Comments Thread For: Eddie Hearn and Matchroom Boxing File Defamation Lawsuit Against Jake Paul

[rrayvez]

jake paul says everyone had serrano willing or a draw, eh no they dont jake paul, but they do say joshua didnt beat usyk so u have 50% correct, that will do for the court case LMAO

Regardless, most agree that 97-93 for that fight was a sh** card. So he’s more than 50% correct.

[War Room]

Good luck on defamation. Lol these cases almost never win in favor of a public figure and or public business entity.

Hearn will lose and Jake knows it. Excellent publicity for Paul. You have to prove damages to get win. Look at the case of Elon Musk vs Vernon 'Pedo Guy' Unsworth, Vernon lost because he couldn't prove damages to his reputation.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50695593

To prove prima facie defamation, a plaintiff must show four things: 1) a false statement purporting to be fact; 2) publication or communication of that statement to a third person; 3) fault amounting to at least negligence; and 4) damages, or some harm caused to the reputation of the person or entity who is the subject ...

Case closed!

[VislorTurlough]

Comical and pathetic that on a day Joe Joyce rises, Eddie does his clown car procession. With his faded, dying stable of yesterday’s news relics

[DannyTevo]

Hearn is in the right. Paul has no proof,

[Get em up]

100 million? That seems a tad bit excessive LMAO you cant make **** like this up. A hundred people say the same thing and Eddie Sue's the guy that has money in his pocket.... imagine that.

[Kris Silver]

As a Brit, why is Hearn quite so triggered?

Does beg questions. Maybe nothing in it and Hearn doesn't seem that bad. But there's obs dodgy deals in boxing throughout.

If Jake can't call it out, open speech, can none of us?

[Fanofreason]

You have to prove fraudulent statements cost your money. Paul will countersue and it will all be thrown out

[alexjust]

Seems like a pretty cut and dry case by Hearn. HOWEVER, I am not sure this was a smart move. Many many many things are said in boxing and very often hearn himself makes outrageous statements. Boxing is the Wild West, full of “he said she said.” If this goes through I expect others to do the same and before he’s done I am positive someone’s going to do the same to him. Sometimes it’s best to just charge some things to the game.
on the defence note, I suspect Paul will either apologise or his attorney’s will argue a 1st ********* freedom of speech defence. Hearn’s attorneys will have to prove Paul intended to hurt the matchroom brand measured by actual tangibles. Will be interesting to see what happens. I’ve got Hearn on this one but we shall see

1st ********* wouldn't cut it here. Hearn will need to prove actual malice since he is a public figure. Which I anticipate he'll be able to do pretty easily. Paul will apologize and blame his outburst on his passion for boxing, bla-bla-bla. If anything, I'd love to see Feldman join the suit against Paul - it's his reputation that mostly got hurt here. Can't blame Eddie here, I was surprised to hear such blatant and unequivocal accusation not supported by any facts.

[alexjust]

You have to prove fraudulent statements cost your money. Paul will countersue and it will all be thrown out

What's his basis for countersuit?

[Apollo7]

As a Brit, why is Hearn quite so triggered?

Does beg questions. Maybe nothing in it and Hearn doesn't seem that bad. But there's obs dodgy deals in boxing throughout.

If Jake can't call it out, open speech, can none of us?

Bribing judges is a pretty serious thing. People should be allowed to defend themselves from false accusations right? If Matchroom hadn't responded like this, it would have made them look guilty of the things Paul is accusing them of imo.

It seems pretty obvious to me that if you're someone like Paul and you make these kinds of accusations, you're gonna get sued.