Did Patriots' bodyguard assault NBC cameraman?



You know the New England Patriots were pretty pissed off after losing against the Indianapolis Colts Sunday night, so it wasn’t too hard to believe that the team’s chief of security assaulted an NBC cameraman who was trying to film coach Bill Bellichick walking off the field.

At least that is what it looks like in the above video.

But if you look at the video slowly, you can see the cameraman’s cable tighten just before he falls, making it appear that he ran out of cable just as he got to Bellichick and Chief of Security Mark Briggs, causing him to jerk backwards and fall down.

But the video also shows Briggs grabbing onto his wrist, prompting the Boston Herald to call it a “50-50, incidental incident.”

Neither the Patriots nor NBC have publicly commented on the incident and the NFL is looking into it.

Here are four still shots in sequence of the incident from The Indianapolis Star.

And here is commentary from Eric Seals, a photographer who witnessed the incident that believes Briggs intentionally took the cameraman down.

As Belichick was running off the field with his security guard, the bald guy acts like a “bull in a china shop” and pushes around 3 photographers that I could see as NBC tracked him leaving. A NBC camera man in a brown vest gets his camera pushed down to the ground causing him to fall.

What do you think?

Comments

Anonymous
Anonymous

Something like wouldn’t be all too surprising, however, I’ve got to go w/ the ran out of cable theory after watching that about 20 times!

Anonymous
Anonymous

Looks like he clearly ran out of cable (or perhaps someone stepped on it further back). Looks like Briggs’ reaction is just grabbing someone who’s falling against him.

Anonymous
Anonymous

I have to agree with the above. I’d say Briggs was either doing what Alan suspects, or was just about to put some space between the cameraman and himself/the coach with a stiff arm when he ran out of cable.

Anonymous
Anonymous

This is not truly a public place so the cameraman has no expectation of freedom of movement. Thus the cable is not guilty of assault on the cameraman.

We must recover the element of quality in our traditional pursuit of equality. We must not, in opening our schools to everyone, confuse the idea that all should have equal chance with the notion that all have equal endowments.
curt
Nike Hyperdunk Low

Anonymous
Anonymous

A firsthand account suggests that Bilichick’s goon did, in fact, cause the cameraman to fall.
http://www.sportsshooter.com/message_display.html?tid=34625#17

http://photos.indystar.com/galleries/slides/7944?page=2

And then he shoved an Indy Star photog.
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2031885&id=1599166719&ref=mf

Anonymous
Anonymous

There is a point at which you can see the cable between the men, after the body guard has a hold of the cameraman. The cable is not strained enough to pull the cameraman down. You can see the body guard push upward to move the cameraman to the side at first and cameraman’s left shoulder moves upward at first. Then the guard pulls downward and to his right. The cameraman moves downward and falls to the right of the guard. You can not see the body guards hands well enough to see if he was using any pressure points as a come along hold on the cameraman. But by the way the cameraman was moved by the bodyguard it is highly possible. However, grabbing the cameraman and forcefully moving him against his will is against the law. If it was an accident, why did the guard and Bill not stop and check to see if he was hurt?

Anonymous
Anonymous

To me it looks like the camera man or to close and bumped into the guard. The guard never looked to his right but just put his hands on the camera and pushed down and rotating causing the camera man to go down.

Anonymous
Anonymous

It definitely looks like he aided the camerman’s fall but it is really hard to tell. Why didn’t he stop to help? I know it is his job to stay with the coach but the coach definitely saw him fall. Guess he is a dick.

Anonymous
Anonymous

What strikes me is the goon’s nonchalant style.

In the video, his hands are busy pushing down on the camera and/or cameraman’s hands. But he looks and behaves as though nothing happened.

In the four still frames, his facial expression hardly changes – meanwhile, you can see him turn to regard the downed cameraman.

Comparing frame 1 and 2, the goon is leaning to his right, looking as though he was focusing his body weight on his hands.

It wouldn’t surprise me if he did it, but his smooth style makes it difficult to prove.

Anonymous
Anonymous

As an employee of NBC, a sponsor of NFL and for the event, the cameraman was not a member of the public and did have an expectation of freedom of movement. So the cable may in-fact be guilty of assault on the cameraman

Anonymous
Anonymous

I think if an accusation is to be made the cameraman is the one to do it.

Anonymous
Anonymous

I’ve watched this a few time and freeze-framed it and have to side with the goon on this one. In jostle to get off the field he looks more than capable of trucking over photographers and little old ladies, but I don’t think he did so in this case.

Anonymous
Anonymous

After looking at it few more times here’s what I think it looks like.

Bodyguard sees the camera man, doesn’t take him as a threat, he’s aware he’s there, but he’s not the guards main focus.

The photographer is running to get a shot around (in front of the body guard)

The guard is aware of this, but still not concerned, he probably sees this after every game.

As the photographer gets near the front of the guard, yoink goes his cable causing a sudden and awkward movement.

The guard sees a sudden weird movement (unaware of the cable problem) from the cameraman and goes into “oh no you don’t” mode giving him a shove away from the area he’s trying to protect.

Probably a non-issue, just a simple accident

Post new comment

Pixiq on Facebook

Join the 10120 Pixiq fans on Facebook

Share

  • Share

Subscribe

Get weekly updates from Pixiq. Short, sweet, and always interesting.