Rocky Landing

God, I hate watching that. That’s the Patriot* way, right there.

I just can't imagine all the dirty laundry that could get aired in a civil trial like this. Even the things that ultimately wouldn't be admissible in court would wind up in the news. Just look at all the allegations already made from dog beatings to child abuse! I just can't see him wanting to sign up for that kind of public ugliness! Option (2) sure seems like the most likely, as hard a pill as that may be for him to swallow. I wouldn't think so. I would also assume that any settlement would also include an NDA. The NFL doesn't have a tacit immunity to NDAs.

You're an ee-di-oh!

KB kinda looked like he was watching Zay's ball instead of his own...

You mean, Josh al-LEN?

Interesting point. I wonder how many resources law enforcement is putting into this thing? IF she actually believes that Shady was responsible, she would want the police case solved, as that would make her claim of damages a slam dunk. So, it benefits her to wait. IF she doesn't believe he is responsible, she wants the case to go unsolved, so that the perp's identities don't derail her civil case. So, she files sooner rather than later. All things being equal, I would assume her legal team would choose sooner over later.

I'm going to guess that they probably won't be Bills fans.

If I were him, I'd choose the former.

How many times do you think Judge Judy has decided civil cases on her show based on testimony? Right. We are in agreement.

That's pretty much exactly what I'm saying. Unfortunately, the standard for burden of proof in a civil case is whether or not the jury believes her story. That's it. If they find her just slightly more believable than him, even on testimony alone, that is enough to satisfy the standard of proof in a civil trial.

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.