It’s circumstantial evidence....how does that negate the facts that the tests on the football were not done properly ? Which as you know, means the so-called “evidence” is worthless. This case was never about Brady’s guilt, but about the powers that Article 46 has, and if the league can use them in almost an unlimited way.
You can bring up this hearsay & that hearsay, but it’s not proof. When you measure balls using different equipment, at different times, in different conditions....you have no Prima Facie evidence. It’s as plain as that.