- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: NFL presented Vilma w/sworn affidavit of GW stating Vilma offered 10k for Favre
Posted on 9/18/12 at 7:19 pm to jeff5891
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
Posted on 9/18/12 at 7:23 pm to FalseProphet
quote:
i am a media member and say on air that you used steroids while playing baseball. you file a defamation suit against me. the suit goes to court. i will be required to show what evidence i have and show how it justifies my statement. you are not required to prove anything but have your attorney poke wholes in the evidence you present to show the evidence is not valid enough for me to make the statement that i did.
False. Truth is an absolute defense. If you want to assert the absolute defense, then you bear the burden. Otherwise, the plaintiff bears the burden of proof to show that the statements were false.
I'll cite you some case law when I'm not on my phone.
This post was edited on 9/18/12 at 7:25 pm
Posted on 9/18/12 at 7:31 pm to FalseProphet
quote:
Goodell doesn't have to prove a damn thing. Vilma has to show that Goodell knew the accusations were false.
goodell has one thing to prove. that he had firm evidence.
Posted on 9/19/12 at 7:57 am to FalseProphet
quote:
Goodell doesn't have to prove a damn thing. Vilma has to show that Goodell knew the accusations were false.
Proving that Goodell intended to lie would be near impossible, but if Goodell's claims of thousands of pages of hard evidence plus assertions that coaches and players admitted to pay for injury are proven to be false or mischaracterized, can that legally be found to be defamation? The public claim of evidence that doesn't exist, I mean.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News