Q: What’s the latest with regards to Senator Specter and what’s happening there?

RG: Our staffs are in touch. I don’t know if we have a meeting yet but it will probably be next week some time.


Q: Is there a way you can waive Walsh’s immunity from some confidentiality things if he does have anything to talk about?


RG: Our staffs are talking about that and we’re making sure he’s got the ability to talk if he has any information that would be pertinent.


Q: Have you been in contact with his lawyer?


RG: Our people have, yes.


Q: What is he telling you at this point? What is he asking for?


RG: At this point, they are just starting the discussions so it’s probably not clear yet. Hopefully we will get it resolved before the end of the week and then be able to meet with him as soon as possible.


Q: Has anybody from the league office talked to him at any point from the fall on?


RG: No. We were aware of some of the rumors and pursued them. But as I said from day one, if we find new information that’s inconsistent with what we’ve been told then I reserve the right to reopen that. If there’s something new that we weren’t aware of, we will certainly look into it.


Q: Sounds like you knew of the rumors before?


RG: Yes. We were aware of this rumor before and we pursued it. But we have not been able to get any new information that was credible. If there’s new information or new material or anything else that could be credible or help us, yes, we’d look at it for sure.


We’ve had people come to us on different things over the last six months that we’ve pursued and it just never led to anything.


Q: Was it about other teams doing similar kinds of things?


RG: We’ve had that from time to time, sure, and we pursued that also.


Q: What kind of indication have you gotten from Walsh’s lawyers that there is new information they want to share with you at this point?


RG: We don’t know if there is new information. That’s the issue. They don’t know what we’ve looked at, what we’ve been able to gather through our own research. They don’t know what we know and we don’t know what they know.


Q: The confidentiality clause he signed upon leaving the Patriots…


RG: I’m not sure he did, first. That’s still a question of whether he actually did sign anything.


Q: Is that standard when you leave a club?


RG: Yes. And sometimes when you join an organization.


Q: Will you meet with Walsh while you are over here?


RG: I doubt it because I’m leaving later tonight probably.


Q: Do you intend to while you are here?


RG: No. It’s between the lawyers right now to determine the conditions under which he would speak and whether he has any information that would be pertinent.


Q: You said on Friday that it was six tapes that you destroyed. What brought the number to six? Why just six?


RG: That’s what they had. My guess is that they probably taped over some of those from time to time. That’s what video departments usually do. It’s possible that they did it more than that because there were notes that reflected that.


We asked them for all the tapes. We asked them for anything that could have been done inconsistent with our policy with respect to taping. We asked them for all of information pertinent to that and they actually certified that they had given us that information.

Benachrichtige mich bei
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments