Poor Andrew Kennedy....

[TR.sixpack]

His lawya was just on Finebaum's and said they were suing the cabby and the valet. I guess for defamation. Poor Andy Kennedy. His reputation is being ruined by a couple of twenty year olds

I guess we had better watch what we say on teh interwebs...

 

[TR.sixpack]

His lawya was just on Finebaum's and said they were suing the cabby and the valet. I guess for defamation. Poor Andy Kennedy. His reputation is being ruined by a couple of twenty year olds

I guess we had better watch what we say on teh interwebs...

 

[TR.sixpack]

His lawya was just on Finebaum's and said they were suing the cabby and the valet. I guess for defamation. Poor Andy Kennedy. His reputation is being ruined by a couple of twenty year olds

I guess we had better watch what we say on teh interwebs...

 

[RebelBruiser]

He has a valid case....if he really didn't do anything....which I believe is why they'd do this. He's a public figure and his name has been all over the news due to this incident. If he really wants to pretend he didn't do anything wrong, then I would think it's almost necessary to sue for defamation.

Hypothetically, if they are full of ****, then he should sue the **** out of them, and he'd have good reason. I don't think he's 100% innocent in this deal, but if he was, then he'd need to sue them for sure.

 

[slickdawg]

Having seen Acmed on TV, and he NEVER LOOKED UP ONCE, that's a clear indicator he's lying. I'd sue the **** out of them too. There is this little thing about being innocent until being proven guilty..............

 

[biguglyjoe]

It's also considered insulting to look someone in the eye in some cultures. Just throwing that out there. Besides the entertainment value of this episode, I really couldn't care less what happens.

 

[awalkerdog]

you have two guys that don't know each other just all of a sudden decide to make up this outrageous story on Andy just for the fame of being on TV. They did a hell of a job making dudes face swell, while they were making this **** up. I mean after all, he is Ole Miss by God and it can't be true. (insert) See Dickie Scuggs.

He is a lying piece of **** and is trying to save his job. Period.

</p>

 

[OrrDawg]

Just wondering.

 

[Ole Miss Grad]

Are you sure they don't know each other?

 

[HammerOfTheDogs]

 

[TR.sixpack]

nm

 

[OrrDawg]

.

 

[kired]

I think people are forgetting the fact that Kennedy was "physically guided to the door". Just the fact that a college basketball coach & director of operations were so drunk that the a cop had to kick them out of the bar. They were at a college bar at 1 in the morning (I assume while maybe the players were in their hotel rooms???) and were "uncooperative and argumentative" when police asked them to leave.

Regardless of what happened with the cab driver, both of these guys are a joke. No way this guy should be allowed to coach anything in the state of Mississippi. I normally could care less what happens at UM, but this even embarrasses me - a fan of their in-state rival.

 

[DesotoCountyDawg]

He did not do a very good job of trying to act innocent.

Same thing with Cabbie. Looks like some embellishment by both parties.

 

[karlchilders.sixpack]

You know you should not ask how many.

 

[thunderclap]

the judge decides to ignore the third-party eye witness and the man who was the victim of the alleged assault and his swollen eyes and the police officer who "escorted" the drunk coach out of the bar.

 

[OrrDawg]

.

 

[karlchilders.sixpack]

All of this situation sounds like minor ********, blow totally out of proportion.

He's likely will get fired over it.

 

[VirgilCain]

a lot of people (mainly spirit ole miss fans) are trying to focus on disputable miniscule details, and not seeing the big picture. Right now they will debate whether or not the earth is round. I'm sure genespagers would act similarly in the same scenario.... but damn, its ridiculous some of the "outs" people are coming up with for Kennedy.

 

[Ole Miss Grad]

I honestly don't know. There is a post on another board claiming this isn't the first time they have covered for each other.

I doubt it's true, but it makes sense that a valet and cab driver would know each other.

 

[VirgilCain]

the cabbie routinely drives unwilling occupants to the front of THAT particular restaurant where THAT valet works and causes a scene where cops are involves? and I'm guessing in hopes of some personal gain for himself (the cabbie) and the valet?

I know you said that you doubt it's true.... but is this the logic of the people that posted the things you are reiterating?

 

[Ole Miss Grad]

I read something like that, though I think it was more along the lines of picking up people.

The wild card in all this is the other cabbie. I have yet to see his comments. They could support or negate AK's version of the events.

 

[FlabLoser]

Having seen Acmed on TV, and he NEVER LOOKED UP ONCE, that's a clear indicator he's lying. I'd sue the **** out of them too. There is this little thing about being innocent until being proven guilty..............

It should also be pointed out that AK and the cabbie are looking at 2 different standards of proof for their cases. For the cabbie's charges to stick against AK, the cabbie's case has to be proved "beyond a reasonable doubt".

