Do Roach and Pacquiao have a case against Floyd Senile?

[Dr. Ironfist]

Haha any of you lawyers here? Well, I am. And theres no case. People keep on bringing up that Manny is a public figure and thats why he should be entitled to something. The fact that he is a public figure actually creates a higher burden of proof for Manny is order to win a slander case. In order to win a case of slander a public figure must show that Floyd Sr.s statements were false and he had reason to believe they were false and that they were made with "Actual Malice." Public figures cannot be awarded damages unless they prove that the person accused of making the false statement did so with knowledge that the statement was false or with reckless disregard as to the truth or falsity of the statement.

First of all were his statements untrue? Can Manny Pacquiao prove he has not done what Floyd said. Also is it untrue that Floyd listed it as his opinion. That is the very first threshold he would have to make. Was Floyd's statement stating an opinion or a fact. If its an opinion he automatically loses. Then he has to state whether the statement was actually false...can Manny prove he has never been linked in any ways to steroids. Then he has to show that Floyd knew or had reason to believe that Manny was not using steroids.

Then finally he has to prove damages. Not hypothetical damages. Not my feelings are hurt. Not I would have gotten a big adidas contract. Actual damages. Can he prove actual damages? No

There is no case. Manny is a public figure and they never win. If they did there wouldnt be a national enquirer. There is no actual malice here and if Manny brought the case he'd have to open up a lot about his training and upon losing be liable for Floyd's legal fees.

[2501]

Haha any of you lawyers here? Well, I am. And theres no case. People keep on bringing up that Manny is a public figure and thats why he should be entitled to something. The fact that he is a public figure actually creates a higher burden of proof for Manny is order to win a slander case. In order to win a case of slander a public figure must show that Floyd Sr.s statements were false and he had reason to believe they were false and that they were made with "Actual Malice." Public figures cannot be awarded damages unless they prove that the person accused of making the false statement did so with knowledge that the statement was false or with reckless disregard as to the truth or falsity of the statement.

First of all were his statements untrue? Can Manny Pacquiao prove he has not done what Floyd said. Also is it untrue that Floyd listed it as his opinion. That is the very first threshold he would have to make. Was Floyd's statement stating an opinion or a fact. If its an opinion he automatically loses. Then he has to state whether the statement was actually false...can Manny prove he has never been linked in any ways to steroids. Then he has to show that Floyd knew or had reason to believe that Manny was not using steroids.

Then finally he has to prove damages. Not hypothetical damages. Not my feelings are hurt. Not I would have gotten a big adidas contract. Actual damages. Can he prove actual damages? No

There is no case. Manny is a public figure and they never win. If they did there wouldnt be a national enquirer. There is no actual malice here and if Manny brought the case he'd have to open up a lot about his training and upon losing be liable for Floyd's legal fees.

Great. What kind of law do you practice and can you post any examples from cases related to the matter, a reference of law from which you made you post from? Thanks!!

[Dr. Ironfist]

"The First ********* protects open and robust debate on public issues even when such debate includes vehement, caustic, unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials." New York Time v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964). Created the notion that the first ammendment protection extended to defamatory statements made about politicians and public figures. And before anyone tries to debate a public official is anyone who extends themselves out into the public. Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts. Its not even debated whether professional athletes are public officials. The debate often comes into play as to whether their wives or children are. Manny would have to prove that Floyd had "serious doubts as to the truth" of his statements. St. Amant v. Thompson, 390 U.S. 727 (1968). If someone has reason to believe a statement. No matter what the reason is they will win 99% of the time. When the price of beef fell dramatically after Oprah and her guests claimed mad cow would "make AIDS look like the common cold." They wound up prevailing against the meat industry because they were able to claim that at the time they had reason to believe such statements. Texas Beef Group v. Winfrey, 201 F.3d 680 (5th Cir, 2000). So there is absolutely no case here and the fact that there is no case here would actually open FR up to legal fees and damages by bringing it.

I practice labor law.

[Ray*]

Well if he's a crackhead like many people seem to be labelling him on boxingscene then Pacman not Roach doesnt have a leg to stand on in suing a renown crackhead..

If he's a world renowned great of all time like he claimed to be then his opinion counts and thus Manny can sue.

[sycomantz]

Haha any of you lawyers here? Well, I am. And theres no case. People keep on bringing up that Manny is a public figure and thats why he should be entitled to something. The fact that he is a public figure actually creates a higher burden of proof for Manny is order to win a slander case. In order to win a case of slander a public figure must show that Floyd Sr.s statements were false and he had reason to believe they were false and that they were made with "Actual Malice." Public figures cannot be awarded damages unless they prove that the person accused of making the false statement did so with knowledge that the statement was false or with reckless disregard as to the truth or falsity of the statement.

