Patriots

Patriots

NEW YORK -- Roger Goodell's decision to keep high-ranking NFL attorney Jeffrey Pash off-limits from questioning by the NFLPA seems to rankle Judge Richard Berman.

During Wednesday's oral arguments on Tom Brady's appeal of his four-game suspension by commissioner Roger Goodell, Berman asked Daniel Nash, the NFL Management Council attorney, as to why Pash wasn't allowed to be questioned.

"What's the problem having [Pash] testify?" asked Berman. "He edited the Wells Report. Nobody else edited the Wells Report. He was the co-lead on the investigation with Mr. Wells."

Nash responded that Goodell felt Pash "was not a relevant witness," which is why Pash was not questioned during Brady's June 26 appeal.

According to Nash, Goodell did allow the NFLPA to question Wells as to Pash's importance. Berman appeared to waggle his head upon hearing that explanation.

Nash also blamed a press release announcing Wells and Pash as co- investigators as having fermented unnecessary interest in Pash's role, to which Berman said, "Well, you all wrote [the press release]."

When Nash tried to move away from the question of Pash, Berman returned to the topic, again asking who else edited the Wells Report.

Nash explained that Goodell determined Pash's testimony was "cumulative" and there was no need for questioning. Author's confession: I'm not sure exactly what that means, but the notion of employing "cumulative" testimony by the NFL really rankled Berman, who said cases have been vacated based on allowing "cumulative" testimony.

"It's not sufficient just to say his testimony would have been cumulative," said Berman.

 

Pash's role is becoming more significant in Berman's mind. During the NFLPA's hour of arguments on Wednesday, Berman said to union attorney Jeffrey Kessler that being able to question Pash would have been valuable to the NFLPA.