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

[brick wall]

Keep on searching~

Glad you feel that way though, someone like you thinking that of me is a compliment

excuse me? i'm not at all thingking about you :*******:
this conversation started only because you quoted me first...otherwise i woul've just ignored all your posts. if anything, it's you who is thinking of me so this will be the last time i'll respond to you before you come back with another one of your gay innuendos.:gay:

[Malicious]

It is less but they still have to prove to a pretty high standard to actually win.

The defense is always all about doubt, there is no proving just casting doubt on the other sides case and there are any number of ways to do it without proving anything.

Wrong. In most defamation cases the burden of proof is on the plaintiff and it is a preponderance of the evidence which is a greater than 50% chance the defendant defamed the plaintiff. However, if a particular jurisdiction recognizes per se defamation the burden is on the defendant to prove the allegations (Manny used PEDs in this case) are true. Either way the burden of proof for the plaintiff is low relative to other tort cases and extremely low relative to criminal cases.

[The Gambler1981]

Wrong. In most defamation cases the burden of proof is on the plaintiff and it is a preponderance of the evidence which is a greater than 50% chance the defendant defamed the plaintiff. However, if a particular jurisdiction recognizes per se defamation the burden is on the defendant to prove the allegations (Manny used PEDs in this case) are true. Either way the burden of proof for the plaintiff is low relative to other tort cases and extremely low relative to criminal cases.

Preponderance of evidence is like 75-80% sure which is low compared to like 100%. Most likely is not close to 50%~

Don't use words or definitions you don't know how to use.

[The Gambler1981]

excuse me? i'm not at all thingking about you :*******:
this conversation started only because you quoted me first...otherwise i woul've just ignored all your posts. if anything, it's you who is thinking of me so this will be the last time i'll respond to you before you come back with another one of your gay innuendos.:gay:

Swing and a miss~

You made an ignorant statement I responded, now you have gone on a wild tangent. Look in the mirror if you want to assess blame.


Keep searching

[Danny Gunz]

Yeah am sure the court would ask them for their evidence and how they knew who pass the information on to the journalist.

You missed the point of his post.

You are asking for evidence now that it is brought up in court that Floyd's team sent the email. Yet before when it was announced Pac's team sent the email you didn't ask for evidence.

[Ray*]

Wrong. In most defamation cases the burden of proof is on the plaintiff and it is a preponderance of the evidence which is a greater than 50% chance the defendant defamed the plaintiff. However, if a particular jurisdiction recognizes per se defamation the burden is on the defendant to prove the allegations (Manny used PEDs in this case) are true. Either way the burden of proof for the plaintiff is low relative to other tort cases and extremely low relative to criminal cases.

Lmao.......Wow

[The Gambler1981]

Lmao.......Wow

I know right people say shit about me not knowing what I am talking about but crickets to that post.

[Dale Cardon]

They have to say it was floyds camp so they could win the suit(which is smArt on their pArt).

But please cont. With the ...

LOL... this poster does not know a damn thing about litigation.

[jtiger777]

ITS FUNNY HOW A PERSON CAN CALL SOMEONE A DUCKER, GAY, FRAUD, CRACKHEAD, ****, MONKEY, ******, SCARY, SAY THAT HE SLEEPS WITH OTHER MEN, MAKE ALL KINDS OF CRAZY PICTURES ABOUT HIM, AND ALL KINDS OF OTHER THINGS BUT SUPPORT SOMEONE WHO SUES FOR DEFAMATION???

[Dale Cardon]

Preponderance of evidence is like 75-80% sure which is low compared to like 100%. Most likely is not close to 50%~

Don't use words or definitions you don't know how to use.

Wikipedia says:

Preponderance of the evidence
Preponderance of the evidence, also known as balance of probabilities is the standard required in most civil cases. This also is the standard of proof also used in Grand Jury indictment proceedings, (which however unlike civil proceedings, are procedurally unrebuttable), and in family court determinations. The standard is met if the proposition is more likely to be true than not true. Effectively, the standard is satisfied if there is greater than 50 percent chance that the proposition is true. Lord Denning, in Miller v. Minister of Pensions,[3] described it simply as "more probable than not." Until 1970, this was also the standard used in juvenile court in the United States.
This is also the standard of proof used when determining eligibility of unemployment benefits for a former employee accused of losing their job through alleged misconduct. In most US states, the employer must prove this case based on preponderance of the evidence.