But for AK to win a defamation suit, the standard of proof that needs to be shown is much, much less. Don't know if there's a phrase for this. I'm just a poor MSU graduate.

 

[SkinsDawg]

Kennedy and Ole Miss will use their wealth and prestige to try and scare these guys out of going to court. You may hear words like 'deportation' thrown out there to try and get the cabbie to drop the charges. It's going to be all about bullying these guys.

 

[graddawg]

Having seen Acmed on TV, and he NEVER LOOKED UP ONCE, that's a clear indicator he's lying. I'd sue the **** out of them too. There is this little thing about being innocent until being proven guilty..............

It should also be pointed out that AK and the cabbie are looking at 2 different standards of proof for their cases. For the cabbie's charges to stick against AK, the cabbie's case has to be proved "beyond a reasonable doubt".

But for AK to win a defamation suit, the standard of proof that needs to be shown is much, much less. Don't know if there's a phrase for this. I'm just a poor MSU graduate.

Actually, no. The cabbie's suit against AK would be of the civil variety, so "beyond a reasonable doubt" wouldn't enter into the equation. That would be the State's burden of proof should they try ole Andrew for battery. As for defamation, the standard is higher for a public figure than just any old John Doe. \

 

[ARebel21]

that none of the coaches "were" thrown out of the bar. There was no hostility at all according to him.

But I do agree that they shouldn't have been out that late before a game night.. regardless of the situation.

 

[mstateglfr]

"thanks" for "that".

 

[RebelBruiser]

I'm just saying. I don't know that any of us were there, and therefore it is definitely possible that the story is fabricated. I'd say that it's unlikely that the whole thing is fabricated, but it's not impossible. And if it was actually a fabricated story, then he should be counter-suing the **** out of them.

That said, I think the whole counter-suing thing is likely just a legal move to try to get the charges dropped. Hypothetically, if you were the cab driver and you knew that you weren't lying, you'd be faced with the choice of either (a) dropping the charges or (b) taking your chance in court which could or could not go your way even if it should. Basically it puts the cab driver at more risk if he does decide to proceed with the charges, because even if he's telling the truth, the court could find otherwise and he could end up on the hook for some cash.

Edited to add: I do think the valet's story loses a little bit of credibility due to the fact that he never spoke to the police the night of the incident, and he didn't come out to the media until the day after the cab driver's story had been all in the media. It's definitely possible that the guy could just be looking for his 5 minutes of fame, so he fabricates a story that matches what he heard from the cab driver so he could get on TV. If you pay attention to his interview, he doesn't give many details. Everything he says is very vague, and he doesn't reveal anything that wasn't already public knowledge.

Just saying. That's why they take these things to court so that men who are smarter than me get a chance to figure out who is telling the truth by catching people in their lies.

 

[ShineOnYouCrazyBulldog]

As I understand it, the owner of the bar didn't throw them out. A police officer has since said they were asked to leave. Now they did so in a cooperating manner but I am pretty sure they were asked to leave the bar (this was not a rest. this place does not serve food on Wed night AKA "College Night").

I hate to see this happen, mainly because not a damn soul outside of the SouthEast gives a **** about a MS school, and calls everyone OM. But there is no spin here. Kennedy shouldn't have been out the night before the Louisville game. No excuses. Screw the punch or the racial slur (if they did actually happen). How do you hold your players to a curfew when you are out and about? If I was a player, I wouldn't give a **** about curfew rules after this. That's what I would be worried about. Well, that and the injuries. All joking aside, the injuries warrant a terrible season.

 

[HammerOfTheDogs]

Take the fight to them. good strategy on Kennedys' lawyers part.

 

[StateLover]

the burden of proof in the defamation suit would be by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning that AK would have to convince the jury that it is "more likely than not" that the Cabbie and the Valet were (1) lying and (2) (because AK would be considered a public figure) with malicious intent to injure AK. He cannot win that lawsuit--it was only filed for posturing and to bully the Valet from testifying.

 

[goindhoo]

From what I recall, Roger Clemens attempted the same strategy. I don't believe that is working out too well for him.

Do you really think the cabbie is worried about being on the hook for a lot of cash? I don't know his financial situation but I would have to guess the cabbie does not have all that much to satisfy a large judgment. Do you think AK will garnish the mans wages for the rest of his life? I seriously doubt the cabbie is terribly scared of a monetary judgment. Plus his lawyer probably informed him that the burden of proof in a defamation action against a public figure (not sure if AK would be) is very difficult to meet.

 

[DawgNsuds]

Edited to add: I do think the valet's story loses a little bit of credibility due to the fact that he never spoke to the police the night of the incident, and he didn't come out to the media until the day after the cab driver's story had been all in the media. It's definitely possible that the guy could just be looking for his 5 minutes of fame, so he fabricates a story that matches what he heard from the cab driver so he could get on TV. If you pay attention to his interview, he doesn't give many details. Everything he says is very vague, and he doesn't reveal anything that wasn't already public knowledge.

