since he signed the contract where it mentioned suspensions and fines will be dealt to players/coaches who knowingly do something that could be considered against league policy. It probably is a somewhat vague statement but that is purposefully done so the league has the power.

As for the bounty:
My wife's a forensic accountant for a firm that specializes in divorce cases. Tracking money is their forte. I asked her about because I didn't think that there would be proof or that anyone would be caught red handed. But she said it's rather simple. Their bank accounts are scrutinized and any withdrawal, such as $10,000, are flagged. Unless Vilma has a receipt for buying some toy worth 10 grand he's up the creek. He can claim he lost it in a poker game but that would mean other people would also have to claim that they won the money from him and give dates to when they won the money and how much they won. Then that time period would be analyzed and all of the payments would have to coincide with the dates and specific amounts of money won/lost. Several people would have to take part in the lie. Chances are Vilma didn't just pull that much cash out of the bank at once. More likely he wrote a check (or several small checks) in which a paper trail would appear or small amounts were taken out. Either way he'd have to account for everything. You'd think it would be easy to hide it but it's really not.

Of course, it would also depend on how good the prosecution is. My guess is that the NFL's 12 elite lawyers are able to make a fool of Vilma's one defense lawyer. And the judge could rule either way. Nothing is guaranteed in a court of law. Not in America at least. But the league has the advantage. Without a doubt.

From where I'm sitting this is how I think it will likely play out though.

Nellie all due respect to your wife and her profession, we have a staff member who is also a forensic accountant, I have no doubt that what she says is true as far as how it can be done. I'm a financial analyst/consultant and I've done my fair share of helping to negotiate divorce settlements over the years although I wish I'd have let someone else do my own. Never deal with money when intense emotions are involved. I preach this all the time yet violated my own rules. Bad, bad soulman.

I guess what it comes down to is whether or not the league has the right to force disclosure in that way despite what the league policy may be in such matters. I may be wrong but I doubt any of it carries the force of law which, in a divorce situation, it would if such an action was ordered by the courts. Asking the players to open up their bank books is probably beyond the scope of what they have the power to do unless some crime had been committed and even then the mere accusation of one still wouldn't seem to be enough to give them that power.

As best I know only the courts, the IRS and the Department of Justice can get in that deep. But.......I'll defer to your wife and Bear Stuff about it since they have far more experience with it at that level than I do. We seldom had to go that far in any divorce case I ever consulted on. Usually the threat was enough to make people play nicey-nicey with both hands on the table. LOL

I guess we'll see how it all plays out. I haven't read thoroughly enough to know how Vilma or the others are preparing to defend themselves. Are they saying it never happened or are they admitting it did but claim there was no law (rule) against it? Big difference huh?

I'm not defending what happened at all. I think it's a pretty crappy thing to go after your colleagues livelihood that way. Playing the sport to win is one thing but to injure or maim is something else entirely. I guess where I'm coming from is looking to see if they actually have a case or they just think they do. Certainly their attorneys do but that doesn't come as any surprise. I've rarely seen one turn a case down as long as the client can pay the bill.

Edit: When I reread this I felt like I was coming off poorly as far as what I may have said about your wife. I'm not in her league when it comes to stuff like that. Nowhere near as far as actually having done it at that level. And I don't wish to show disrespect for any financial or legal professional. I hope this don't come out sounding that way.

Originally Posted by soulman

Nellie all due respect to your wife and her profession, we have a staff member who is also a forensic accountant, I have no doubt that what she says is true as far as how it can be done. I'm a financial analyst/consultant and I've done my fair share of helping to negotiate divorce settlements over the years although I wish I'd have let someone else do my own. Never deal with money when intense emotions are involved. I preach this all the time yet violated my own rules. Bad, bad soulman.

I guess what it comes down to is whether or not the league has the right to force disclosure in that way despite what the league policy may be in such matters. I may be wrong but I doubt any of it carries the force of law which, in a divorce situation, it would if such an action was ordered by the courts. Asking the players to open up their bank books is probably beyond the scope of what they have the power to do unless some crime had been committed and even then the mere accusation of one still wouldn't seem to be enough to give them that power.

