read this before shooting you mouth

are you ****en nuts? all they have to prove is that Floyd and Gang spread malicious lies as if they were the truth.

On the other hand, FLOYD HAS THE BURDEN OF EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT WHAT HE SAID WERE TRUE AND IF HE HAS NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO SUBSTANTIATE THE TRUTH OF HIS STATEMENTS LIKE IS ACTUALLY THE SITUATION NOW, HE BETTER PRAY THE COURT DEEMS HIS STATEMENTS AS MERE OPINIONS AND NOT DEFAMATORY LIES

 

Arum if you reading this, then read carefully.

**** you, you greedy piece of ****. Stop pretending that you care about Pac's interest, all you care about is money, you slimy ****. You know pac will lose but you also know how much money you will make from this event. You remind me of Mr Burns from the Simpsons, a guy who would stab his own mother in the back for an extra dollar.

And yes in my opinion i think Pacroid has been juicing, yeah i said. Use that as evidence BITCHHHHH.

 

Win or loose, Pac is exposing corrupt slanderers that have done very bad things to the sport of boxing:happy

 

Well, you got part of it right. Additionally, they must prove the following:
Allegationss of criminal conduct (A sport's banned substances list is not the law.)
Allegations injurious to another in their trade, business, or profession (Really tough to prove, especially since Manny has gotten loads of free press from this, which is only increasing his popularity.)
Allegations of loathsome disease (No.)

Their case is weak as ****...At best.:yep

 

there is no ****en requirement that the allegation must have imputed to Pacquiao a criminal conduct. it is one of the actionable slanders but is not necessarily limited to this. Again, malicious lies have been spread against pacquiao's personal character and his manner of conducting professional obligations ==****en defamatory.


i don't know if moral damages can be demanded in the United States but if there is, Mayweather is definitely gonna pay lol, and for loss of possible endorsement deals isn't there one company that backed off from pacquiao recently?:huh

 

It isn't limited to that. They only have to prove one of those three. Actionable: giving cause for legal action: giving a basis for somebody to take legal action.

 

you just agreed to what i said lol

 

Part of what you said, yeah. I think you unknowingly agreed to most of my previous post.

The bottom line is that they additionally have to prove one of those three that I listed. I highly doubt they can.

 

its freedom of speech- as long as it dosent impinge on the freedom and welfare of others. so many people just spout that line without understanding the full context. you can say what you like- but not as an employee for a company you can, not as an endorser for a product, etc.

e.g when tim hardaway said he didnt like gays- people said- oh freedom of speech. david sterns reponse was- sure he can say what he likes- just not as an employee of the nba.

its the same here- floyd can say what he likes- but if it affects another persons ability to earn a living or lead a certain lifestyle - then he ll pay for it.

sorry to smoke you- but you needed an education. :rasta

 

there is no question that the comments were meant to harm manny's professional character and his means of handling his profession which inevitably affects his business or trade. floyd's legal team will not focus their defense on that issue. Their main focus and only way to bail out is to allege that the statements were all opinions(hence, protected by the Constitution), were never meant to state a fact, and were never spoken with malice and bad faith in order to attack manny's character.

If i am a jury member, i would easily cite the repetitious manner the statements were given and the fact that they used it to gain negotiations leverage to rule that there was indeed malicious intent to commit slander

 

He has to prove that they did, in fact, hurt his business, not just that they were intended to, and that's the only way he wins this case.

You're not a jury member, and that isn't the law. Look it up.

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl

 

Arum and the blame game...hmmmm reminds me of someone else.

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl
Please shut the **** up if you don't have any idea of what you are talking about....

The

This content is protected

has the burden of proving that the statement was absolutely false...

The

This content is protected

also has the burden of proving that they (Mayweathers, GBP) knew the statements were false.

The Plaintiff has several other burdens, but you are too blinded by your Floyd hatred to understand, you ****ing idiot! And the other thing, if it makes it to court, it will be tried in a court of law... NOT in the ESB court of opinion where Pac fans reign supreme..:good

 

Actually, you're wrong... You smoked yourself. Get a legal education before you try to tell others what they need....


Tim hardaway and Floyd are in two different boats. Tim hardaway didn't pay through a court of law. He paid at the hands of his employer, who has the right to expect conduct above and beyond what the law expects...


In this case, Floyd has to be convicted in a court of Law. And that is close to impossible. There is no NBA-Nazi like Stern to hand down a fine to Floyd... What a ****in idiot. Floyd haters will twist logic to satisfy their own minds.