Why do you keep lying? They were BOTH after the time in question. One was from March 2015, one from April 2015.
The one phone was active between May 23, 2014 - Nov. 5, 2014. The other phone was active between March 6, 2015 - April 8, 2015. That gap between them is the phone that has gone missing. Do you not understand how dates work?
So only Brady saves messages so his phone would have them all and everyone else doesn't save them? So Brady, with no evidence against him, needs to turn stuff over that you admit it's unreasonable to ask someone to do? Had the NFL run into obstacles you would have a point. Instead they fed a bunch of BS in the hopes people like you would eat their garbage. There would be no mess. They would say these are the numbers we are interested in. If the people in question refused to cooperate then they have a leg to stand on.
The NFL is a company that feels somebody who plays in their league has done something wrong, and they have substantial evidence to reinforce that they feel he did something wrong, so they wanted to punish him accordingly. This isn't a court of law. If your boss at your work feels you are doing something against guidelines and have good reason to believe so, it is at their discretion on how they punish you. They let Brady provide a case as to why he shouldn't be facing these consequences, and he was sought as not being credible because his defense resulted in wanting the NFL to obtain other people's phones because he was not able to provide his own phone that went missing. It's not those people's jobs on the line, it's Brady's. That's why the burden is on him. Once again, the NFL would need warrants and subpoenas to obtain other people's phones if they were not willing, but they don't have to do that with Brady. Want to know why? Because they don't have to. The burden is on him. If he had the phone and doesn't give it to them, the suspension stands. Why? Because the burden is on him. He is the one appealing, hence why it is called an appeal. This is why it is reasonable for him to turn over the phone, and not for other people to turn over theirs.
Yes and I said Chael deserved what he got, because I don't let my fandom get in the way. You should stop letting your hatred get in the way.
You only let it get in the way when discussing football scandals then? And what hatred are you talking about exactly? For Tom Brady? I don't hate Brady or the Patriots, and I never said that. This all started because I was pointing out a contradiction of yours, and now you're trying to spin it as me being a hater of Brady. I'm just seeing things for what they are. But you're probably another one of these people who think in absolutes believing there are only "fanboys" and "haters" and don't realize there is a gray area.
Brady doesn't need to prove anything, the league does.
Yeah, the burden of proof was on the NFL at Brady's own appeal hearing. Laughable.
Imagine if someone was murdered and the police came to you and said prove you did not do it. We are not going to prove you did, if you can't prove you did not then you are getting the death penalty. That's what you are arguing for.
Once again, this wasn't a court of law. This was a company doling out a punishment and hearing the person-in-question's appeal to the amounted evidence against him. He failed to give a credible argument. You trying to blur that line with judicial procedures is asinine. It seems like this might go to court, and that's when you'll be able to understand the difference. Hopefully.