Junior Seau dead, probable suicide

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Donger

And the "victims" in the case heartily volunteered, enthusiastically played the game and were handsomely rewarded for their choice.

Just like the woman that put a cup of coffee between her legs and suffered 2nd degree burns for it.

Sure, she put hot coffee where she shouldn't have, but McDonalds knew that the coffee was hot enough to cause burns leading to skin-grafs and did nothing about it.

A so called 'acceptance' of the risks here isn't going to get the NFL off the hook - it never gets the deepest pockets off the hook.

Juries do what they do. They'll see the faceless conglomerate of super-wealthy individuals that had concussion studies done and ignored and they'll compare those to the individual plaintiffs, be they players or the families of players that died.

Don't coach - bet. What you think the jury should do is irrelevant. What you claim you would do where you a 1-man jury is equally irrelevant (afterall, both you and veilpass would get your asses bounced from the pool). History tells us what the jury will do.

Ignore it at your own peril.

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Just like the woman that put a cup of coffee between her legs and suffered 2nd degree burns for it.

Sure, she put hot coffee where she shouldn't have, but McDonalds knew that the coffee was hot enough to cause burns leading to skin-grafs and did nothing about it.

A so called 'acceptance' of the risks here isn't going to get the NFL off the hook - it never gets the deepest pockets off the hook.

Juries do what they do. They'll see the faceless conglomerate of super-wealthy individuals that had concussion studies done and ignored and they'll compare those to the individual plaintiffs, be they players or the families of players that died.

Don't coach - bet. What you think the jury should do is irrelevant. What you claim you would do where you a 1-man jury is equally irrelevant (afterall, both you and veilpass would get your asses bounced from the pool). History tells us what the jury will do.

Ignore it at your own peril.

If I wanted to remain in that jury pool I assure you I could do so.

[Brock]

Originally Posted by vailpass

If I wanted to remain in that jury pool I assure you I could do so.

Yeah, billions of dollars at stake, they're not going to be looking deep up your pooper or anything.

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by Brock

Yeah, billions of dollars at stake, they're not going to be looking deep up your pooper or anything.

Oh, well, if it's gonna' be THAT kind of party I don't want to stay anyway.

What type of things would you look for in the backgrounds of jurors in a case like that?
NFL fan status? Political bent?

[Brock]

Originally Posted by vailpass

Oh, well, if it's gonna' be THAT kind of party I don't want to stay anyway.

What type of things would you look for in the backgrounds of jurors in a case like that?
NFL fan status? Political bent?

Everything. There wouldn't be any NFL fans on that jury for sure.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Brock

Everything. There wouldn't be any NFL fans on that jury for sure.

And I can't imagine a judge in the country that would have a problem with you striking a juror for cause when he claims to be a fan of the billion dollar defendant...

You can strike as many for jurors for cause as they have eligible jurors. And if you run out, we'll just bring in more.

Either risk having the entire trial overturned for lying during voir dire, or every person in this thread will end up getting tossed off the jury.

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by Brock

Everything. There wouldn't be any NFL fans on that jury for sure.

Would this be a federal case?

[Jenson71]

Originally Posted by vailpass

Would this be a federal case?

A class action against the NFL would be. Even if it was initially brought in a state court, I think the NFL would want to move it to the federal courts, which has more benefits for corporate defendants. Higher burdens for allegations (the Iqbal standard, iirc).

[Jenson71]

Originally Posted by vailpass

Oh, well, if it's gonna' be THAT kind of party I don't want to stay anyway.

What type of things would you look for in the backgrounds of jurors in a case like that?
NFL fan status? Political bent?

Plaintiffs want mothers.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by vailpass

If I wanted to remain in that jury pool I assure you I could do so.

Go ahead and lie under voir dire; we'll make sure that whatever verdict you're a part of gets tossed out and by God we'll try again.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Just like the woman that put a cup of coffee between her legs and suffered 2nd degree burns for it.

Sure, she put hot coffee where she shouldn't have, but McDonalds knew that the coffee was hot enough to cause burns leading to skin-grafs and did nothing about it.

A so called 'acceptance' of the risks here isn't going to get the NFL off the hook - it never gets the deepest pockets off the hook.

Juries do what they do. They'll see the faceless conglomerate of super-wealthy individuals that had concussion studies done and ignored and they'll compare those to the individual plaintiffs, be they players or the families of players that died.

Don't coach - bet. What you think the jury should do is irrelevant. What you claim you would do where you a 1-man jury is equally irrelevant (afterall, both you and veilpass would get your asses bounced from the pool). History tells us what the jury will do.

Ignore it at your own peril.

Oh sure, juries will be juries. I was specifically referring to the apparent victimization that some here are affording the players. I would think that even the dimmest player in the NFL would strap on that helmet for the first time and think, "Hmmm, helmet eh? Is this dangerous and violent?"

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by Donger

Oh sure, juries will be juries. I was specifically referring to the apparent victimization that some here are affording the players. I would think that even the dimmest player in the NFL would strap on that helmet for the first time and think, "Hmmm, helmet eh? Is this dangerous and violent?"

I dunno. Young men are not good at calculating risk on stuff like this.

It does make me wonder, though, why guys like Dave Duerson and Mike Webster go down and guys like Willie Lanier and Jerry Kramer cruise into old age. Is it a hardwired risk of physiology that could one day be predicted, or did the Duerson/Webster cohort just take one unlucky hit that kickstarted an irreversible process?

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Just like the woman that put a cup of coffee between her legs and suffered 2nd degree burns for it.

Sure, she put hot coffee where she shouldn't have, but McDonalds knew that the coffee was hot enough to cause burns leading to skin-grafs and did nothing about it.

A so called 'acceptance' of the risks here isn't going to get the NFL off the hook - it never gets the deepest pockets off the hook.

Juries do what they do. They'll see the faceless conglomerate of super-wealthy individuals that had concussion studies done and ignored and they'll compare those to the individual plaintiffs, be they players or the families of players that died.

Don't coach - bet. What you think the jury should do is irrelevant. What you claim you would do where you a 1-man jury is equally irrelevant (afterall, both you and veilpass would get your asses bounced from the pool). History tells us what the jury will do.

Ignore it at your own peril.

So why is the NFLPA not responsible for not looking out for their players health? Wouldn't that be THIER job? Isn't that the entire point of a Union?

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

So why is the NFLPA not responsible for not looking out for their players health? Wouldn't that be THIER job? Isn't that the entire point of a Union?

You don't think the NFLPA is going to end up as a possible co-defendant?

It wouldn't surprise me for a minute.