The truth always comes out in time. Sources reports with the Saints’ bounty scandal coming to its conclusion on Wednesday, it makes sense to look back at how it started. At some point along the way, obviously, someone in the Saints organization said something to someone that maybe should’ve stayed in house.

According to Warren Sapp, it’s former Saints tight end Jeremy Shockey. Here’s how their Twitter conversation unfolded, complete with denial from Shock-J.

Jeremy Shockey, who played for the Saints from 2008-2010 and was a part of the ’09 championship team, denies the allegations.

“It’s reckless, it’s careless, it’s hurtful to me and the great time I had with the Saints,” said Shockey, who was accused by Sapp of being the “snitch” in this story. “Sean Payton is a father figure to me. I would never do that to him or to the Saints.”

But here’s the thing: even if Shockey’s telling the truth, Sapp’s already put his name out there. It’s the same reason political campaigns have been known to run ads that were patently false — the facts don’t matter. Instead, for some people, whatever they hear or read is what will stick with them.

But there’s a bigger issue beyond who among Sapp, his source, and Shockey are telling the truth.

As PFT’s Mike Florio points out: “NFL was able to dust off a cold case because someone blew the whistle during the 2011 season. And, as we explained earlier this month, it’s critical that the NFL protect the whistleblower from any type of retaliation — including insults, threats, and/or specific acts of violence from an overly zealous fan who now thinks the Saints’ Super Bowl title has been tainted and/or that the team’s quest to play in the Super Bowl that will be hosted by New Orleans has now been derailed. As it turns out, the NFL has outed the suspected whistleblower. On the network that the NFL owns.”

Ironcially, it was on the very same network earlier in the day that Goodell weighed in on the Saints’ sanctions.

“Clearly, we were lied to,” he said. “We investigated this back in 2010, we were told it was not happening, it continued for another two years until we got credible evidence late in the 2011 season and we were able to identify significant information that verified from multiple sources that this was going on for a three-year period.”

“Credible evidence” may or may not include a former player with ties to the organization. But the next time the league investigates a scandal, it might be much tougher to find someone willing to offer a glimpse behind the curtain, especially when doing so comes with great personal and professional risks.

Source