Case Dismissed

[vancemeek]

As expected, well, by some anyway, a federal judge dismissed the defamation lawsuit brought against Roger Goodell by Jonathan Vilma.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/88...-roger-goodell

[packa7x]

Yeah, he clearly didn't have a case. Anyone who took a basic law class knows defamation is super hard to prove. Pretty sure I laid out the criteria for everyone in one thread.

[packa7x]

I'll toot my horn a bit more for those wondering why his case has no shot:

Defamation is very hard to prove, and it's interesting to look into how Goodell fits into this. To nail Goodell for this, the statement has to be:

-False: Vilma must prove that what Goodell said was an outright lie. Can he do that? We do know that there was a bounty system in place. The NFL claims that he offered $10,000 but it was never paid. That's in line with testimony from many people who were there. Villa would have to produce some sort of tangible evidence that Goodell indeed lied to have a shot. Goodell likely has guys who will go up and testify that Vilma DID offer $10,000. Nothing will be concrete and stories will contradict. A court would likely rule in favor of Goodell.

Public: Goodell's statements would have to be public, they obviously were.

Intent to injure: Vilma must prove that Goodell acted with willful malice. Even if he can prove Goodell lied, did Goodell lie because he wanted to hurt Vilma? Or did he lie because he simply believed what he was told? Extremely hard to prove.

Damages: After Vilma proves that Goodell publicly lied with intentional malice, he must prove that there were demonstrable damages. How did this harm Vilma's reputation? There is nothing conclusive.

The lawsuit is a sham. He's throwing s**t against the wall and seeing what sticks.