Lol, you know your done when your trying to argue semantics over “who started it”. The state took over the investigation and proceedings. It was literally the same exact lawsuit with the same complaints except for the holiday party girl. Nothing happened, no one cared, everyone got over it.
“If Criminal Charges are pending” is doing a lot of heavy lifting in your point.
That’s not what intervening means.
Dems true words, I’m going to make it a bumpersticker
That was what i was arguing against? That criminal charges were likely coming. They’re aren’t. If there were any, they’re gone now, with zero chance of them ever happening. No judge in the country would allow someone to be prosecuted with a national story like this telling everyone how terrible they are (whether it’s true or not)
Discovery will determine whether criminal charges will be filed in the future.
I mean, proven beyond a reasonable doubt is not an air tight 100% the person did it. It simply means the evidence weighs strongly enough that a reasonable person would believe it to be true.
Lawsuits only need to be proven to be likely true, which is an entirely different evidentiary threshold to beyond a reasonable doubt.
No it won’t. Learn how the justice system works. Discovery is a civil proceeding and legally is not admissable in a criminal procedure. I will not reply to you further as you’re clearly clueless as to how the legal system works. More internet ignorance.
I mean… “Discovery is a civil proceeding and legally is not admissable in a criminal procedure” is just a nonsensical statement.
Are you under the impression that things aren’t a crime if they are discovered “late” ? Do you think discovery has no role in criminal proceedings?
I dont make the headlines lmao.
No i’m under the impression that we have a 5th amendment right which precludes discovery even being an OPTION when criminal liability is at stake.
Well then I hope you are never charged with a serious crime.
EDIT: In all seriousness discovery is very serious in criminal court, maybe moreso than civil court. Circumventing it is grounds for a mistrial. And yes criminal charges can originate from civil suits.
If something is ‘proven’ to be 51% likely, then you haven’t proven anything. You are using the word prove inappropriately. You don’t prove something to be likely. You demonstrate that something is likely.
You can demonstrate that something is likely to win a civil case.
You have to prove that something happened to get a conviction.
No, I am using it correct in legal teminology.
Burden of Proof | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu)
In civil cases, the plaintiff has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence. A “preponderance of the evidence” and “beyond a reasonable doubt” are different standards, requiring different amounts of proof.
3 Likes
Riot Games had similar issues and they are doing fine. as long as Blizzard genuinely address and fix the problems then it should be ok
Hmmm it looks like you are. It’s semantics anyway and you knew what I meant in my first post.
And apparently this has already been through arbitration and involves inter office relationships.
I don’t know what Blizzards policy is but most places you have to declare that, get put in separate chains of command and sign papers indemnifying your employer.
sigh Yes because he was mentioned several times in the filing. 
Basically this.
Large companies factor in fines when considering actions. Lawsuits for oil spills etc are just cost of doing business.
Any legal offense that results in a fine is mainly intended to police the actions of small businesses or lower to middle class people.
Except that this case is going before a jury, not a Judge.
2 Likes
As much as I’d like to see fewer systems on systems so you can system while you system…
There’s nothing to show that he did anything wrong personally.
Now, we wait.
2 Likes