Here’s what Dan Snyder said in his deposition

December 12, 2022

by Steve Thomas

I spent a good portion of this weekend reading the transcript of Dan Snyder’s deposition with the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, and now have 22 pages of notes, because I’m just nerdy like that and so you don’t have to do it yourself.  If you recall, this is the committee that is abusing its congressional authority for political reasons by investigating one single private, non-publicly traded, closely held company whose transgressions, if any, could and should be handled by state-level authorities.  Honestly, whatever you may think of Dan Snyder’s conduct, this committee’s actions are a disgusting overreach of power, the likes of which is probably making our founding fathers turn in their graves.  Regardless, I thought I’d take some time to summarize for you what Snyder told the committee.  My goal here is to distill 298 pages down to a short, manageable length, so here we go.

Executive summary

For the “To long, didn’t read” crowd:

• Snyder claimed that he didn’t recall a significant number of the conversations, business points, and actions others had imputed to either him or the team, including some things he probably should have been able to recall.
• What he did remember, he denied.
• He repeatedly emphasized how much progress the team had made in improving corporate culture.
• He made a point to sing the praises of Tanya Snyder, Jason Wright, and Ron Rivera on multiple occasions.
• He said that the team continually kept the NFL front office informed and appraised of the team’s ongoing investigations.
• He denied that the MEAWW lawsuit investigations were overbroad or that he was aware of any private investigators harassing witnesses.

Generally speaking, the tone of the examination by the representatives of the Democratic majority (whose identities were redacted) were that of opposing counsel.  In contrast, the examination by the Republican representatives (whose identities were also redacted) were more akin to what one would expect from an examination by his or her own counsel.  The Republican counsel also put a long statement on the record that mirrored what I wrote above regarding the inappropriate nature of the committee’s investigation.

Former Staff 1

Snyder testified that he believes a former employee, whose name was redacted but who was labeled as “Former Staff 1” in the transcript, attempted to bribe Snyder employees into making slanderous statements about Snyder, many of which surfaced in the defamation lawsuit Snyder filed in India against the MEAWW lawsuit.  Former Staff 1 was a central figure in Snyder’s testimony and is the person upon whom Snyder places the most blame for the MEAWW reports.

MEAWW lawsuit and Washington Post investigations

The Committee asked Snyder a significant number of questions about his investigations and their relationship to the Washington Post articles and the Wilkinson investigation.  Snyder claimed that he either was not aware or did not recall most of what the Committee asked him about the investigations conducted by his attorneys.  The essence of Snyder’s claim, at least for what he could recall, was that everything his attorneys did was for the MEAWW lawsuit and not to interfere with the NFL’s Wilkinson investigation.  The Democratic majority tried to get Snyder to admit that what he was really doing was fishing for information on the Washington Post’s sources, but they were largely unsuccessful.  Snyder stated that it was the team who asked the NFL to take over the Wilkinson investigation, not the other way around.  Snyder disclaimed knowledge of any private investigations into witnesses, stating that he did not know what his attorneys had done or not done.  He emphasized the extremely negative impact the MEAWW reports had on his family, including his children, and said that that was why he was pursuing the lawsuit against MEAWW.

Presentations to the NFL

In response to questions about the slide shows presented by the team to the NFL regarding the results of the team investigations, Snyder repeatedly stated that the team merely “delivered the facts” and denied that the real point of his investigations and the information put into the slide presentations was to out the Washington Post’s sources.

Snyder’s management style

Snyder stuck to the principal story that the team’s negative culture developed without him being present.  He claimed that he was normally only in the office about 30 days per year prior to the start of the recent troubles.  His strategy in this deposition was clearly to place as much blame as possible onto former team president Bruce Allen.  This strategy mirrors the public statements put out by the team over the past several years.  Snyder repeatedly emphasized that Tanya Snyder was now conducting the team’s day to day executive business and was the person who attended league meetings.

David Pauken testimony response

David Pauken was the former team COO who made a wide variety of allegations against both Snyder individually and the team culture and operations more generally.  Pauken was one of the principal sources who claim that the team has been abusive to women, that Snyder had been involved in decisions that gave leniency to men who had mistreated women, and other claims.  Pauken was also the person who claimed that Snyder had ordered him to put sour milk into the suite at Fed Ex Field owned by Ted Lerner.  Snyder essentially denied all of Pauken’s claims.

Tiffany Johnson allegations against Snyder

Johnson is the woman who claimed that Snyder touched her leg at a charity event and then later attempted to direct her into his limousine.  Snyder unequivocally denied these allegations, stating that he didn’t know Johnson at all, didn’t remember the evening in question, and that he didn’t own a limousine.  The majority pointed out that while Snyder may not have owned a limousine, he was still driven in a large chauffeured vehicle.  Regardless, Snyder denied these allegations.

Tiffany Scourby and Dr. Tony Roberts

Snyder denied that he ever asked Scourby, a Redskins cheerleader, to go up to a hotel room with his friend, team ophthalmologist Dr. Tony Roberts, at a charity event, which is an allegation raised by the Washington Post.

Cheerleader allegations and Larry Michael

Snyder claimed that he had no knowledge of any illicit videos of Redskins cheerleaders until those allegations were made public.  He additionally stated that had been unaware of allegations of misconduct against former team executive Larry Michael until they were published, but admitted that it was “possible” that Michael had harassed a female employee.  Snyder claimed that he didn’t remember Brian Lefemina approaching him about the allegations against Michael.

Settlement of sexual harassment claim against Snyder

Snyder was questioned about the allegations that he had harassed a female team employee on his jet, an accusation which he denied.  He also made the point that an insurance company had settled the case, not him directly.  This is very common in the insurance defense world – insurance companies often settle claims over the objections of the insured.  I have seen this happen many times in my legal career, so this was a believable scenario.

Vestry Laight report

Vestry Laight is a business consultant firm retained by the team as part of the effort to change the team’s corporate culture.  Snyder repeatedly touted the results of Vestry’s report, and, in an effort to help Snyder focus on the improvements that had been made, the Republican minority walked him through ten separate recommendations made by Vestry, all of which Snyder claimed had been completed.

Bruce Allen and Brian Lafemina

Snyder stated in his deposition that it became apparent that Lafemina and Allen could not co-exist in the franchise, and that he “made the wrong choice” in firing Lafemina instead of Allen.

Conclusion

At the end of the day, not much that was new and/or exciting came out of this deposition, which was certainly one of the goals of Snyder’s counsel.  It was clear that they had spent time prepping him for the deposition, because he stuck to specific talking points on nearly every topic.  On the positive side, I thought he did a good job in steering the discussion towards an emphasis on the changes made to improve the organization, in particular the impact of Jason Wright, Ron Rivera, and Tanya Snyder.  He also did a decent job in claiming to be a “hands-off” owner, thereby distancing himself from the misconduct in the building.  On the negative side, Snyder used “I don’t recall” too much, to the point that at times it seemed implausible that he could possibly not remember certain things.  He also came across as a fairly weak leader who never fully took responsibility for what happened to the team over the course of the past 20 years.

I don’t believe that this deposition will move the needle too much in terms of his ability to retain control of the team.