Remove this Banner Ad

Jason Akermanis

  • Thread starter Thread starter BigBadCam
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

By this logic, Akermanis can come out and say "player X is a drug cheat, player Y is a gambling addict, player Z cheats on his wife with his teammate's girlfriend" and until he admits he lied there'll be doubt hanging over the heads of player X, Y and Z.

How is that fair?

Well Braun did have to live with that and it's not fair no. And for this reason people don't listen to Aker anymore because he's probably talking crap.
 
I've only counted one so far

The Scarlett one can't be proven unless Aker comes out and says he lied. And where in the Braun incident did he lie? He was accusing someone not lying, he made a willy of himself though.

Anyway were not going to get anywhere with this, but i will agree on him being the biggest tool in the AFL

well at least you counted one. That's at least an admission that your Aker has form.

Also, in regards to Braun, I was always taught that bearing false witness = lying. Aker accused the guy of being a drug cheat when he wasn't. Clear cut case IMO of bearing false witness.
 
Also, in regards to Braun, I was always taught that bearing false witness = lying. Aker accused the guy of being a drug cheat when he wasn't. Clear cut case IMO of bearing false witness.

Legally speaking, isn't that slander as well? If West Coast, fearful of further bad press, had've jumped on it and suspended Braun without pay based on Aker's 'testimony' its feasible Brauny could come after Aker in the courts for slander, loss of income, etc.

Aker would have either had to swear in court as to the truth of his allegations, or own up that he was telling porkies.

Extreme scenario I know, but the possibility is there.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom