Quote:
Originally Posted by Delgar
Yeah, and I think Vlad is correct.
These kind of things don't make me proud of the legal system we work with but what Ferland has done is legally likely a good strategy. I say this because I believe (based only on admittedly second or third hand reports) that Ferland was a drunken lout that night and is lucky he wasn't convicted. Now he's doubling down in the civil matter (remember OJ-- not guilty criminally, liable civilly-- the criminal verdict does not let you avoid civil responsibility).
Counter-suing civilly as strong as he is is likely to reduce any settlement agreed upon, unless the claimant (and his lawyer) are ready to go the distance. Probably not a profitable/reasonable venture given the claimant was also by all reports a drunken lout.
Either way, I don't respect Ferland.
|
Please explain your reasoning, other than you hate Ferland for some unknown reason. As the trial proved he did nothing wrong, he got punched in the face and defended himself. Ferland has done nothing outside of the proper legal system and you don't respect him, wow!