Skip to content

Cleveland Browns owner Jimmy Haslam knew about sales scheme: former Pilot exec

The Browns Board
55 16 1.5k 1
  • DieHardBrownsFanD DieHardBrownsFan wrote on last edited by
    #30

    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.

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #31

    @diehardbrownsfan said:

    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..

    nickersN nickers wrote on last edited by nickers
    #32

    @domcucch1994 said:

    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.

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by
    #33

    @diehardbrownsfan said:

    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 GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #34

    @texasag1969 said:

    "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.

  • DieHardBrownsFanD DieHardBrownsFan wrote on last edited by
    #35

    Pretty sure it's not 'homey'.😁

  • @domcucch1994 said:

    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...

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by
    #36

    @nickers said:

    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...

    Pretty sure the last (and only?) woman to own an NFL franchise won a SB.

    Just sayin'...

  • Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by Tour2ma
    #37

    Two "pretty sures" in a row? By different posters? On different topics?

    Must be the Parma water factor...

  • @tour2ma said:

    I other news... water is wet.

    Unless of course you are making America great again?

    Big difference.  The FBI doesn't work for Haslam.

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #38

    @diehardbrownsfan said:

    Big difference.  The FBI doesn't work for Haslam.

    Right....Haslam cannot obstruct an investigation into himself by the FBI.

  • @domcucch1994 said:

    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 GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #39

    @nickers said:

    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...

    Don't forget the involvement of the son  (or was that son-in-law?)

  • @texasag1969 said:

    "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.

    T TexasAg1969 wrote on last edited by
    #40

    @the-gipper said:

    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?

  • @nickers said:

    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...

    Pretty sure the last (and only?) woman to own an NFL franchise won a SB.

    Just sayin'...

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #41

    @tour2ma said:

    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:

    http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/team/front-office.html

  • @the-gipper said:

    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?

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #42

    @texasag1969 said:

    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?

  • @nickers said:

    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...

    Don't forget the involvement of the son  (or was that son-in-law?)

    OrionO Orion wrote on last edited by
    #43

    @the-gipper said:

    Don't forget the involvement of the son  (or was that son-in-law?)

    in-law I believe.  

  • ballpeenB ballpeen wrote on last edited by
    #44

    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.

    OrionO Orion wrote on last edited by
    #45

    @ballpeen said:

    Those on tril have been saying that from the beginning, yet he  hasn't been indicted.  You're probably right, but I never heard it before. 

     It's about what you can prove. There is that.

    He's been the artful dodger. 

  • When the FBI opens an investigation into you or your company, you are in a world of Sheet.

    GhoolieG Ghoolie wrote on last edited by
    #46

    @diehardbrownsfan said:

    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?

  • @flyingfooldoug said:

    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.  

    flyingfooldougF flyingfooldoug wrote on last edited by
    #47

    @diehardbrownsfan said:

    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.

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #48

    @ballpeen said:

    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?)

  • @nickers said:

    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...

    Pretty sure the last (and only?) woman to own an NFL franchise won a SB.

    Just sayin'...

    nickersN nickers wrote on last edited by nickers
    #49

    @tour2ma said:

    Pretty sure the last (and only?) woman to own an NFL franchise won a SB.

    Just sayin'...

    That woman had a bonafide HC in Dickey Vermiel and potential HOF QB Kurt Warner..Dee has Sheet...

    Just sayin'..