Manny will have to prove that he didn't use steroids in court.

Yes becasue Pac's team has to prove that the alligations are completely untrue. If Floyd's team proves there is reasonable proof that there comments can be taken in good faith then they win. I think most people think what PBF is doing is because of jealousy, spite, ill will, suspicion, etc etc. So PBF is not making these accusations and asking for tests from the goodness of his heart i would say. I think all the tests Pac has taken proves that the ellegations are completely untrue already. Pac wouldnt have to go through with PBFs random olympic tests to prove the allegations are untrue.

In 1964, the U.S. Supreme Court decided a case entitled New York Times v Sullivan, and applied the First Amendment to hold that where a public figure attempts to bring an action for defamation, the public figure must prove an additional element: That the statement was made with "actual malice". "Actual malice" means that the person making the statement knew the statement to be false, or issued the statement with reckless disregard as to its truth.

all Manny has to do is show the judge the NASC test results. The NASC will will probably have a representative to back up the evidence. Do you guys really think a state judge, will throw out an officials states drug test results based on a drug traffickers word? You guys are out of your ****in mind. The case will be held in a court of law, not the streets. Id like to see any of you retards try to plead your case in front of a judge in the defense of Floyd and use your normal logic of "his head is too big". Youd probably get thrown out I'm suprised the Flomos arn't calling Henry Armstrong a juicer at this point.

all Manny has to do is show the judge the NASC test results. The NASC will will probably have a representative to back up the evidence. Do you guys really think a state judge, will throw out an officials states drug test results based on a drug traffickers word? You guys are out of your ****in mind. The case will be held in a court of law, not the streets. Id like to see any of you retards try to plead your case in front of a judge in the defense of Floyd and use your normal logic of "his head is too big". Youd probably get thrown out

Just gave it to you! Please could you be logical about this now? Just stop being a fan and see how logic will set you free. dude I get it...I've been done with this thread. I see what you have posted. I was never big on this whole case thing in the first place, I will not benefit from it in anyway. You just caught my attention in your OP. I'm going to bed, its 4 in the morn

so if I'm assuming the courts will test Manny and if it comes back clean , then that means that he NEVER EVER used steroids or peds? what about when Mosley passed his test? that didn't mean that he NEVER EVER used steroids now did it...explain it a bit more for me. Then what Pac should do now to prove he is innocent genius? If he doesn't want to be tested you flomos will say he's hiding something. If the court tell Pac to undergo this blood testing and came out clean you flomos will say ''it doesn't mean he didn't used it before''. So what do you really want ha? Kill Pac and distribute all his blood and urine in every blood testing in universe to prove his innocence? What about if the court tell the mayweathers to produce evidence of their allegation? You think they can produce?

I never said that your source was false...what I am saying is that a more CREDIBLE source would indeed help. Just gave it to you! Please could you be logical about this now? Just stop being a fan and see how logic will set you free.

The action Manny took for his lawsuit was "Per Se Defamation". Here the burden of proof is on the defendants to prove wrong doing (MW/GBP) and not the plaintiff (Pac) like with normal defamation actions. I'm not a big fan of either fighter right now, just telling it like it is.

Again with the what if's! Just because someone can edit it doesn't automatically make the article false. Here is another article from citizen media law project that has no association with the Floyd pac fight that clearly states that opinions like "Floyd is a Jerk" are protected by the first ammendment because they are a pure opinions which cannot be proven or disproven. A comment like floyd Sr's "It's my opinion that Manny is using performance enhancing drugs" can be DISPROVEN! therefore it is not protected by the first ammendment and can be used as basis for a defimation claim. http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/opinion-and-fair-comment-privileges I never said that your source was false...what I am saying is that a more CREDIBLE source would indeed help.

No Im an actual lawyer! wiki..lol..okay we'll go with that... again they have to prove he meant harm/malice and didnt actually believe the accusations and KNEW THEM TO BE UNTRUE! Ok here is a random website that says the exact same thing! http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/opinion-and-fair-comment-privileges Floyd seniors opinion can be proven false therefore it is not protected by the first ammendment and can be used as a basis for a defimation case. So yes wiki is right and yes you can shut the fuk up now.

you know that my three year old son could get on wikipedia and edit the information on there? just something to think about with your source. Again with the what if's! Just because someone can edit it doesn't automatically make the article false. Here is another article from citizen media law project that has no association with the Floyd pac fight that clearly states that opinions like "Floyd is a Jerk" are protected by the first ammendment because they are a pure opinions which cannot be proven or disproven. A comment like floyd Sr's "It's my opinion that Manny is using performance enhancing drugs" can be DISPROVEN! therefore it is not protected by the first ammendment and can be used as basis for a defimation claim. http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/opinion-and-fair-comment-privileges

what's this with the NEVER EVER? is there a (super-olympic-type)test that can tell that a person NEVER EVER juiced? that said, even if they both took the SUPER-RANDOM-OLYMPIC-STYLE blood test and both passed, will NOT PROVE that they NEVER EVER juiced BEFORE. ask the TS..he started that, i only asked him a question...look at the OP

