Allison Fisher Cutec Shaft Conspiracy!

[Snapshot9]

Questions

If she had the Cuetec shortened to 56", did Cuetec do it for her, or another cuemaker? And taking 2" off the back end would greatly affect the weight of the cue?

Or did Cuetec manufacture a special 56" cue for her that would be stock other than being 56" long. Note, that if they did that, and maintained the weight of a 58" cue, the diameter dimensions of the cue would be slightly different.

And how tall is Allison anyway?

 

[travis trotter]

:smile: look to me playing with a cue that fits your style i do play with cuetec i have two cues from cuetec a allison fisher 57'' and a earl strickland 58 ''
cue i have two players cues and a mizzerak cue so i own 5 cues to play a good solid game of pool with so allison fisher is till the best pool player there is thanks

 

[vagabond]

I'm not a legal expert so I'm wondering, do some of the statements made in this thread border on libel?evident that he's full of it.

To have a good case one needs to establish:
1.The comment did not have factual basis ( meaning it was not true )
2.The readers have to believe what was said
3.Those comments have to have adverse effect on the livelyhood of the person and to an extent on the reputation of the person against whom the comments were made.

If the above criterion are met u have a case to proceed.

 

[av84fun]

To have a good case one needs to establish:
1.The comment did not have factual basis ( meaning it was not true )
2.The readers have to believe what was said
3.Those comments have to have adverse effect on the livelyhood of the person and to an extent on the reputation of the person against whom the comments were made.

If the above criterion are met u have a case to proceed.

1. Put more correctly, "truth" is a defense to a claim of defamation. The plaintiff does not have to prove innocence of the charge but rather, the defendant accused of defamation must prove the truth of his/her claim.

2. There are two kinds of defamation...per se and per quod. In per quod, not all readers have to believe what was said...only a sufficient number to cause economic harm to the plaintiff. (see #3) In per se defamation which includes such eggregious comments as that someone is guilty of a crime for which a jail sentence can be imposed...it is not necessary that anyone believe the remark because such statements are deemed fundamentally defamatory and damaging.

3. The comments about Ms. Fisher's cue fall within the borders of per quod defamation. Therefore, she would have to prove actual money damages and almost certainly could not given the obscurity and lack of credibility on Mr. Wheat's part.

Regards,
Jim

 

[vagabond]

1. Put more correctly, "truth" is a defense to a claim of defamation. The plaintiff does not have to prove innocence of the charge but rather, the defendant accused of defamation must prove the truth of his/her claim.

Regards,
Jim

Agreed with regards placing the burden of proof on the defendant.

By the way do you have any details on Rev Jerry falwel VS Lary flynt (the porn magazine guy ). How did Lary Flynt got away inspite he used derogatory adjectives refering to Rev Falwel`s mother?