First of all were his statements untrue? Can Manny Pacquiao prove he has not done what Floyd said. Also is it untrue that Floyd listed it as his opinion. That is the very first threshold he would have to make. Was Floyd's statement stating an opinion or a fact. If its an opinion he automatically loses. Then he has to state whether the statement was actually false...can Manny prove he has never been linked in any ways to steroids. Then he has to show that Floyd knew or had reason to believe that Manny was not using steroids.

Then finally he has to prove damages. Not hypothetical damages. Not my feelings are hurt. Not I would have gotten a big adidas contract. Actual damages. Can he prove actual damages? No

There is no case. Manny is a public figure and they never win. If they did there wouldnt be a national enquirer. There is no actual malice here and if Manny brought the case he'd have to open up a lot about his training and upon losing be liable for Floyd's legal fees.

Great post...green K.

im glad you brought up the National enquirer, that was as plain as plain english can get.

Floyd Sr. - 1
Roach and Manny - 0

you should start a new thread using your post, therefore, all assumptions of roach having a "case" against Floyd Sr can be debunked

[Al Haymon]

Haha any of you lawyers here? Well, I am. And theres no case. People keep on bringing up that Manny is a public figure and thats why he should be entitled to something. The fact that he is a public figure actually creates a higher burden of proof for Manny is order to win a slander case. In order to win a case of slander a public figure must show that Floyd Sr.s statements were false and he had reason to believe they were false and that they were made with "Actual Malice." Public figures cannot be awarded damages unless they prove that the person accused of making the false statement did so with knowledge that the statement was false or with reckless disregard as to the truth or falsity of the statement.

First of all were his statements untrue? Can Manny Pacquiao prove he has not done what Floyd said. Also is it untrue that Floyd listed it as his opinion. That is the very first threshold he would have to make. Was Floyd's statement stating an opinion or a fact. If its an opinion he automatically loses. Then he has to state whether the statement was actually false...can Manny prove he has never been linked in any ways to steroids. Then he has to show that Floyd knew or had reason to believe that Manny was not using steroids.

Then finally he has to prove damages. Not hypothetical damages. Not my feelings are hurt. Not I would have gotten a big adidas contract. Actual damages. Can he prove actual damages? No

There is no case. Manny is a public figure and they never win. If they did there wouldnt be a national enquirer. There is no actual malice here and if Manny brought the case he'd have to open up a lot about his training and upon losing be liable for Floyd's legal fees.

Dr, Ironfist,

Here is the quote from FMS:

"In my honest opinion, I believe that Manny...."

[Al Haymon]

Great. What kind of law do you practice and can you post any examples from cases related to the matter, a reference of law from which you made you post from? Thanks!!

What have I been tellin' you all week?

[miron_lang]

Haha any of you lawyers here? Well, I am. And theres no case. People keep on bringing up that Manny is a public figure and thats why he should be entitled to something. The fact that he is a public figure actually creates a higher burden of proof for Manny is order to win a slander case. In order to win a case of slander a public figure must show that Floyd Sr.s statements were false and he had reason to believe they were false and that they were made with "Actual Malice." Public figures cannot be awarded damages unless they prove that the person accused of making the false statement did so with knowledge that the statement was false or with reckless disregard as to the truth or falsity of the statement.

First of all were his statements untrue? Can Manny Pacquiao prove he has not done what Floyd said. Also is it untrue that Floyd listed it as his opinion. That is the very first threshold he would have to make. Was Floyd's statement stating an opinion or a fact. If its an opinion he automatically loses. Then he has to state whether the statement was actually false...can Manny prove he has never been linked in any ways to steroids. Then he has to show that Floyd knew or had reason to believe that Manny was not using steroids.

Then finally he has to prove damages. Not hypothetical damages. Not my feelings are hurt. Not I would have gotten a big adidas contract. Actual damages. Can he prove actual damages? No

There is no case. Manny is a public figure and they never win. If they did there wouldnt be a national enquirer. There is no actual malice here and if Manny brought the case he'd have to open up a lot about his training and upon losing be liable for Floyd's legal fees.

WTF???!!!! Its impossible for someone to be guilty. all the accused have to do is lie whenever needed.

[2501]

What have I been tellin' you all week?

That you wont criticize any mayweather no matter how ridiculous their behavior/actions/words are, but will definitely try to belittle and discredit anyone who does?

[-MAKAVELLI-]

Great. What kind of law do you practice and can you post any examples from cases related to the matter, a reference of law from which you made you post from? Thanks!!

he's not really a lawyer, he just stayed at a Holiday Inn last night