Cleveland Browns owner Jimmy Haslam knew about sales scheme: former Pilot exec
-
Well, the FBI director does. Ask Comey.
-
When the FBI opens an investigation into you or your company, you are in a world of Sheet.
When the FBI opens an investigation into you or your company, you are in a world of Sheet.
They did that....and he has scraped by. I doubt any testimony of this nature will change that status.
-
Good.
Let this man surrender the team to the league because he is a shitty owner who can't hire successful men to put this team into playoff contention..
Good.
Let this man surrender the team to the league because he is a shitty owner who can't hire successful men to put this team into playoff contention..
That won't happen .. Dee Haslam is our new owner.. Let that sink a minute.. An Emo broad who went "Nuclear".. Now owns our team.. My worst fear just became a reality...
-
Well, the FBI director does. Ask Comey.
Well, the FBI director does. Ask Comey.
Pretty sure that's a bad example... on many levels.
-
"The Knoxville News Sentinel reports the jury in the federal fraud trial of former Pilot Flying J executives and sales representatives heard a recording of former vice president John "Stick" Freeman saying Haslam was aware of the scheme to deprive trucking customers of the diesel discounts they had negotiated.
In Freeman's words: "He knew — absolutely."
This is a recording of "hearsay evidence" not a recording of Jimmy himself. It means absolutely nothing in a court of law unless witnesses in Jimmy's trial attest that he "knew everything". You'd think one or more who knew would have turned on him in a plea bargain by now.
"The Knoxville News Sentinel reports the jury in the federal fraud trial of former Pilot Flying J executives and sales representatives heard a recording of former vice president John "Stick" Freeman saying Haslam was aware of the scheme to deprive trucking customers of the diesel discounts they had negotiated.
In Freeman's words: "He knew — absolutely."
This is a recording of "hearsay evidence" not a recording of Jimmy himself. It means absolutely nothing in a court of law unless witnesses in Jimmy's trial attest that he "knew everything". You'd think one or more who knew would have turned on him in a plea bargain by now.
I would not call that statement hearsay. Hearsay would be: " I John Freeman heard from Mr. Daffy Duck that Jimmy Haslam told Daffy Duck to rip off truckers".
If John Freeman said: Jimmy Haslam told me to rip off truckers.....that is not hearsay.
-
Pretty sure it's not 'homey'.

-
Good.
Let this man surrender the team to the league because he is a shitty owner who can't hire successful men to put this team into playoff contention..
That won't happen .. Dee Haslam is our new owner.. Let that sink a minute.. An Emo broad who went "Nuclear".. Now owns our team.. My worst fear just became a reality...
-
-
Big difference. The FBI doesn't work for Haslam.
Right....Haslam cannot obstruct an investigation into himself by the FBI.
-
Good.
Let this man surrender the team to the league because he is a shitty owner who can't hire successful men to put this team into playoff contention..
That won't happen .. Dee Haslam is our new owner.. Let that sink a minute.. An Emo broad who went "Nuclear".. Now owns our team.. My worst fear just became a reality...
-
"The Knoxville News Sentinel reports the jury in the federal fraud trial of former Pilot Flying J executives and sales representatives heard a recording of former vice president John "Stick" Freeman saying Haslam was aware of the scheme to deprive trucking customers of the diesel discounts they had negotiated.
In Freeman's words: "He knew — absolutely."
This is a recording of "hearsay evidence" not a recording of Jimmy himself. It means absolutely nothing in a court of law unless witnesses in Jimmy's trial attest that he "knew everything". You'd think one or more who knew would have turned on him in a plea bargain by now.
I would not call that statement hearsay. Hearsay would be: " I John Freeman heard from Mr. Daffy Duck that Jimmy Haslam told Daffy Duck to rip off truckers".
If John Freeman said: Jimmy Haslam told me to rip off truckers.....that is not hearsay.
I would not call that statement hearsay. Hearsay would be: " I John Freeman heard from Mr. Daffy Duck that Jimmy Haslam told Daffy Duck to rip off truckers".
