Lawyer for Ex-Pats Videotaper Matt Walsh: He Never Claimed to Have a Rams Tape

First-class traitor Former New England Patriots assistant Matt Walsh touched base with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell this week. The purpose? To assess Walsh’s proof of things like the Patriots taping the St. Louis Rams at a pre-Super Bowl XXXVI practice in 2002.

Usually, when you’re talking about evidence supporting a videotape claim, said evidence is—wait for it—the videotape itself. Not eight other videotapes of signals involving other teams and other games. Somehow Walsh, who turned over those irrelevant-the-Rams-issue tapes, must subscribe to the logic “If X=Y and Z=Y, then A=B because, well, because I said so.”

Or something like that.

Michael Levy, Walsh’s lawyer, added yet another “WTF?” to the mix by stating (per ESPN) that

“Mr. Walsh has never claimed to have a tape of the walk-through . . . Mr. Walsh has never been the source of any of the media speculation about such a tape. Mr. Walsh was not the source for the Feb. 2 Boston Herald article.”

So let’s get this straight: Walsh (and two others) videotaped for the Patriots during the timeframe in question. Walsh gave up tapes. But he didn’t turn over evidence of the high-profile allegation linking his name to the Rams case. (Google ”Matt Walsh” and “St. Louis Rams.” We garnered 44,200 hits. Now go re-read Levy’s comments).

This makes less sense than the fact that Paris Hilton pulled down $150K for partying at a London nightclub.

Oh, and given that the eight tapes are consistent with what the Pats already ‘fessed up to, there’s no news here. Somebody–Walsh, his lawyer, the Boston Herald, the Patriots, the NFL–has some ’splainin’ to do about this mess.

What’s more idiotic: Matt Walsh not providing a Pats-Rams Super Bowl tape or the realization that someone paid Paris Hilton $150K to show up at a London nightclub?

Image: Used courtesy of www.splashnewsonline.com