This could get ugly for the Saints...

[FQDawg]

[TWEET]1220724744833597446[/TWEET]

 

[BlueRidgeMtns]

uhhhh what?

 

[bruiser.sixpack]

[TWEET]1220724744833597446[/TWEET]

Breaking News:

Oakland Raiders become the Las Vegas Gamblers

New Orleans Saints become the New Orleans Sinners

Film at 11.

 

[Xenomorph]

Couple of thoughts... First, that's a terrible look for the Saints. Second.. I'm always amazed at the type of conversations people will have over email.

eta: clarity

 

[aTotal360]

Yes and yes.

 

[57stratdawg]

Remember when the Saints cried so much about a PI call the NFL changed a rule for them.

Then, the very next playoff loss they were still playing the PI-Victim card?

 

[horshack.sixpack]

I'm amazed that people would side with the church over abuse victims. That is the sickest and saddest part of it all!

 

[gwadSIG]

First, LSU and the children's hospital and now this. Louisiana should just change the state motto to "Corruption welcomed".

 

[FQDawg]

I'm amazed that people would side with the church over abuse victims. That is the sickest and saddest part of it all!

I'm not all that surprised. People tend to be emotionally invested in their church. They aren't necessarily emotionally invested in other people, even if those people are abuse victims.

And I can guarantee that if this turns out to be legit, there will be a LOT of people who side with the Saints over the abuse victims.

 

[MrKotter]

Remember when the Saints cried so much about a PI call the NFL changed a rule for them.

Then, the very next playoff loss they were still playing the PI-Victim card?

And this is relevant to the current topic how?

 

[Bulldogg31]

What kind of world do we live in when an area’s Roman Catholic archdiocese can’t even handle their own public relations damage control amidst their sexual abuse crises?

Back in my day....

 

[ShrubDog]

Remember when the Saints cried so much about a PI call the NFL changed a rule for them.

Then, the very next playoff loss they were still playing the PI-Victim card?

Bitching about others bitching.
Must suck hanging onto Bernie’s dreams.

 

[jdbulldog]

Did they not not have those emails transferred to a super saintly secretive server?

[TWEET]1220724744833597446[/TWEET]

 

[DAWG61]

Bernie who? Kosar?

 

[bruiser.sixpack]

Hey Saints! Call Hillary. She can help you with the rest of the emails you want to go away.

 

[RockKickinSandPoundinSOB]

Maybe now this will get them and a portion of their bitchass fans to STFU and stop crying about every call.

 

[OldFatDog]

Hey Saints! Call Hillary. She can help you with the rest of the emails you want to go away.

And, then, when you get knocked out of the playoffs in 2025, you can blame her.

 

[horshack.sixpack]

I'm not all that surprised. People tend to be emotionally invested in their church. They aren't necessarily emotionally invested in other people, even if those people are abuse victims.

And I can guarantee that if this turns out to be legit, there will be a LOT of people who side with the Saints over the abuse victims.

Putting any church ahead of the Biblical teaching is a real problem. The object of worship has been misplaced it would seem.

ETA: should have said any Christian church. if you aren't that into Christ, then honoring the Bible wouldn't make a lot of sense.

 

[MadDawg.sixpack]

Maybe now this will get them and a portion of their bitchass fans to STFU and stop crying about every call.

vagisil works wonders I'm told

 

[bsquared24]

I'm amazed that people would side with the church over abuse victims. That is the sickest and saddest part of it all!

If you read the article I don't understand what there is to blame the Saints for here. The PR dept of one of the largest institutions in the city ask the PR dept of one of the other largest institutions for advice. The Saints said tell the truth, be straight forward. How is that in someway bad or inappropriate?

The pushing of this to the media is just a tactic to try and force for a larger settlement, of which the lawyers then keep a third of it.

 

[FQDawg]

If you read the article I don't understand what there is to blame the Saints for here. The PR dept of one of the largest institutions in the city ask the PR dept of one of the other largest institutions for advice. The Saints said tell the truth, be straight forward. How is that in someway bad or inappropriate?

The pushing of this to the media is just a tactic to try and force for a larger settlement, of which the lawyers then keep a third of it.

If the Saints were confident that every thing they did was above board or that nothing was in any way "bad or inappropriate" they wouldn't be fighting to keep the emails out of the public eye.

 

[skydawg1]

"Corruption welcomed"

This has been the worst kept secret in LA for 200 years.

 

[bsquared24]

I disagree, you see the smear on the Saints that has already occured based off nothing. The safest thing is to not give them any words to try and twist.

 

[Go Budaw]

I disagree, you see the smear on the Saints that has already occured based off nothing. The safest thing is to not give them any words to try and twist.

Are you serious? It’s not based on nothing. An NFL franchise has no business whatsoever exchanging any business emails with a private religious entity about a child abuse scandal. Should literally NEVER happen. Ever. It doesn’t even matter what the content is. But the fact that lawyers are desperately trying to keep the content hidden should let everyone know that the Saints statement is BS. It also doesn’t take over 200 emails to say “just tell the truth”.

 

[mount lefroy]

I'm not all that surprised. People tend to be emotionally invested in their church. They aren't necessarily emotionally invested in other people, even if those people are abuse victims.

And I can guarantee that if this turns out to be legit, there will be a LOT of people who side with the Saints over the abuse victims.

I'm emotionally invested in my church. Not enough to side with them over sexual abuse. Matter of fact I cant think of a member that would.

 

[johnson86-1]

I'm amazed that people would side with the church over abuse victims. That is the sickest and saddest part of it all!

What makes you think anybody sided with the church over abuse victims? Institutions have to rely on individuals and sometimes individuals do horrible things. The answer to every bad thing can’t be burn down the buildings and salt the ground, so somebody has to manage how institutions move forward. Doing so is not siding with the church over abuse victims. .

 

[paindonthurt_]

The 17ing media is owed nothing. I wouldn’t give it to them on principle alone.

The media has become a problem in this country Regardless of the side you fall on.

 

[Go Budaw]

The 17ing media is owed nothing. I wouldn’t give it to them on principle alone.

The media has become a problem in this country Regardless of the side you fall on.

Uh, by law the media is owed whatever public records exist from the case upon their request. Therefore they are owed anything that the judge presiding over the case deems as admissible evidence or anything otherwise pertinent that the judge does not require to remain confidential.

I’m guessing the First Amendment is your least favorite.

 

[goindhoo]

Obviously, these aren’t public records. Try again.

 

[Go Budaw]

Obviously, these aren’t public records. Try again.

What? Court records most certainly are public records, unless otherwise deemed confidential by the judge. That’s the whole point of the Saints attorneys arguing relevance of the emails in the case. Should the judge rule them as admissible evidence that is relevant to the plaintiff’s claim / allegation, they will become public record as they are presented in court.

The whole point is a judge will eventually decide what the media is “owed” based on the relevance to the case. But the concept that the media is owed nothing by default is complete horse ****.

 

[goindhoo]

Protective orders are entered all of the time. Evidence can still be relevant/admissible but protected from public dissemination.

 

[Go Budaw]

Protective orders are entered all of the time. Evidence can still be relevant/admissible but protected from public dissemination.

No ****. But there typically has to be a valid reason (in the eyes of the judge) why it has to remain confidential. Protection of trade secrets, witness confidentiality, protection of personal information / contact information, etc. Saints are gonna have to have a compelling argument to prevent at least partial disclosure at minimum, with some redactions of course to prevent personal info from leaking out.