If John Freeman said: Jimmy Haslam told me to rip off truckers.....that is not hearsay.
But you would still need him to testify under oath would you not? The recording by itself would not suffice. Correct?
-
Pretty sure the last (and only?) woman to own an NFL franchise won a SB.
Just sayin'...
You are referring to Georgia Frontiere.....but...Several women own NFL teams.
Virginia McCaskey (daughter of George Halas) is and was owner of the Bears when they won in 1985.
Martha Ford......wife of the late William Clay Ford owns the Lions
Susan Smith and Amy Strunk...both nee Adams....daughters of old Bud Adams own the Titans (plus with a brother I believe)
Kim Pergula and Husband Terry are co-owners of the Bills
Carol Davis....wife of Al...plus son Mark...own the Raiders.
And now it seems that Dee is being listed as "co-owners" of the Browns....particularly on the team's own website:
-
I would not call that statement hearsay. Hearsay would be: " I John Freeman heard from Mr. Daffy Duck that Jimmy Haslam told Daffy Duck to rip off truckers".
If John Freeman said: Jimmy Haslam told me to rip off truckers.....that is not hearsay.
But you would still need him to testify under oath would you not? The recording by itself would not suffice. Correct?
But you would still need him to testify under oath would you not? The recording by itself would not suffice. Correct?
In certain circumstances under the exception to hearsay rule, it may. A question may be: why is this person not available to come into this court and testify?
-
Don't forget the involvement of the son (or was that son-in-law?)
in-law I believe.
-
Those on tril have been saying that from the beginning, yet he hasn't been indicted.
Why is that? I'll tell you why. It's not about what you think. It's about what you can prove.
I am not saying he didn't know. I just find it pretty strong in Haslams favor that the DA hasn't brought charges, no matter how thin. You have to have some proof, and proof isn't a bunch of people who plead guilty to the fraud saying that he had to know. You have to have more than that.
-
Those on tril have been saying that from the beginning, yet he hasn't been indicted.
Why is that? I'll tell you why. It's not about what you think. It's about what you can prove.
I am not saying he didn't know. I just find it pretty strong in Haslams favor that the DA hasn't brought charges, no matter how thin. You have to have some proof, and proof isn't a bunch of people who plead guilty to the fraud saying that he had to know. You have to have more than that.
-
When the FBI opens an investigation into you or your company, you are in a world of Sheet.
When the FBI opens an investigation into you or your company, you are in a world of Sheet.
Um, ah...yeah................. they sure burned Hillary, didn't they?
-
I've just been reading more on this. Try this number. $450,000a month is what they were defrauding truckers out of on their fuel. And emails were sent from execs to Jimmy StupidShmuckinghillbilly informing him. If he loves the analytics he set in place for the Browns, I wonder what he'll think of the analprobing he can get in the federal lockup.BBC anyone?
They put people like Haslam in a Federal Prison Camp. He would never go to a maximum security prison.
They put people like Haslam in a Federal Prison Camp. He would never go to a maximum security prison.
I don't really care where they put him as long as he can't ruin the team any longer
-
Those on tril have been saying that from the beginning, yet he hasn't been indicted.
Why is that? I'll tell you why. It's not about what you think. It's about what you can prove.
I am not saying he didn't know. I just find it pretty strong in Haslams favor that the DA hasn't brought charges, no matter how thin. You have to have some proof, and proof isn't a bunch of people who plead guilty to the fraud saying that he had to know. You have to have more than that.
Those on tril have been saying that from the beginning, yet he hasn't been indicted.
Why is that? I'll tell you why. It's not about what you think. It's about what you can prove.
I am not saying he didn't know. I just find it pretty strong in Haslams favor that the DA hasn't brought charges, no matter how thin. You have to have some proof, and proof isn't a bunch of people who plead guilty to the fraud saying that he had to know. You have to have more than that.
And Ballpeen should know. Russ is a retired Federal Hearing officer. (Is that right, Russ?)
-
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login