What you have to understand is in a defamation suit the accuser is the who made the statement that is said to hurt the character of someone else( goodell). Vilma is really the defendant ( even though he is technically accusing goodell of defamation, it doesn't matter BC in the eyes of the court Vilma is defending himself from accusations made be goodell)

That's why goodell has to prove his evidence was strong enough to make a statement about Vilma. If the court says his evidence isn't, then he did not have the right publicly state what he did and will be penalized for it.

2 Jump to Post ...

Report Post Jump to Post

Posted by TigerinATL

Member since Feb 2005

62057 posts

Posted on 9/18/12 at 3:32 pm to jeff5891

quote:
That's why goodell has to prove his evidence was strong enough to make a statement about Vilma. If the court says his evidence isn't, then he did not have the right publicly state what he did and will be penalized for it.

What court would say the evidence is lacking though? The evidence Goodell was working with were accusations by Vilma's superiors and Vilma refusing to defend himself. Seems pretty black and white to me. I wish Vilma had enough to take Goodell down because I think he's bad for the game, but I just don't see it.

2 Jump to Post ...

Report Post Jump to Post

Posted by FalseProphet

Mecca

Member since Dec 2011

11708 posts

Posted on 9/18/12 at 7:19 pm to jeff5891

quote:
What you have to understand is in a defamation suit the accuser is the who made the statement that is said to hurt the character of someone else( goodell). Vilma is really the defendant ( even though he is technically accusing goodell of defamation, it doesn't matter BC in the eyes of the court Vilma is defending himself from accusations made be goodell) That's why goodell has to prove his evidence was strong enough to make a statement about Vilma. If the court says his evidence isn't, then he did not have the right publicly state what he did and will be penalized for it.

That's entirely wrong. Vila is the plaintiff. He has to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Goodell made false statements. The burden doesn't shift to Goodell just because Vilma says he's lying.

Goodell doesn't have to prove a damn thing. Vilma has to show that Goodell knew the accusations were false.

This is an uphill battle for Vilma.

3 Jump to Post ...

Report Post Jump to Post

Saints Talk - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board