• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

AB accused of Rape (update dipshit released by pats)

Yes, she could. She cannot cite her own statements to the NFL in any later official proceeding (Fed. Rules of Evidence, §801(c)), while the other side (Brown's lawyers) can cite any information she provides - ANY - and seek to disprove or discredit the information.

That is how these cases are won and lost. Credibility is absolutely paramount. If the defense can show 2-3 times where the accuser changed her story, they accuse her of lying 2-3 times and can turn the case. For that reason, my client's don't offer "free" testimony that does no good and can in fact do harm.

Yes there is disclosure but i highly doubt any of it will be made public, she just wants to repeat her story to as wide an audience as possible and is betting public opinion will portray any detractors of her story as rape apologists, blaming the victim, she will ride that horse all day long #MeToo

She got nothing to lose, he got everything
 
Last edited:
Yes there is disclosure but i highly doubt any of it will be made public, she just wants to repeat her story to as wide an audience as possible and is betting public opinion will portray any detractors of her story as rape apologists, blaming the victim, she will ride that horse all day long

Statements to the NFL would not be privileged, and would therefore be subject to discovery in her pending lawsuit. There is some limited privilege (under state law) for an employer's internal investigation, but that privilege would not extend to statements that have nothing to do with the employer-employee relationship. Also, since the matter is pending in Federal court, the Federal Rules of Evidence apply, and those rules provide no privilege for statements made by a plaintiff during an investigation of the allegations.

So yes, Brown's legal team could get the statements. That is why having the lawyers answer the questions is the way to go, if at all.
 
Bottom line, There is no evidence to discover. Totally a matter of who you believe.

He says it never happened, she says it did. Neither side can prove anything. Who do you want to believe?
 
She has zero obligation to speak to NFL investigators. Zero. Their findings are completely irrelevant to her case and useless in terms of her lawsuit.

They can ask to speak to her, but she would be well-advised to tell them to send written questions which she answers with the help of her attorneys, and with no signature, verification, attestation, or acknowledgement by her that she is the one making the statements.

Leave it to an ambulance chaser to go legal on the board
 
GFGCMYXRPGALQAG.20120831183513.jpg

Ok I will say it. HIT
 
True in part. The $75,000 limit is for cases brought under something called diversity. No, not that type of "diversity." Claims between citizens of different states, such as this one, may be brought in Federal court if the damages are greater than the $75,000 jurisdictional limit. (28 U.S. Code § 1332.) Claims brought in Federal court for violation of Federal law involve the "Federal question doctrine" and have no jurisdictional limit. Therefore, a claim brought for violation of FMLA - Federal law, 29 CFR § 825 - does not have a jurisdictional limit.

Oh, and as a freebie for you freeloaders ... cases brought in Federal court under diversity are governed by substantive (as opposed to procedural) state law, in this instance where the wrongdoing occurred, under something called the "Erie doctrine" since there is no Federal common law (well, there's some, but that's a different story).

You're welcome.

Steeltime is this amount all inclusive? Are compensatory damages and punitive damages separate in any ruling? The judge can award separate punitive amounts exclusively, correct?


Sent from my iPad using Steeler Nation mobile app
 
Sounds like the only reason she would talk to the NFL is to put pressure on AB to settle and avoid a headache or worse. Her testimony may hurt her legal case but it could also lead to AB getting cut by the Pats and then he’d be sitting out the year because at that point I can’t see another team signing him this season. At least not for anything above league minimum.

It it would also seem that if they want to use public pressure then they aren’t confident they can win in court, or they outright know they’ll lose so they are hitting the gas to get this done quick.
 
i wish we had a competent legal mind to help us sift through all this legal hocus pocus buffonery.
 
Maybe she’s trying to paint him as having a history of anger and irrational decisions? Remember he is being sued for throwing a couch off a 14th floor balcony and almost hitting a toddler. He has had the police called to his residence because if his anger issues.

He has a history of texts and ex employees that very well may testify against him.

Just because they were in a bed together doesn’t mean much. No relationship ok. Maybe she treated it as brother sister client trainee, and he pushed it too far and did violate her when she said no...

He’s always sticking a camera in someone’s face so it not a surprise she’s in his pictures...especially when she was training him and trying to grow recognition with him as a client.

Doesn’t give him the right to push up on her..
 
the **** is a bon mot? can it play WR?
 
Steeltime is this amount all inclusive? Are compensatory damages and punitive damages separate in any ruling? The judge can award separate punitive amounts exclusively, correct?

Sent from my iPad using Steeler Nation mobile app

Juries award damages, both punitive and compensatory, unless the parties waive jury,* but the $75,000 limit is for compensatory damages only. Any sexual assault case will reach that amount, since emotional distress damages from a sexual assault, in and of themselves, will reach that level.

Punitive damages cannot be included in the jurisdictional calculation, since those damages have a much higher standard of proof ("clear and convincing evidence"), and are dependent as to the amount awarded on the actual damages based on the Supreme's ruling in State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Campbell,123 S.Ct. 1513 (2003).

* In fact, under California law, the same jury that awarded damages MUST be the one to award punitives. If the jury is discharged before doing so - too bad, no punitives.
 
the **** is a bon mot?

bon mot noun
\ bōⁿ-ˈmō
\
plural bons mots\ bōⁿ-​ˈmō(z)
\ or bon mots\ bōⁿ-​ˈmō(z)
\
Definition of bon mot

: a clever remark : witticism

Use: "Pretty much anything Steeltime says or writes constitutes a bon mot."
 
bon mot noun
\ bōⁿ-ˈmō
\
plural bons mots\ bōⁿ-​ˈmō(z)
\ or bon mots\ bōⁿ-​ˈmō(z)
\
Definition of bon mot

: a clever remark : witticism

Use: "Pretty much anything Steeltime says or writes constitutes a bon mot."

So that is a no on playing WR then?
 
bon mot noun
\ bōⁿ-ˈmō
\
plural bons mots\ bōⁿ-​ˈmō(z)
\ or bon mots\ bōⁿ-​ˈmō(z)
\
Definition of bon mot

: a clever remark : witticism

Use: "Pretty much anything Steeltime says or writes constitutes a bon mot."

no wonder supe didn't know what it meant.
 
As always, Hines with the Oscar Wilde-level bon mot that puts the whole discussion in context.

Why you posting on the message board when you could be out chasing ambulances? Must be a slow day in the court room for you. You should head down to the public defender's office to pick up some cases.
 
Why you posting on the message board when you could be out chasing ambulances? Must be a slow day in the court room for you. You should head down to the public defender's office to pick up some cases.

there's gotta be a few DUI cases he can handle pro boner in traffic court.

yes, pro boner.
 
Literal translation is "good word".

bon mot noun
\ bōⁿ-ˈmō
\
plural bons mots\ bōⁿ-​ˈmō(z)
\ or bon mots\ bōⁿ-​ˈmō(z)
\
Definition of bon mot

: a clever remark : witticism

Use: "Hey yinz jaggoffs What's the bon mot n'at?"
 
Top