the shooting at Tom Brady's wedding (1 Viewer)

[two_dollars]

I hate the Patriots. I don't think Goodell even needs to look up Brady's phone number in this matter though. He had nothing to do with this. It was an outside agency. Unless Tom said "Shoot people taking pictures" then there is no liability.

I don't think anything comes down on Brady because I have what is known as "common sense."

 

[Art_VanDalay]

Let me be clear. I have no problem with Goodell and the league office punishing players for crimes they've been convicted of. If a player hasn't been convicted of anything, however, I think that it should up to the team whether or not they want to punish them. Goodell should stay out of it, as each team is accountable to its own fanbase, and they should be able to use their own discretion in how they want to discipline their own players.

I'll go one step further -- I think disciplinary action should be up to the individual teams no matter what the circumstances. A team's fan base should be the ultimate determinant.

No you wouldn't because he would be an "Independent Contractor" and not an Employee. I thought this discussion would be more interesting from a broader NFL impact sense than measuring how much man love exists for one Tom Brady. Take it off of Brady and look at the impact going forward and it may have implications down the road.

 

[Chase Stuart]

However, in a case like this, where bodyguards may have allegedly roughed up or worse, fired a shot at photographers on Mr. Brady's behalf, how will the league view this sort of conduct? Goodell has taken an obviously hard line, no nonsense stand with the more obvious situations but here, we are essentially asking if Tom Brady should be held vicariously liable for the actions of people either in his employ or acting on his behalf?

Vicarious liability where an agent is acting on behalf of his employer only arises when the employee is acting within the scope of his employment. It would be a real stretch to argue that shooting at unarmed photographers is part of a bodyguard's job responsibilities.

Saying Brady isn't vicariously liable doesn't get him off the hook. He could be personally liable, if he either explicitly or implicitly told the bodyguard to shoot the photographers. He also could be liable if he was negligent in hiring these bodyguards (had they shot at people before? do they have a criminal record?).It seems like it's unlikely that he would be individually or vicariously liable for any of the damage here. But there's more to the situation than vicarious liability.

 

[-baller]

I thought this was a fantasy football board.

shouldn't this thread be on field and stream?

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

I thought this was a fantasy football board.shouldn't this thread be on field and stream?

Heavy on the "stream" imo

 

[Dexter Manley]

To my knowledge, Goodell never talked to Brady about his hired guns shooting at the paparazzi during his wedding. Now the photogs are suing. Per PFT:

Brady, Bundchen sued for wedding shootingPosted by Mike Florio on September 22, 2009 12:43 PM ETIt was a bizarre story that disappeared almost as quickly as it unexpectedly arrived on the scene.In early April, photographers looking to capture images of the Costa Rican nuptial celebration of Pats quarterback Tom Brady and his supermodel (without super powers) wife, Gisele Bundchen, allegedly found themselves having to move faster than a speeding bullet.Now, the men who claim that the Brady and Bundchen goon squad shot at them have sued the happy couple in federal court in New York.Among other things, the lawsuit (per Joe Buck's favorite web site) claims that Brady and Bundchen negligently hired and trained the security team, and that they permitted the hired muscle to "discharge firearms with intent to kill or wound."So the short list of NFL franchise quarterbacks now includes two of them who are defending themselves against civil lawsuits containing serious allegations.Let's see if ESPN will cover this one.

 

[tim_whatley]

If I was marrying Gisele, I would want as many pictures taken and released to the media as possible. The more compromising, the better.

 

[Zoomanji]

Can they even be sued in the USA if the "supposed crime" took place in another country?

I'm sure they will just be paid their money. That's all this is about.

 

[fatness]

Let's see if ESPN will cover this one.

And the NFL.Oh, that's right. The NFL regularly overlooks shooting incidents involving players.