Pt. 1: I'm a lawyer, so let me try to explain about the case (based on what I've read of the filings/deposition): I don't get the sense there is any evidence that 100% shows the groping. It is like most assault claims - his word vs hers. But people need to remember this isn't a criminal case - the guy is not charged with assault - & the burden of proof is not "beyond a reasonable doubt". He sued her claiming he lost his job due to false allegations of assault claiming it was his colleague that
Pt. 2: groped her. She counter-sued for assault & battery seeking damages & also defended herself again his suit by saying she did not interfere with his employment & had no authority to fire him (essentially the proper party for him to sue was his former employer). He tried to get her suit thrown out (unsuccessfully) & also now claims that beside it being the colleague that groped her instead of him, he might have accidentally touched her - those are his defenses to the assault claims. She did
Anonymous said:Pt. 3: her deposition & has filed that along with the M&G pics in an effort to have his case dismissed - again, the balance of that will rest on her claims that she’s not the proper party for him to be suing here. IF she’s successful that resolves her liability in his suit against her - it will not determine whether or not he assaulted her. She may choose to not pursue those claims further at that point. Alternatively, this could likely go to court & then the determination will be about whether
Pt. 4: on a “balance of probabilities” ( a much lower burden of proof than beyond a reasonable doubt) her claims were false causing his firing, or true - & if in either case what , if any, damages he/she is entitled to. The burden is important here though - so long as examining all the evidence reasonably it can be said that her version is more likely to be true than his, the burden is met - she doesn’t have to prove the assault BARD. I 100% believe her, but that doesn’t mean that he’s not by
Pt. 5: law entitled to make his case as again, much of this is just his word against hers unfortunately. For me his case has lots of holes: how long he waited to sue, his defense at best/worst means he’s suing the victim as he admits she was groped, the proper party to sue was his former employer, his motivations are money while she stands to gain nothing from this, etc., etc. Hope that helps!
Thank you this is really helpful and i think my mutuals will find it helpful so thanks for taking the time to go through it.