As best I know only the courts, the IRS and the Department of Justice can get in that deep. But.......I'll defer to your wife and Bear Stuff about it since they have far more experience with it at that level than I do. We seldom had to go that far in any divorce case I ever consulted on. Usually the threat was enough to make people play nicey-nicey with both hands on the table. LOL

I guess we'll see how it all plays out. I haven't read thoroughly enough to know how Vilma or the others are preparing to defend themselves. Are they saying it never happened or are they admitting it did but claim there was no law (rule) against it? Big difference huh?

I'm not defending what happened at all. I think it's a pretty crappy thing to go after your colleagues livelihood that way. Playing the sport to win is one thing but to injure or maim is something else entirely. I guess where I'm coming from is looking to see if they actually have a case or they just think they do. Certainly their attorneys do but that doesn't come as any surprise. I've rarely seen one turn a case down as long as the client can pay the bill.

Such is the case with leech, blood-sucking lawyers! lol

Originally Posted by soulman

Nellie all due respect to your wife and her profession, we have a staff member who is also a forensic accountant, I have no doubt that what she says is true as far as how it can be done. I'm a financial analyst/consultant and I've done my fair share of helping to negotiate divorce settlements over the years although I wish I'd have let someone else do my own. Never deal with money when intense emotions are involved. I preach this all the time yet violated my own rules. Bad, bad soulman.

I guess what it comes down to is whether or not the league has the right to force disclosure in that way despite what the league policy may be in such matters. I may be wrong but I doubt any of it carries the force of law which, in a divorce situation, it would if such an action was ordered by the courts. Asking the players to open up their bank books is probably beyond the scope of what they have the power to do unless some crime had been committed and even then the mere accusation of one still wouldn't seem to be enough to give them that power.

As best I know only the courts, the IRS and the Department of Justice can get in that deep. But.......I'll defer to your wife and Bear Stuff about it since they have far more experience with it at that level than I do. We seldom had to go that far in any divorce case I ever consulted on. Usually the threat was enough to make people play nicey-nicey with both hands on the table. LOL

I guess we'll see how it all plays out. I haven't read thoroughly enough to know how Vilma or the others are preparing to defend themselves. Are they saying it never happened or are they admitting it did but claim there was no law (rule) against it? Big difference huh?

I'm not defending what happened at all. I think it's a pretty crappy thing to go after your colleagues livelihood that way. Playing the sport to win is one thing but to injure or maim is something else entirely. I guess where I'm coming from is looking to see if they actually have a case or they just think they do. Certainly their attorneys do but that doesn't come as any surprise. I've rarely seen one turn a case down as long as the client can pay the bill.

I was thinking the same thing. But if Vilma is claiming that he was wrongfully suspended then it would be up to him to prove his innocence. Therefore, he would have to provide his bank statements. The burden of proof rests on him.

But if the league were suing him then they could request his bank statements and if he doesn't want to provide them they could also subpoena to get them. It's a process.

I haven't any idea how Vilma and the others plan on defending themselves either. I can only assume they will claim the rule isn't clearly stated.

Originally Posted by nelliewilson

I was thinking the same thing. But if Vilma is claiming that he was wrongfully suspended then it would be up to him to prove his innocence. Therefore, he would have to provide his bank statements. The burden of proof rests on him.

But if the league were suing him then they could request his bank statements and if he doesn't want to provide them they could also subpoena to get them. It's a process.

I haven't any idea how Vilma and the others plan on defending themselves either. I can only assume they will claim the rule isn't clearly stated.

You know how the language of "Legalese" is. It's really hard ot understand. I hear that it's more difficult to learn and comprehend than Mandarin Chinese! lol

Originally Posted by soulman

Edit: When I reread this I felt like I was coming off poorly as far as what I may have said about your wife. I'm not in her league when it comes to stuff like that. Nowhere near as far as actually having done it at that level. And I don't wish to show disrespect for any financial or legal professional. I hope this don't come out sounding that way.

No worries. I wasn't offended and she's got thicker skin than me. Your opinion is always appreciated, soul.

There was some football player on at a crazy hour on espn radio yesterday, and he made himself look foolish when he said there was no proof of the players being involved, and the host had to have him repeat that twice. Why i brought that up was that it seems there's not much being said against these players or coaches by that many around the league, makes ya wonder how much dirt is under the rug...