So you're a legal analyst now! Look out Greta Van Sustran!! No Im an actual lawyer! Wrong!! The supreme court has already ruled that the opinion privliege is not protected by the first ammendment. Read the link under other defenses-opinion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation wiki..lol..okay we'll go with that... again they have to prove he meant harm/malice and didnt actually believe the accusations and KNEW THEM TO BE UNTRUE!

so if I'm assuming the courts will test Manny and if it comes back clean , then that means that he NEVER EVER used steroids or peds? what about when Mosley passed his test? that didn't mean that he NEVER EVER used steroids now did it...explain it a bit more for me. what's this with the NEVER EVER? is there a (super-olympic-type)test that can tell that a person NEVER EVER juiced? that said, even if they both took the SUPER-RANDOM-OLYMPIC-STYLE blood test and both passed, will NOT PROVE that they NEVER EVER juiced BEFORE.

Wrong!! The supreme court has already ruled that the opinion privliege is not protected by the first ammendment. Read the link under other defenses-opinion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation you know that my three year old son could get on wikipedia and edit the information on there? just something to think about with your source.

Petrocelli is selling Pacquiao a dream..hes getting paid guranteed money..win or lose!...the OJ Simpson case was a open-shut case..and was not a defamation case..big difference. understand this lawyer took this case for a payday..thats all! So you're a legal analyst now! Look out Greta Van Sustran!!

:sucks: it must be found that the parties making the accusations..KNEW THEM TO BE UNTRUE and DID NOT BELIEVE THE ACCUSATIONS..and the intentions were to cause harm/malice. It is quite obvious that Mayweather SR. believed every word he said./..and he goes on record in the very first video saying "In My honest OPINION..I BELIVE MANNY IS ON SOME SORT OF SUPPLEMENTS" ..well good luck, chuck!! Wrong!! The supreme court has already ruled that the opinion privliege is not protected by the first ammendment. Read the link under other defenses-opinion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

Petrocelli, whose partner, David Marroso, represented their firm in the mediation, is best known for gaining a wrongful death civil conviction against O.J. Simpson in 1997. "I can say that Manny is going to move on to the next fight in the ring, and we're going to move on to our fight in court. We are going to press forward vigorously against each of the defendants for their defamatory statements against Mr. Pacquiao," said Petrocelli. "We are going to take all of their depositions under oath, and we will require them to admit that they have no evidence whatsoever to support any of any of their statements, and if they do have any evidence, they're going to be forced to disclose it," said Petrocelli. "Of course, we know that they don't have any evidence, so we're expecting that they will have to admit that they lack any evidence on which to base their statements." Petrocelli said that deposition process and case preparation could begin in a month, but that he doesn't expect the trial to begin until later this year, or, perhaps in early 2011. "The defendants have no evidence, and so, they're not going to be able to produce it. It's a fairly simple case," said Petrocelli. "Manny is a plaintiff in a lawsuit, and he's fully prepared to participate." http://boxing.fanhouse.com/2010/01/07/floyd-mayweather-manny-pacquiao-definitely-off/ Petrocelli is selling Pacquiao a dream..hes getting paid guranteed money..win or lose!...the OJ Simpson case was a open-shut case..and was not a defamation case..big difference. understand this lawyer took this case for a payday..thats all!

the fact that Manny has never tested positive is enough ground for Manny to CONTINUE to PROVE that he is clean. Also, add on to the fact that Roach said that Manny would pass the test BECAUSE HE IS CLEAN. With that being said, for them to lie and make excuses as to why not to do random blood tests is fishy to me and I'm being real. If Roach said that Manny would pass the test because he is clean, that means any test that he were to take would yield the same results and once again prove that he is clean...right? Also, why would a Roach/Pac tell Floyd to skate off, when it was Roach who said that Manny would pass the tests BECAUSE HE WAS CLEAN? That doesn't make much sense to me, even if you add the principle deal in there. The thing is any suspicions you might have don't mean a thing because you aproaching this as a fan and not as a logical person. I personally don't like pac or floyd, in fact if I had one wish it would be for both of them to get in the ring and a bolt of lightning hit them both. So unlike you I'm actually approaching this as a neutral party who really doesn't care either way. Thats why innuendo means nothing and hard cold facts mean everything. What does it matter that Manny doesn't want to take the tests when the type of blood tests Floyd wants are almost always administered during an athletes off time and not when they are actually training in order to be effective. See how actual facts crush innuendo and dunderheaded suspicion.

:sucks: it must be found that the parties making the accusations..KNEW THEM TO BE UNTRUE and DID NOT BELIEVE THE ACCUSATIONS..and the intentions were to cause harm/malice. It is quite obvious that Mayweather SR. believed every word he said./..and he goes on record in the very first video saying "In My honest OPINION..I BELIVE MANNY IS ON SOME SORT OF SUPPLEMENTS" ..well good luck, chuck!!