Kennedy would lose credibility as well since it's been established that he lied about what he was doing out. He stated that he was out having dinner. We have indisputable evidence that this establishment does not serve food.

On another note, can you Rebs quite citing the managers account that he was not thrown out of the restaurant? It is public record that a police officer asked him to leave. Another indisputable fact, it is irrelevant that the manager didn't "throw him out". He was asked to leave by a police officer, end of story!

 

[RebelBruiser]

Edited to add: I do think the valet's story loses a little bit of
credibility due to the fact that he never spoke to the police the night
of the incident,
and he didn't come out to the media until the day after the cab
driver's story had been all in the media. It's definitely possible that
the guy
could just be looking for his 5 minutes of fame, so he fabricates a
story that matches what he heard from the cab driver so he could get on
TV. If you pay
attention to his interview, he doesn't give many details. Everything he
says is very vague, and he doesn't reveal anything that wasn't already
public knowledge.

Kennedy would lose credibility as well since it's been established that he lied about what he was doing out. He stated that he was out having dinner. We have indisputable evidence that this establishment does not serve food.

On another note, can you Rebs quite citing the managers account that he was not thrown out of the restaurant? It is public record that a police officer asked him to leave. Another indisputable fact, it is irrelevant that the manager didn't "throw him out". He was asked to leave by a police officer, end of story!

Good job Gene's Page lawyer. Congrats! The prosecution rests.

And what you're wrong about is that there is no such thing as an indisputable fact. That's why they go to court and play the legal game.

Honestly, I don't think he's completely innocent. I'm just saying that the defamation suit is the right angle to take if he wants to try to get off the charges (whether he deserves to get off or not). Also, I'm curious how it has been established that Kennedy lied, especially since they aren't even in court. Using your reasoning, you could say the same thing about the cab driver. In other words, you're a dumbass.

 

[DawgNsuds]

<span style="font-style: italic;">Unfortunately we do not have a kitchen. We do provide an appetizer buffet for our Friday and Saturday happy hours. Please let me know if I can be of any more assistance.</span> <br style="font-style: italic;"> <br style="font-style: italic;"> <span style="font-style: italic;">Regards,</span> <br style="font-style: italic;"> <br style="font-style: italic;"> <span style="font-style: italic;">Alex Moller</span> <br style="font-style: italic;"> <span style="font-style: italic;">Lodge Bar Cincinnati</span> <br style="font-style: italic;"> <span style="font-style: italic;">General Manager</span> <br style="font-style: italic;"> <span style="font-style: italic;">www.lodgebarcincy.com</span>

<br style="font-style: italic;">
But I would call this indisputable evidence that they don't serve food. I would say that any court in the land would make the Manager a reputable witness to this fact. Once again, someone whose facts don't support their argument, turns to name calling rather than state facts. You lose all credibility here. <span style="font-style: italic;">
</span>

Also, I'm curious how it has been established that Kennedy lied, especially since they aren't even in court.

<span style="font-style: italic;">
</span>Secondly, When did it become necessary to be in court for a statement to be untrue? <span style="font-style: italic;">
</span>

 

[cajundawg]

Why was he asked to leave? If he is simply sitting there, unwinding, minding his own business, sipping his scotch and water - why would they ask him to leave?

"Thrown out" or "asked to leave" = not behaving....

 

[BeeeDeee]

Folks keep harping on them being "thrown out" of the bar. Here's a quote from the manager of the bar:

"The reports that they were kicked out were untrue," Moller told the newspaper. "They were here, but they left on good terms."

That doesn't say, "I didn't throw them out, but the cops did" or "I didn't throw them out, but the cops might have" or "I didn't throw them out, but I'm not sure how they left". It says that they left on good terms. Pretty unambiguous.

Edited to add link: http://msn.foxsports.com/...ch-sues-cab-driver,-valet

 

[KurtRambis4]

i heard the cabbie and the valet were best friends since 3rd grade and that in the 7th grade they made this scheme up. the scheme involved one of them becoming a cab driver in life and the other a valet. then, the cabbie would sit outside of the place where the valet worked picking up drunk people and screwing with them to make them upset. once they got upset, the cabbie would call the police, punch himself in the face, and make up a story about being yelled and and what not. then, the valet would come in as the "3rd party with no dog in the fight" and cooberate the cabbie's (who he didn't know...yeah right hahahahaha lolz lol lol) story. they have been doing this for years now but somehow this is only the first time they've ever gotten it to work. go figure. bad luck?

/ om grad

yeah...sounds plausible...

 

[tossedoff]

cooberate

 

[kired]

he was "intoxicated and ejected from Lodge Bar." Maybe Anderson was ejected & the rest just left with him??

But the manager's not stupid - he's probably afraid of being sued too, so he's not going to say anything negative about them outside of court.