Can Margo sue Cotto for false allegations?

[arraamis]

to make it simple, no. . . margarito's reputation is already damaged because of a proven use of plaster. . . and, most importantly cotto has a reasonable basis. . . it's not something "he knows or should have known is untrue" the standard is what would "a reasonable person in the same or similar circumstances" believe? a reasonable person in cotto's circumstances, with the mosley fight, and the pictures, etc. would have reason to believe, and thus base his statements on.

pac, however, WILL WIN his case against mayweathers. . .

manny never failed a test
Margarito got caught with plaster in his wraps

so its not the same as mayweather accusing manny of roids

There's nothing to sue about tony is a proven user of plaster so its not defamation to say as much. If he was caught using it once its perfectly reasonable to suggest he used it before. Its different to pac floyd where pac is not a proven steroid user.

Pugly! -- Reading your previous posts concerning the LAW, I would expect you to know the differences better than most, even as a second-year.

Margarito, was accused of ATTEMPTING to load his gloves prior to the Mosley fight. There isn't a shred of concrete {excuse the pun} evidence that he loaded his gloves for any other fight ... not a shred of evidence!!!!!!

To state with certainty that "Tony is a proven user of Plaster" is completely absurd, to the point of being totally ridiculous.

The FACTS:

The loaded gloves were NEVER used against Mosley!!!!

No one suffered any damages as a result of the attempt to load gloves!!!!

No evidence of any kind, or in any form, have been presented to any Boxing commission, to link Margarito to using loaded gloves ever prior to the Mosley bout!!!!

I'm not defending Margarito, but he's only GUILTY of the ATTEMPT!!!!

NOTHING MORE!!!!

[ajohnz]

im in law school . . . two semesters ago i took an exam with an essay question based on defamation. . .

it slightly differs from state to state, where they implement different statutes. .

but there are three basic elements to proving a defamation claim: **1.) defamatory comment (one that causes harm, or injury to one's reputation) ***2.) made to a third party. ****3.) that the person knew OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN was false. . . to see how the court has interpreted these elements, and applied them to various facts - just go a google search. . .

** the plaintiff, in order to recover damages, must be able to show he has suffered harm to his reputation. . . the burden is on the plaintiff to prove this. . . the defendant can argue that the plaintiff already had a tarnished reputation, and thereby suffered no further injury from his comments/accusations.

*** an exmaple would be through the media.

**** to show that a person "should have known", the court uses the objective "reasonable person" standard, applied to a subjective interpretation of "in the same or similar circumstances". . .

how do you figure mayweather fits requirement 3? (if these are the real requirements). just because pacquiao never failed a drug test doesn't mean mayweather should know for certain he doesn't take PEDs. there are plenty examples of athletes in history who never failed a drug test yet were still on drugs. i'm not saying pac is on anything at all, just don't see how mayweather logically fits this requirement.

[Fistic]

These cases are expensive and with no guarantee of a positive outcome. Suing Cotto would hurt Margarito more IMO. Besides why sue that man that is helping you get paid Dec 3rd. Its not like Margarito has many options after Cotto.

[PRking718]

Pugly! -- Reading your previous posts concerning the LAW, I would expect you to know the differences better than most, even as a second-year.

Margarito, was accused of ATTEMPTING to load his gloves prior to the Mosley fight. There isn't a shred of concrete {excuse the pun} evidence that he loaded his gloves for any other fight ... not a shred of evidence!!!!!!

To state with certainty that "Tony is a proven user of Plaster" is completely absurd, to the point of being totally ridiculous.

The FACTS:

The loaded gloves were NEVER used against Mosley!!!!

No one suffered any damages as a result of the attempt to load gloves!!!!

No evidence of any kind, or in any form, have been presented to any Boxing commission, to link Margarito to using loaded gloves ever prior to the Mosley bout!!!!

I'm not defending Margarito, but he's only GUILTY of the ATTEMPT!!!!

NOTHING MORE!!!!

Yea there is no point, Margarito knows he cheated so he would not go for a defamation suit. Good point though, it's like arresting a guy with a gun as he enters a bank to rob it. The ATTEMPT was there. You're right, he isn't proven guilty of it, just of trying. I must say, with all that, common sense does point towards having used the plaster before and getting away with it. The Mosley fight was a smaller fight than the Cotto one, Cotto had already beaten Mosley to a unanimous decision, and no one starts cheating after their on top of the world, they usually cheat to get there. Tony was a heavy favorite in that fight with Mosley. **** is just too funny, especially since he doesn't have the same pressure power since Cotto. Only one way to find out.

[edgarg]

There's nothing to sue about tony is a proven user of plaster so its not defamation to say as much. If he was caught using it once its perfectly reasonable to suggest he used it before. Its different to pac floyd where pac is not a proven steroid user.

