Beastmode

What if Goodell submits player testimonies as evidence of Vilma's involment and then Vilma submits testimonies of players saying he didn't?

This has the potential to turn into a real circus act which would make Goodelllook like ...

Attached Thumbnails

 

Halo

If it goes to trial, it's a jury trial.

Remember, this isn't how much or how little Vilma is guilty, this is about Goodell making false statements about Vilma, repeatedly, without correct evidence to back it up.

Vilma would have to be caught red handed, but even then Goodell did NOT use discretion or correct protocals when making blanket statements about Vilma and YES it does hurt his career.

Ever know someone fired from a job?
Ever ask the boss why they were fired?

Their answer should be "I can't discuss that" or "they moved on."

Do you know why companies direct management to say that?
Because if someone says "he was fired for incompetence (etc.)" the former, fired employee may have grounds for lawsuit against their former employer for potentially making false statements and divulging private information.

These are contracted players which are a little different, but not much. You cannot use your authority to make false statements about people, even if they're somewhat true.

Roger Goodell used NO DECORUM or forethought before making ANY statements about Vilma. He setup Vilma as an instigator of Williams' Bounty Scheme.

Goodell DID NOT repeat Fujita's name over and over again...
Goodell DID NOT repeat Will Smith's name over and over again...
Goodell DID NOT repeat Anthony Hargrove's name over and over again...

But he did talk A LOT about Vilma. Goodell better have hard, cold evidence showing Vilma was Williams' general in the Bounty Scheme.

Goodell also need to prove it was a "Bounty Scheme" and NOT a "Pay for Performance" scheme. The two are totally different.