Hey ESPN.....

[bsfins]

Law firms are often more zealous in an investigation than the police.  After all if they win they get a cut, if they lose it costs them money.  Cops don't have any motivation other than personal satisfaction of a job done well.  They get paid either way.

The whole reason, I have a job.... modified to add, Police investigate to make arrests,prosecutors investigate to get convictions..Sounds simple huh? 

My initial reaction is sounds like gold diggers,and being there isn't anything criminal,it really makes me feel that way...

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Here is the reason it took so long to file........


Apparently to serve a defendant in NV the defendant has to be in the state.  (I thought all states had a process to serve out of state defendants, certainly most do.)

If she served the other defendants first, Big Ben may have choose never to visit NV to avoid the lawsuit.  So they had to wait until he came for his annual golf (and fuck) visit.

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/article/2009-07-22/final-answer-roethlisberger-case-could-be-months-away

[CF DolFan]

it can't be covered because it's a CIVIL suit.  if he were actually charged with something, then it will be reported.

Didn't they cover it when Bill Bellichick's mistress' husband was suing him? That's a civil case.

[Philly Fin Fan]

Didn't they cover it when Bill Bellichick's mistress' husband was suing him? That's a civil case.

They also covered the Roberto Alomar civil suit.

[bsmooth]

Law firms are often more zealous in an investigation than the police.  After all if they win they get a cut, if they lose it costs them money.  Cops don't have any motivation other than personal satisifacation of a job done well.  They get paid either way.  In a case of investigating if a hotel prevented an employee from reporting a crime, they will take a police report and that is it.  They are not going to attempt to get a witness on tape admitting to this etc. 

Are you kidding me? A major casino is not going to risk the bad publicity and possible run in with the gaming commision by covering up a rape. They have nothing to gain by the cover up and a lot to lose.
Because she refused to go to the hospital, there is no proof that they even had sex. It is her word against his. His lawyers are going to dig into her life to destroy her credibility and it will ruin her. So will the hotel, and I guarantee that they will have much higher power law firms than she will.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Are you kidding me? A major casino is not going to risk the bad publicity and possible run in with the gaming commision by covering up a rape. They have nothing to gain by the cover up and a lot to lose.
Because she refused to go to the hospital, there is no proof that they even had sex. It is her word against his. His lawyers are going to dig into her life to destroy her credibility and it will ruin her. So will the hotel, and I guarantee that they will have much higher power law firms than she will.

He admits they had sex.  Denies it was non-consenual.  So she doesn't need to prove sex. 

[fyo]

He admits they had sex.  Denies it was non-consenual.

I've searched long and hard for any reports of this, but every single instance lead back to a tmz.com claim that someone claims that Roethlisberger claims it was purely consensual. By my count, that's third hand information and deep into hearsay territory.

[Defense54]

He admits they had sex.  Denies it was non-consenual.  So she doesn't need to prove sex. 

Right there they need to cuff him up for beastiality.  When your a Superbowl winning QB you need to have standards.

These Chicks are getting ruthless though. Lately they are either shooting you in the head or stabbing you in the back..............

[bsmooth]

He admits they had sex.  Denies it was non-consenual.  So she doesn't need to prove sex. 

Even if he did admit they had sex, the burden shifts from him to her to prove she was raped. What physical evidence is there? This is going to be a he said/she said case just like Kobe's. Now the lawyers on both sides will have to destroy the other sides credibility. Roll the dice.

[SportsChick]

but this is a civil case, not as difficult to prove (case and point see: OJ Simpson)

[YoFuggedaboutit]

but this is a civil case, not as difficult to prove (case and point see: OJ Simpson)

They say cases are won and lost with jury selection..... that couldn't have been more true in OJ's criminal trial vs his civil trial

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Having just watched his press conference I am full confident he is guilty.

He called the allegations false and reckless. 

What he did not do was either state that it was consenual sex nor state that they did not have sex at all.  His failure to state either of those leads me to believe his attys want to leave their options open. 

[Phishfan]

If I was him he has already said more than I would. Why even give a response at all? Just go to court.

[Defense54]

Having just watched his press conference I am full confident he is guilty.

He called the allegations false and reckless. 

What he did not do was either state that it was consenual sex nor state that they did not have sex at all.  His failure to state either of those leads me to believe his attys want to leave their options open. 

Sounds like you kmow The Steelers are the Team to beat and you are just wishing more distractions on him. 

[SCFinfan]

I've searched long and hard for any reports of this, but every single instance lead back to a tmz.com claim that someone claims that Roethlisberger claims it was purely consensual. By my count, that's third hand information and deep into hearsay territory.

What you're describing is not hearsay by federal standards. If a witness recounts a party's statement (or even the statement of a party's agent), it's an admission, and not subject to the hearsay exclusion.

Look @ (D)(2): http://expertpages.com/federal/a8.htm

-------

I wish Ben hadn't responded in the way he did. He's gotta feel emotionally twisted on the inside over this matter - not something you need right before training camp - so I can understand why he did it. However, were I his lawyer, I would've recommended a much calmer, cooler statement and pace. Something  more like, "These charges are false, and that will be born out in court (or "in due time") by relevant testimony and other forms of evidence. As for me, I will (or "must") continue to focus on my on-the-field duties, and guarantee that this incident will not affect my performance in any way. Thank you."

In essence, I realize Ben called the charges false by calling them reckless. But most people don't know the legal meaning of that term, and so its meaning was probably lost on most.

I do think Hoodie's point is interesting. Are his lawyers leaving open the possibility of admitting some sort of non-consensual sexual contact between the two? He didn't come right out and say they were false, right? I think I'd try to roll the dice and bet on his celebrity and appeal winning over the jury, were the evidence 50-50. Then again, such decisions are up to Ben and Ben alone. Man. I hope these charges aren't true.