An uneducated question for you lawyer-type fellers.....
- Thread starter 1msucub
- Start date
It's rather simple. Racism. Only 19.83% of OM fans aren't racist.
Ole Miss - Rebels
Rebels - Colonel Reb
Colonel Reb - Confederate
Confederate - Civil War
Civil War and civil suit both contain the word civil.
Ole Miss - Rebels
Rebels - Colonel Reb
Colonel Reb - Confederate
Confederate - Civil War
Civil War and civil suit both contain the word civil.
How can the Nkimdechie brothers pay the two million dollars in jail. So my theory is let them finish school and make money in football that will go to the victim.
My logic takes me to 3 possibilities
In order of least to most likely:
1) Criminal charges weren't made possible.
2) The plaintiff is full of ****
3) Plaintiff realized the future income potential of young Nkemdiche and purposely didn't file charges. He's worth more to him on the NFL track than not. Getting him thrown in jail makes the NFL track less likely. Drag it out in the civil court and collect his signing bonus when he goes pro.
In order of least to most likely:
1) Criminal charges weren't made possible.
2) The plaintiff is full of ****
3) Plaintiff realized the future income potential of young Nkemdiche and purposely didn't file charges. He's worth more to him on the NFL track than not. Getting him thrown in jail makes the NFL track less likely. Drag it out in the civil court and collect his signing bonus when he goes pro.
The short legal answer is that the authorities chose not initiate a criminal action.<o
></o>
The short legal answer is that the authorities chose not initiate a criminal action.<o
Based on either a lack of evidence or a conspiracy to cover up and protect those involved, right? Any other real choice here?
I hate Ole Miss more than the next guy, but if you are the DA, you are going to think twice before Having them arrested and prosecuting a case gainst high profile athletes on what you pereive as flimsy evidence. Not excusing him for not doing it, but the Duke lacrosse deal cost the guy his political career. This DA'sperception of flimsy evidence may be influenced by his allegiances, though. Anyway, in civil you only have to cross the 50 to score. In criminal, you have to cross the goal line.
It's very weird. Either the plaintiff is full of **** or the police took a boys will be boys approach to a situation where somebody lost consciousness for 15 minutes and had to stay overnight in the hospital. It's hard to believe somebody would spend money on lawyers just to be proven a complete liar in court (or that the law firm wouldn't do enough due diligence to figure out they're full of **** before agreeing to a contingency fee) and it's h ard to believe university or oxford police would be that dumb. Charges ultimately not being filed after a full investigation would be one thing, but it sounds like the investigation was over the night it happened.
The Duke lacrosse guy improved his career by charging them, he lost his career when he withheld exculpatory evidence and knowingly tried to prosecute innocent people for political purposes.
Easy. To win a civil case, you have to cross the 50 yard line. To win a criminal case, you have to score a touchdown.
how does the opd or investigating party relay info that there is not enough evidence, yet a reputable law firm feel confident enough to pursue it? where did all this evidence come from and why was it missed the first time?
civil law has a much diminished burden of proof, but "no proof" is different than some proof..again, i already know its a burden of proof issue, but clearly no proof is different than what the firm is going to bring to the table. we know there were at least 2 other witnesses (per the story), plus 8 others including the victim, 2 named assailants, plus the 5 john does....how is that not enough? im curious as well.
civil law has a much diminished burden of proof, but "no proof" is different than some proof..again, i already know its a burden of proof issue, but clearly no proof is different than what the firm is going to bring to the table. we know there were at least 2 other witnesses (per the story), plus 8 others including the victim, 2 named assailants, plus the 5 john does....how is that not enough? im curious as well.
agree 100%, nobody is disputing that, but the difference is, a criminal act is an act against society or a member of society, and thus, is a crime punishable by the action itself. according to my understanding, there is no, "hey, (party involved), you just got robbed at gunpoint, assaulted, murdered, raped, do you want to press charges?" its an act against society and thus is punished without regard to the victim's wishes. if the victim was assaulted, essentially, it would have to be criminal UNLESS there was truly NO EVIDENCE. that would have to be the case 100%. the victim doesnt get asked, "hey, do you want this guy to go to jail or do you wanna get paid?"....which leads me to the next question, if the investigating party found, and i quote "no evidence", how come some lawyers in memphis were able to contradict that to the point where they feel they have enough evidence to take that ***** to trial?
