Just commenting on the case of ChiefFireWaterMike v LouisvilleThunder. I think that in this case, the source/availability of the "undisclosed evidence" should be more thoroughly examined.
- First, where did the plaintiff get this information from? Could it have been Photoshopped, or otherwise forged?
- Second, are we totally sure that the alleged "new" evidence wasn't available back in 2021? If not, I would say that the defense has a claim of laches: that is, that the plaintiff knew or should have known about this evidence previously, yet chose not to present it at original trial (and by doing so, gave up the right to re-allege based on such evidence...they "slept on their rights")
(see also estoppel)[/li][/list]
Anywho, that's my take right now.
1 - LT himself hasn't denied the authenticity of the evidence (and he won't deny the authenticity under oath because he knows doing so would perjure himself). Nobody serious denies the authenticity of this evidence even his defenders, you are literally alone in this concern.
2 - Once again, I literally did not have access to this evidence until a week or two before I filed the case. Please explain how this evidence would have been discoverable in 2021. Subpoena LT for the contents of his direct messages? That would violate his right against self-incrimination. Please think through this more next time.
