Rocky Landing

Are you suggesting that the judge would instruct a jury not to believe her sworn testimony???

Again, her testimony, and that of her cousin is, by definition, evidence. Perhaps you would require a recording, or some other hard evidence. There is nothing that requires the jury to require such. They could find for the plaintiff based solely on her testimony, and circumstantial evidence. It happens all the time.

I'd bet if this goes to trial that all of it will be admissible in a civil court. I believe there is a pretty wide allowance of testimony regarding character in a civil case. If you think back to the OJ civil case, remember how much character testimony was allowed that was not allowed in the criminal trial?

I'll guess her own attorneys make a pretty good living, as well.

I'm not even sure what you mean by "won't fly." She has her testimony, a corroborating witness, and some pretty gruesome photos of her beat up face. The jewelry taken was some that was in dispute between her, and Shady. I'm only trying to look at this realistically. A civil court of law is not going to dismiss this off hand as the Bills fans on this site would like to do. This is a serious case. It's not going away, unless Shady is able to settle, IMO.

From wikipedia: "In the law, testimony is a form of evidence that is obtained from a witness who makes a solemn statement or declaration of fact. Testimony may be oral or written, and it is usually made by oath or affirmation under penalty of perjury."

Of course it is.

Well, her testimony would certainly be admissible.

We're just into semantics here, at this point. But, I wouldn't say that if something is 51% likely to be true that it has been "proven." Would you?

I think that there is probably enough here (all hearsay, and circumstantial, of course) for a good legal team to put together a decent case. I suppose it would hinge on the testimony of the witnesses. She wasn't home alone, right? If Shady is smart, he'll settle out of court, if he can.

A preponderance of evidence equates to "more likely than not." If the jury believes that she is 51% likely to be telling the truth, that is a preponderance of evidence.

I think you may be misreading my post. The allegations do not have to be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt," as they would in a criminal case. She just has to have a more convincing story than him.

It's a civil suit. It doesn't have to be proven. Honestly, I think there is a large amount of denial on this thread. The only way this could be "all about the money," as seems to be the mantra here, is if she had set up the assault herself. That's a stretch. Sure, she's looking for a pay day. But, that's clearly not all that's at play here. This could very well be extremely damaging to Shady, regardless of his guilt, or innocence. I'm sure everyone knows this, but a civil lawsuit is based on a preponderance of evidence. The allegations do not have to be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt," as they would in a criminal case. She just has to have a more convincing story than him.

I have to believe that if this goes to trial, and she is able to convince a jury that he is, in any way responsible, or that there was credible evidence of domestic violence, that the league will take that very seriously. These things have a way of snowballing.

I don't believe it will. A civil lawsuit is based on a preponderance of evidence, and is not based on the amount of evidence, per se, but which side is more convincing. And, because this is not a criminal trial, in which a case must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, the standard for allowing the case to go forward is much easier. I would not be at all surprised if he settled this out of court. With the apparent lack of hard evidence, all it takes is his checkbook to make this go away. If he doesn't settle, this could become a long, and protracted battle, which could certainly become damaging to his career, regardless of how innocent he may, or may not be. JMO.

Yes, it does. Thank you.

Maybe I'm missing something. How does bringing up Mahomes "shatter" Kirby's statement?

Are you suggesting that the Chiefs signed UDFA Chase Litton to be their franchise QB? Or, are they handing the reigns to Chad Henne?

Correct me if I'm wrong: Ivory had one carry, and was targeted twice. I think they know exactly who they have in Ivory, and didn't expect much out of him, and didn't want him injured. He's a vet, and has little to prove. JMI.

Can you explain this to me?

He does. He really is a good compliment to Shady, IMO, and Murphy adds another dimension. I feel a little bit better about our offense in general after yesterday.

Great. Make us do math...

Like I said, he got a hand on it, but that's not "on the money." Be that as it may, Peterman did have a good game last yesterday, one errant throw notwithstanding. I do still maintain that while all three QBs had good games, took advantage of their situations, and played to their strengths, I think they also, all three, showed their weaknesses, as well. Although, probably Peterman least of the three.

IDK, it was a 10 yard throw with Ivory cutting across field at full speed, and the pass was behind him. The announcer called it as "through Ivory's hands," but it wasn't. He just got a hand on it. It might have been catchable, but a poorly thrown ball. Would love to see a slo-mo on it.

Croom, and Lee both looked great tonight, I thought. That's going to be a tough choice, and I wonder if they may have pushed Thomas towards the bubble? It's going to be a tough choice for TE #3.