In addition to the difference in the burden of proof, in a criminal investigation, a person can refuse to testify per the 5th amendment and their silence cannot be used against them. In a civil case such as this one, the plaintiff's lawyers can force the brothers to testify. One of two things will happen. Either they will testify and be cross examined, or they will claim the 5th amendment due to fear their testimony could be used against them in a criminal case. If they claim the 5th, in a civil case their silence can be used against them as an implied admission.
In this case, I would expect them to testify, along with a number of other party-goers. That is when this will get interesting. Everyone has different recollections of an event like this, but the scope of those differences will be telling.
In this case, I would expect them to testify, along with a number of other party-goers. That is when this will get interesting. Everyone has different recollections of an event like this, but the scope of those differences will be telling.
If you are asking if the fact that those implicated were om football players, affected the analysis from a charging standpoint. I assure you it did. If you are asking whether the charging analysis involved a vast far-reaching cover-up, I'd doubt it. The authorities have great level of discretion in this type of decision, and at the end of the day we have a fight at a frat house, with some arguably minor injuries. Now with that said, 8 out of 10 times an identified suspect would be arrested the night of the incident for questioning. That never happened in this case. UPD is saying they could not identify a suspect, so the police report would read "2+ large black males sought after possible assault and battery at the KA house". I ask you this, if it wasn't om football players would UPD handle it the same way?
the " fun" part of this if it actually has legs is the possibility to dig into finances if they lose and say they can't pay, love to see if the money trail can be uncovered
Here's a question that might never have been asked before in history:
If a booster settles with the plaintiff outside of court, is that impermissible benefits to an athlete? It's not the same as paying off a student-athlete's debt because there is no guarantee of liability, and if it never really goes to trial, ?
I guarantee you someone in Oxford is trying to figure out the answer tonight.
If a booster settles with the plaintiff outside of court, is that impermissible benefits to an athlete? It's not the same as paying off a student-athlete's debt because there is no guarantee of liability, and if it never really goes to trial, ?
I guarantee you someone in Oxford is trying to figure out the answer tonight.
Correct. I feel like we are on the same side here...
i believe that the point was less evidence needed in a civil case which oj lost as opposed to the criminal case which he was found not guilty...
Yes
I think it would be discharging the legal obligation of the defendant which should clearly be treated as an impermissible gratuitous benefit by a booster. But, this is the NCAA...
I think it would be discharging the legal obligation of the defendant which should clearly be treated as an impermissible gratuitous benefit by a booster. But, this is the NCAA...
Exactly.
I'm an ADA in Oklahoma. Another issue is judicial economy. For example, simple A&B carries 90 days in Oklahoma. If you have a shaky case, a defendant with unlimited resources, you have to evaluate whether dedicating tax payer dollars for a huge fight that at best gets you a small verdict is worth detracting from more heinous offenses.
I'm an ADA in Oklahoma. Another issue is judicial economy. For example, simple A&B carries 90 days in Oklahoma. If you have a shaky case, a defendant with unlimited resources, you have to evaluate whether dedicating tax payer dollars for a huge fight that at best gets you a small verdict is worth detracting from more heinous offenses.
In a case like this, there is not as much motivation to settle...
Because a jury award for a malicious assault or injury cannot be discharged in bankruptcy, whatever the plaintiff would be awarded in a case like would have a better chance for recovery. Between the father being a physician and the two brothers future earning potential in professional football, there is a pretty high chance of recovery of whatever the award might be. If the plaintiff honestly feels like they have a good chance at trial, then it would be better to win it as a judgment rather than settlement. This is because a jury would more then likely give a larger award than they could get in a settlement (sympathy factor/bias against celebrity), and the amount of a judgment for this action is protected in bankruptcy. However, if there is not much of a case, then this will probably get thrown out in a summary judgement stage. Either way, I see this ending quickly or going all the way.
Because a jury award for a malicious assault or injury cannot be discharged in bankruptcy, whatever the plaintiff would be awarded in a case like would have a better chance for recovery. Between the father being a physician and the two brothers future earning potential in professional football, there is a pretty high chance of recovery of whatever the award might be. If the plaintiff honestly feels like they have a good chance at trial, then it would be better to win it as a judgment rather than settlement. This is because a jury would more then likely give a larger award than they could get in a settlement (sympathy factor/bias against celebrity), and the amount of a judgment for this action is protected in bankruptcy. However, if there is not much of a case, then this will probably get thrown out in a summary judgement stage. Either way, I see this ending quickly or going all the way.