Pacquiao Lawsuit: "It was Floyd's camp who told Tim Smith about the FAKE emails"

[-Kev-]

so are you for the betterment of the sport or just the pac-mayweather matchup?

Basically, no extra tests should be taken, what needs to be done is a whole new testing system, not extra tests. NSAC CA, NY, Texas, etc, should all have OST.

.........................................

[The Gambler1981]

Okay. I had no issues with you..still don't. Usually you remain calm in your discussion and don't resort to the insults.. until now.

Point is.. I keep having to repeat



Yet you keep bringing up the court of law.. which has nothing to do with the point I was trying to make. The poster I was referring to seemed to have understood the point.. you still seem to have trouble..

He said the same thing I did~


If you want to win a court case you need proof, you are comparing unlike situations which is why your statement was bullshit at best.

[Mega Eggot]

none of that is mayweathers fault, all pac had to do was accept the tests. lol

[-Kev-]

The 38 year old Mosley?

Just wanted to make sure because last I checked,

Floyd fought an aged Mosley. But its not surprising as the majority of Floyds opponents in the last 5 years have been against guys in their mid 30s. The only exception was, Ricky Hatton, but he was from a lower division.

Now, before you bring up your silly little video of Mosley talking about his tooth,

remember this,

Mosley worked for DLH.

DLH is the face of GBP.

The vice president never gets first dibs before the president does.

What would you have said if it was Pacquiao.


Johnny Chingas: "What, the former Flyweight who's been knocked out twice before?, Floyd should stop ducking Gamboa already"

[baCCaT]

.........................................

so you should question all the fights that doesnt have any olympic "style" testing. further, these questions should be raised to the sanctioning body. isnt it?

[davidoff]

They are getting paid money to do the job but it doesn't mean they can't lose the lawsuit.


^This is coming from a normal college student who isn't even studying criminal justice, i'm just using my head to come up with these simple answers, amazing isn't?

I never said Pac couldn't lose. Indeed, there's a good chance he might. I don't quite understand your point.

I have no reason to question the integrity of Pac's lawyers. Until someone provides some evidence to the contrary, I'm going to assume they are of integrity.

So, again, I would assume they would have advised on the likelihood of success. A loss will not look good at all, so I'm sure they haven't proceeded on the basis of clutching at straws. I can only assume they feel it is a case they have a good chance of success in, and accordingly Pac has agreed for them to proceed.

I appreciate lawyers get paid for their time. But I'm not going to question Pac's team without evidence. Similarly, when/if the Mayweather's file their defence, I'll assume they too have material which backs up what they're relying on, and they're not just paying bad lawyers to file any old nonsense.

[brick wall]

It is not making up stories, it is a point they are trying to make but it does not mean it is important or meaningful or that the lawyer thinks it will work out even if it only has a .01% chance of helping them maybe it will work out. If it doesn't turn out on to the next one.

That is how you win a lawsuit, the defense tries to shoot holes in each point.

lmao...read the opening post again or i'll just post it again for you.

Mayweather and his representatives falsely told the New York Daily News

isn't that a serious claim? do you really think that doesn't mean anything? unimportant? is that how law works for you?

[The Gambler1981]

lmao...read the opening post again or i'll just post it again for you.

Mayweather and his representatives falsely told the New York Daily News

isn't that a serious claim? do you really think that doesn't mean anything? unimportant? is that how law works for you?

That is their claim~ doesn't mean it is going to work out or is a big deal to the lawyers or their case overall.

Yea it is it is called due diligence, you don't waste shit that could possibly work out because there will never be a chance to bring it up again.

[Vasyl’s dad]

What would you have said if it was Pacquiao.


Johnny Chingas: "What, the former Flyweight who's been knocked out twice before?, Floyd should stop ducking Gamboa already"

I haven't supported this fight in any way.
The only thing I've said in regards to it, is, "*****s got what they wanted, they all screamed that Manny is ducking Shane".

But never have I said its a great fight, or even a decent one.


Now what?


Poof, be gone now.

[brick wall]

That is their claim~ doesn't mean it is going to work out or is a big deal to the lawyers or their case overall.

Yea it is it is called due diligence, you don't waste shit that could possibly work out because there will never be a chance to bring it up again.

so you're saying it's okay to claim something in court without the burden of proving it's truthfulness?