Has it really been that long since you last committed fraud?I haven't done this in awhile, but if you're committing fraud I'd think you'd technically need to preserve all related documents because of a reasonable anticipation of litigation.
Has it really been that long since you last committed fraud?I haven't done this in awhile, but if you're committing fraud I'd think you'd technically need to preserve all related documents because of a reasonable anticipation of litigation.
He told a girl the other night that he'd "show her a good time".Has it really been that long since you last committed fraud?
It'd be pretty cool if you could put a hold on specific documents that didn't exist yet. Fire up the precogs.Edit: I know the context is actually a litigation hold, but the point stands. Lit holds obviously relate back to documents that predate the hold directive.
Legally actionable fraud. Lying on message boards isn't a tort.Has it really been that long since you last committed fraud?
The quote from the Giants about pre-litigation is, I think, a response to the plaintiffs' lawyer's statement implying they destroyed evidence. It's generally ok to delete e-mail. It's not ok to delete evidence, which it can become once suit is filed. Doesn't change the content of the e-mail, just whether the Giants did a bad thing in addition to whatever they may have done with memorabilia fraud.Oh, if it predates litigation then it's worthless. Evidence only matters if it is created after files are charged.
SEE!! I told you we needed tort reform.Legally actionable fraud. Lying on message boards isn't a tort.
By the time we're done, she's going to owe you punitive damages.I'm going to hire DDB to represent me when my wife of 13 years finds out that her diamond engagement ring is really cubic zirconia.
I googled thetan. Can we have a thread on that? Holy shit.Hey hey hey, everybody: cut DDB some slack. His thetan level is just a little high. Don't worry, though; if he gives me most of his wealth I can tell him how get better.
Wait, you're just catching up on Scientology now?I googled thetan. Can we have a thread on that? Holy shit.
I mean, I have a general awareness, but never knew the details.Wait, you're just catching up on Scientology now?
Bravo if the use of pin was purposeful here.I'm not investing much hope in the possibility of Eli getting nailed. In the end he'll follow his big bro's lead and find a way to pin it on his wife.
No sympathy here. I'm sure he was being compensated handsomely for the memorabilia. Maybe relative to his salary, the compensation is so small that he considered it an annoyance. But then, maybe he shouldn't enter into contracts like this if the inconvenience leads him to commit fraud.As much as I love the idea of hating Eli for this, I imagine from his perspective that he was just trying to swat away an annoying mosquito without really bothering to think about the downstream implications. That said, I'm amused.
No argument. I just doubt he gave it enough thought to qualify as something I personally would consider intentional fraud.No sympathy here. I'm sure he was being compensated handsomely for the memorabilia. Maybe relative to his salary, the compensation is so small that he considered it an annoyance. But then, maybe he shouldn't enter into contracts like this if the inconvenience leads him to commit fraud.
I'm kind of with you here; Manning's going to deserve the doggie-do he gets but he wasn't conducting a conspiracy. Plus the kind of fraud we're talking about here (while I don't mean to minimize the negative effects discussed) is widespread far beyond the Giants and basically an open industry secret. Manning's real crime is giving an accidental peek at how the sausage gets made, and in writing.No argument. I just doubt he gave it enough thought to qualify as something I personally would consider intentional fraud.
Kind of. Lots of players still where multiple helmets, whether by choice (comfort) or role (one with green dot, one without). It's a bullshit rule that isn't enforced . . . except about the throwback thing, which makes no sense since throwback games move merchandise, other than the Steelers bumblebee outfits.Do we have any idea how recent this went on for? Since 2013 the NFL has had a one helmet rule where a player keeps one helmet all season, hence the lack of throwback helmets on throwback uniform day.
I'm really not upset or outraged by this. He did a shitty thing and is getting caught. Good.
First Peyton's scrotum... now Eli's helmet... with the Mannings it really is a game of inches.Say it taint so, Peyton.
So selling something of nominal value for thousands mandated acquiring something of nominal value for millions.According to the article Eli was under contract to Steiner Sports, and he apparently wanted to keep the authentic stuff, so he pawned off phonies.
He sold stuff that had nominal value for presumably thousands.
Sound like a crime to me.
And it explains why the Giants signed Geno Smith.
This line of defense seems familiar, but I don't recall it working out well.... Plus the kind of fraud we're talking about here (while I don't mean to minimize the negative effects discussed) is widespread far beyond the Giants and basically an open industry secret. Manning's real crime is giving an accidental peek at how the sausage gets made, and in writing.
Which was one of Steiner's selling points after the horrible 90's problems. Hey guys we get it right from the source. You can trust us!I'm kind of with you here; Manning's going to deserve the doggie-do he gets but he wasn't conducting a conspiracy. Plus the kind of fraud we're talking about here (while I don't mean to minimize the negative effects discussed) is widespread far beyond the Giants and basically an open industry secret. Manning's real crime is giving an accidental peek at how the sausage gets made, and in writing.
Not intentional. I'll attribute it to my subconscious trying to needle Peyton.Bravo if the use of pin was purposeful here.
Thanks, I was wondering about any exception to the statute of limitations.Unless discovery shows he did it more recently. Which it might, if this goes to civil trial, because NY State statute of limitations for civil fraud actions is the greater of 6 years or 2 years from discovery.
RICO is pretty easy to make out. I'm assuming the hook is mail fraud as they shipped the merchandise. There'd be an association between Manning and the Giants or Steiner and that's about all you really need.I had heard on the radio he was looking at a civil racketeering charge. Is that complete nonsense (provided the statute of limitations doesn't eliminate the possibility) or does it seem like a suitable charge?
Well.. it is in the middle of a swamp for the most part.When you combine this story (Eli working with Giants equipment managers to produce fake game-used items that were then sold to collectors) with the Brandon Jacobs story (where a Giants equipment manager stole and sold Jacobs Super Bowl items to collectors and then gave Jacobs fakes), there is definitely something smelly going on in East Rutherford.
"Could you ever imagine Peyton being involved in this?" Christie said. "No, definitely not. Peyton's smarter."
Chris Christie is obviously a hypocritical loudmouth POS but I do enjoy him shining more light on this story.
Chris Christie is obviously a hypocritical loudmouth POS but I do enjoy him shining more light on this story.
It's a plain statement of the reality of the situation, not a defense, and if used as the latter I'd agree that no, it's not a winner in either of the public opinion or legal courtrooms.This line of defense seems familiar, but I don't recall it working out well...
Libel.Got to be a conspiracy to commit fraud case here, maybe unjust enrichment, and a whole bunch of other lawyerly words...
(not to be taken seriously. I'm just having fun with this in the dead time of the NFL offseason)