*SIGH*
QUOTE: "He just tried to cover it up "
He was complicit in the
coverup, but not in the planning, administration or commission of the "crimes." Either you did NOT read it, or you didn't understand it, because I did more than just
IMPLY it, I actually
SAID it.
Even though you're wrong, I won't call you a "lying bag of worms" ��
You don't have to be involved in a 'crime' to cover it up, Mr. Dunning - I MEAN - Dempsey. And not everyone (by a longshot) wants to play narc or boss-man to his co-workers.
I agree 100% that Sean should've immediately put an END to any part of it still going on, end everyone's involvement. But once that's done, LOTS of people, maybe most people, depending how close they are to the co-workers, or whomever is involved, would opt to try to help keep them out of trouble, out of jail.
EXAMPLE: Say you go home tonight, walk in, and your sister Sadie Mae Dempsey is frantic - there's blood everywhere ... She screams "
Dempsey! I shot Wilbur (her boyfriend), he's dead! Me and Darlene dragged him out to the pickup, we gotta go get ridda the body!" and they take off in the truck. You fill a bucket with hot water and start cleaning up the blood. About an hour later, the police come to the door, "
Son, you know whar Wilbur is? His mama is rill worried." You tell him no, you don't know.
QUIZ:- Are you guilty of murder?
- Guilty of manslaughter?
- Conspiracy to commit murder?
- Accessory to murder?
- Accessory after the fact?
- Destruction of evidence?
- Concealment of evidence?
Hearsay is a rule of evidence that's only relevant when a jury is present. If you're using the word informally, well, about EVERYTHING any of us hear and repeat is hearsay.
No, I wasn't present when persons qualified under Fed.R.Evid. § 602 to have personal knowledge of the matter made statements, nor was I myself qualified under § 602 to have personal knowledge. So no, I would not be permitted to testify in front of a jury.
But numerous sources, several I've consulted today, report that Payton had no involvement in the planning or administration of the bounty program. The NFL conducted two investigations into bountygate, and the worst they say about Sean is that he was aware of the investigation (the second one at least), and, knowing there was an investigation qualifies as "constructive notice" something was going on. The commissioner ruled he should've taken strong action, warned the team, the coaching staff, that none of it would be tolerated.
BY THE WAY .... There was credible information that the Vikings had a very similar bounty program active at the same time. But Goodell chose not to investigate.