So this came out about Peyton Manning...

[minnesotahog]

There was no testimony in a trial. That is all I am saying.

Doesn't matter. They answered under oath. Why would several people lie about the situation? What do they have to gain? We all know they'll have more to lose by going against Manning.

 

[HogTime]

Doesn't matter. They answered under oath. Why would several people lie about the situation? What do they have to gain? We all know they'll have more to lose by going against Manning.

Trial with a cross exam is very different than a deposition. Look at the motion to dismiss (which was conveniently not provided to the readers) to get the whole story.

Again, I don't know what happened and if he did it - then he should be handled like any other person regardless of race. So can we agree on that?

 

[minnesotahog]

Trial with a cross exam is very different than a deposition. Look at the motion to dismiss (which was conveniently not provided to the readers) to get the whole story.

Again, I don't know what happened and if he did it - then he should be handled like any other person regardless of race. So can we agree on that?

Point is Manning wouldn't want something like this to go to a trial. Especially in the court of public opinion. I totally agree with your last sentence