Receive up-to-the-minute news updates on the hottest topics with NewsHub. Install now.

Analysis: Why Derrick Rose Was Found Not Liable

October 19, 2016 9:26 PM
39 0
Analysis: Why Derrick Rose Was Found Not Liable

After convening for three hours, a federal jury of six women and two men on Wednesday found New York Knicks guard Derrick Rose not liable for sexual battery and related civil offenses. The 28-year-old Chicago native will thus not be ordered to pay Rose’s accuser—whom Sports Illustrated and other media outlets refer to as “Jane Doe” in light of her status as an alleged victim of sexual violence—any money in damages. Doe sought $21.5 million in the case.

In a civil case such as Doe v. Rose, the burden of persuasion is the “preponderance of evidence” or, more colloquially, “more probable than not.” Put another way, jurors can only impose liability if they collectively believe that the defendant is probably liable to the plaintiff. This jury thus foun...

Read more

Share in social networks:

Comments - 0