First of all the evidence is NOT that he used "Plaster", but that there was a single thickness of slightly stiffer gauze inside his new knuckle pads. This was in the Mosley fight where he had to lose a quick 50 lbs and was in the worst shape of his career. This of course is no excue and I'm not offering one, but it may have been the trainer's motive. Margarito himself was specifically declared NOT to know anything about it, was not involved, but as the "head of the team",, but got the minimum penalty. Some of the Commission did not think he should be penalised but, becuse of a technicality, he was..

The Cotto fight, in LAW has no connection to the Mosley fight, and there is absolutely no evidence of any kind that he used anything illegal. Therefore, in my opinion, if Cotto is committing slander and libel in that he is defaming Margarito, then there would be a strong case against him.

[~AK49~]

In todays age, you can sue for anything. Doesnt mean he would win tho, as he cant prove the allegations are not true. Its not illegal to speak the truth. Marg was caught with illegal wraps, and thats the fact of the matter.

[x3_bazooka_x3]

Cotto's been more vocal than ever recently. It seems like every time he's speaking publicly, he's accusing Margarito of Plastering him. He sounds almost as bad as Mayweather accusing Manny of being on roids.

Nevada did clear Tony of any wrong doing in that fight, But lets be real Latinos dont sue, we kick yo mo ****in ass

[PRPOWERPUNCHES]

Real men don't sue for **** like that. This fight is huge for Marg, means much to him than Cotto IMO because his career and his reputation is on the line.

He has everything to lose and everything to gain in this fight. It's do or
die time with Marg.

Real men, did you say "real men"? Margafrito isn't a real man!

Real men don't use Plaster to win fights, real men don't hide and create
alibi's after getting caught red handed. Real men are like Cotto, straight
up and serious about there craft and have work extremely hard to achieve everything they have. Fuk Margafrito and the only law sue he may have is against the NYSC for letting him fight and getting his right eye knocked into
the fukin 5th row!

[uoykcuf]

He was caught with plaster, his trainer was banned from boxing because of it. Margarito should have been too.

[edgarg]

to make it simple, no. . . margarito's reputation is already damaged because of a proven use of plaster. . . and, most importantly cotto has a reasonable basis. . . it's not something "he knows or should have known is untrue" the standard is what would "a reasonable person in the same or similar circumstances" believe? a reasonable person in cotto's circumstances, with the mosley fight, and the pictures, etc. would have reason to believe, and thus base his statements on.

pac, however, WILL WIN his case against mayweathers. . .

Hello Ug. Allow me to have a "reasonable doubt" against your opinion. If Margarito's reputation is as shot as you say, that couuld make damages all the more, because I can't see that in Law there would be any connection between Cotto 1 and the Mosley fight. Even in the Mosley fight Margarito was found by the Commission NOT to have known anything about the illegality, but was penalised beacuse"he was the head of the team" this was the official verdict. Some Commission members were against any penalty for Margarito but were induced to vote because of an obscure sub clause which had been used successfully in a previous case of a different kind, but sufficient to cause an enforcable legal precedent. So they compromised, by issuing the lightest penalty allowable by their rules. This is official.

Then the actual "plaster" turned out not to be plaster at all, but a single strip in the centre of a new pad. It was described by a Commissioner who examined it at the scene, as "slightly stiffer in places, as if it had been wet and dried". Richardson had also been there from the beginning contrary to all the rumours, and had passed the wrapping of the first hand. (There were also 4 commissioners in the dressing room) The lab result required sophisticated equipment to show that there were "elements" (think "traces") of 2 components which with a third-a complex Oxygen molecule-could make Plaster-of-Paris. This last was not present. They zoomed in on "plaster" because the Mosley side made wild statements from the beginning like "his WRAPS were covered in a thick plaster like substance", :a block" fell out...etc.etc. Considering that the wrap itself was made from new gauze and the hand was wrapped with 4 Commissioners and Richardson there, this is patently false.

The lab also announced that the 2 elements were very commonly found in many manufactured items, including most cosmetics, . Somewhere I saw that another lab(I think) thought that the traces found were hand cream, and considering that the item passed through at least a dozen or more hands before ending at the lab, this is not impossible.

All in all, I believe Margarito, and think that the trainer made the illegal pad (goodness knows why) to try to gain some ephemeral advantage over Cotto. As soon as the REAL lab report came out, Arum, not missing a step, brought a suit against the Commission to show that the pad, as found, could cause any human being any kind of damage. The suit was not defended not contested.

Interesting to know you are in the middle of Law School. You probably know that often, legally sound cases are lost, and legally unsound cases are won............