If Cotto sued Margo and Capetillo, we would know the truth

[Casual_Fan]

That was Cotto's mistake.

If you thought Margarito cheated, you should have sued both him and Capetillo. That would have made them both talk a lot, since they would have fought against each other so that the judge mandates one of them to fork most, if not all, the money. Sue the whole corner and let them sing their way out of a lawsuit.

I don't know if he might be able to do it now, but if you believe Margo cheated, look for the truth. That should be it. No need to talk on and on about it.

That's all that Cotto can do. NSAC is an administrative body, and it is highly unlikely they will condemn themselves if anything happened that night. Similar with the D.A. Government tends to protect government.

[Slyboots]

No. Just....no.

Explain how they would "talk more" if there was a lawsuit? You realize that if Marg and Capetillo admitted to using illegal wraps in that fight they would face criminal charges and possibly go to prison? And what the hell would Cotto sue them for anyways? In a situation like this, you press charges and then possibly sue them if they are convicted.

I don't think you've thought this through much.

[Casual_Fan]

No. Just....no.

Explain how they would "talk more" if there was a lawsuit? You realize that if Marg and Capetillo admitted to using illegal wraps in that fight they would face criminal charges and possibly go to prison? And what the hell would Cotto sue them for anyways? In a situation like this, you press charges and then possibly sue them if they are convicted.

I don't think you've thought this through much.

Yes I have. The standard of evidence for a criminal charge is different from the standards of tort law. I don't know about Nevada law, but it should be preponderance of evidence (tort) [which Cotto would probably have had, since the pads had calcium and sulphur, and oxygen was not found since the tool does not detect oxygen].

In criminal law, it's very different, it would be "beyond reasonable doubt", and Margo is assumed innocent. Cotto can prove enough for a tort lawsuit, yet not have enough evidence for a criminal case.

Also, the D.A. decides if a criminal case is warranted. Cotto does not have a say in that. It's completely out of his hands.

Cotto could sue them for using an object to cause bodily harm, when contract law stated that he could not use it.

Why would they talk? If Cotto could prove his case, the judge would have awarded him X amount of money.

The judge has the power to decide how much of said amount Margo has to cough up and how much Capetillo has to cough up. That in and of itself puts Margo and Capetillo against each other, since each one of them needs to prove the other was into the whole plaster thing, so that the judge might go harder against one of them, and easier against the other.

[RAV3N]

I dont think they ever had the gauze that marg used in the cotto fight.

There is no evidence so there is no case for marg to answer to.

[Casual_Fan]

I dont think they ever had the gauze that marg used in the cotto fight.

There is no evidence so there is no case for marg to answer to.

True. Cotto could just say that it was the same one. Let Margo and Capetillo say that it wasn't. Let's see who can state a better case to the judge.

Cotto would not even need to prove INTENT on part of Capetillo or Margo. Intent would be needed on a a criminal case, not in one regarding breach of contract.

[RAV3N]

lol, you need to prove that it was the gauze from fight night and capetillo would probably know that he threw the gauze from that fight away once it had finished.

marg and capetillo stick together, get the case thrown out then sue cotto for defamation.

cotto cant prove anything and would be just wasting his time and money.

all cotto can do is try and take marg out in the ring.... which I dont think he will.

[Casual_Fan]

This kind of lawsuit doesn't work as in:

"You've got no evidence dawg! Therefore, I'm innocent until proven guilty!"

It's more like

Judge:
"Bring me all your evidence. Both of you. I'll decide"

It's breach of contract, damages. Not a criminal case as the ones regularly shown in movies.

[RAV3N]

there is no evidence, that is the problem.

if cotto gets caught falsifying evidence, which is something he would have to do, he would get thrown in jail.

[Phil Ivey]

lol @ saying know the truth? Yeah Margarito and Capetillo saying two opposite things will bring the truth out.........

[Casual_Fan]

lol @ saying know the truth? Yeah Margarito and Capetillo saying two opposite things will bring the truth out.........

You get caught lying on a court there's contempt of court and perjury.
It's not an Ellie Seckbach interview in Oxnard.

Regarding evidence, so much **** has been said about this, that a good lawyer might be able to turn past talk into admisible evidence on a good deposition. And evidence for this kind of cases is not limited to "here's the murder weapon, it has been carefully guarded by the police" and such. It really is "bring me everything you got". Testimony, hard evidence, expert opinions, etc.

Cotto should have tried that approach, IMHO.