Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pacquiao Lawsuit: "It was Floyd's camp who told Tim Smith about the FAKE emails"

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by PAKYO View Post
    LMAO!
    You are indeed ******!
    A bit of knowledge is a very dangerous thing, please don't hold on that belief of yours and if you have indeed studied law, then what a waste of money it is.



    Looks like this is where he is getting his education on lawsuits.


    Oh dear, *****s...oxygen robbers.
    Glad someone like you feels that way~

    Comment


      Originally posted by empiricix View Post
      Actually, that's not true. If you argue too many issues rather than choosing only those that are relevant and winnable, it becomes harder to focus the attention of the jury to the point you are trying to make. Worse, you also give the opposing counsel the opportunity to pick apart the weaker issues and give the jury the impression that they are dismantling your arguments.

      A good lawyer knows that the jury cannot digest every single argument. Thus, he will focus on making a few strong arguments and keep hammering at them to create the impression that his case is strong.

      Just review the OJ case and you will see that the strategy of the defense was to nitpick just one or two of the prosecution's arguments, like the small size of the gloves. In the end, that's all that the jury focused on and all the rest of the prosecution's arguments, testimonies and evidence were disregarded.
      actually what u said is not true at all. if ur a prosecutor, u try to throw the kitchen sink at your opponent. yes sure u confuse the jury, but the more stuff u have to back up your point, the better. the oj case is a bad example, there was sooooo much wrong with the prosecutions case that it was totally forseeable that oj wouldnt be convicted. had nothing to do with the few points the prosecution may have dropped the ball on.

      but like i said, a prosecutor has argue all of his points, if he doesnt, hes precluded from arguing them later....which would probably lead to, u guessed it, a malpractice suit.

      Comment


        12 pages. to summarize the debate, *****s believe pac should put up evidence before they believe. but when this all started, they believed tim smith right away about the email, even when there was no evidence back then or now. LOL.

        Comment

        Working...
        X
        TOP