Could Pacquiao's Recent Choices Sink His Own Lawsuit Before It Gets Off The Ground?

[Don Mac]

Mayweathers dont have to prove a damn thing. They have su****ions. Floyd Senior and FMjr have never claimed for a fact that Pac was on steroids.

wrong....

They need to outline their defense very quickly to show they have evidence to back up their statements... how many days have they got left from the date on crt papers? love to know who is actually gonna pay for their legal team without a decent future fight taking place... Floyd is in a tight spot me feels

[shadeyfizzle]

That proves the first query, but does it also prove malice? You said you need both right? I guess I would need to know what qualifies as malice under the law. How can it be explained that Roger's motive was purely to harm Manny's reputation and not something as to say.. "I just wanted to get to the bottom of this (PED issue)."

It's a civil case so arguments from either side do not have to be definitive. Just which proposed case is more likely.

Given that Roger's statement fulfills the 1st query....the obvious question for team Pacquiao to ask would be....if he knew for a fact that his statement was false....what other motivation would roger have to repeat the same statement publicly???

[Haglerwins]

Then their defense is weak and that's a sure loss if they do that. First, Pacquiao has test records to prove he's NEGATIVE of drugs.

Second, GBP can not force Pacquiao to take the damn test as he is covered with the Right Against Self Incrimination. Yes, you can speculate all you want but that doesn't prove a thing in court.

Integrity of NSAC's testing then goes on trial here. The argument would be posed how easy it is to overcome it.

I agree Pac doesn't have to take any test outside of what the Commission authorizes... but then there are the strange phobia statements regarding blood drawing, and then the refusal to be drawn from inside a 30 day window when he's had blood drawn inside that time frame and KO'd his opponent in 2.

I don't think the defense might actually have to prove anything here, just cast enough doubt on the plaintiff to avoid judgment against them.

[Haglerwins]

It's a civil case so arguments from either side do not have to be definitive. Just which proposed case is more likely.

Given that Roger's statement fulfills the 1st query....the obvious question for team Pacquiao to ask would be....if he knew for a fact that his statement was false....what other motivation would roger have to repeat the same statement publicly???

Interesting. I think it'll be tough to get him on 2, but fair point.

[Don Mac]

His freaking strength coach is on trial right now for dealing steroids to athletes. If he doesnt want to get dragged into that mess he better withdraw the suit.

link or STFU

Just to say that Arums legal team may be requesting IP addresses from boxing forums- this was posted in philiboxing

[M.I.C.]

By outlining the testing conditions and when he will and wont test, Pac has pretty much illustrated his preferred cheating method and current roid cycling program.

[SCUD.]

Integrity of NSAC's testing then goes on trial here. The argument would be posed how easy it is to overcome it.

I agree Pac doesn't have to take any test outside of what the Commission authorizes... but then there are the strange phobia statements regarding blood drawing, and then the refusal to be drawn from inside a 30 day window when he's had blood drawn inside that time frame and KO'd his opponent in 2.

I don't think the defense might actually have to prove anything here, just cast enough doubt on the plaintiff to avoid judgment against them.

Integrity of NSAC? Is that the same NSAC that tested Mayweather negative of any drugs? To challenge the results of NSAC tests on Pacquiao is to challenge the results of NSAC tests on Mayweather. Do you agree?


Can you look at the definition of DEFAMATION PER SE of the US Law first before you debate with me. You got all your third paragraph mixed up.

[SCUD.]

By outlining the testing conditions and when he will and wont test, Pac has pretty much illustrated his preferred cheating method and current roid cycling program.

Insinuations and product of imagination. Won't stand in the court of law.

[Reservation]

The fact is that Pac can prove he is clean (NSAC tests). Can the Mayweathers prove he is not to justify the lies they have been spreading? No.

And please don't try to argue that the NSAC tests are unreliable because that would be challenging 40 year's worth of tradition and would be questioning every boxer's integrity.

[Haglerwins]

Integrity of NSAC? Is that the same NSAC that tested Mayweather negative of any drugs? To challenge the results of NSAC tests on Pacquiao is to challenge the results of NSAC tests on Mayweather. Do you agree?


Can you look at the definition of DEFAMATION PER SE of the US Law first before you debate with me. You got all your third paragraph mixed up.

I agree, and the defense will bring forth that Mayweather was more than willing to subject himself to the OST that was written up.

3rd paragraph mixed up? You'll have to be clear here, I don't know what you're getting at.