dhabums wrote:I applaud your bravado. But I bet if your livelihood is taken away from you due to a criminal act, you will consider and then definitely pursue legal action.
So anyone/everyone in Steve Moore's situation would choose legal action?
dhabums wrote:To be fair, only half the population is above average intelligence so I won't try to speak for the other.
Ummmm TOO LATE.
dhabums wrote:I do not expect anyone here to share their opinion of what they'd do if they were Steve Moore because nobody here is in his situation.
Well YOU shared your opinion of wot YOU'D do, didn't you?
In fact you spoke for everyone when you said "definitely
(rather than say take the $750K insurance money and put that Harvard education to work)
dhabums wrote:I don't know what you do, but if tomorrow it is taken from you due to a criminally negligent act that meant everything you have worked for was gone, you BETTER be considering litigation.
So you've gone from: one would... definitely pursue
To: one best consider
I have no problem with Steve Moore's lawsuit btw, I just hate the self-centred three-ring-circus NHL-damaging approach he took. Steve Moore has every right to sue Todd Bertuzzi and I'd probably do the same thing in his situation (although the guaranteed
$750K to a career-fringe-NHLer + the options a Harvard education presents = might be tempting). I like to think though, that I'd do it with less ballyhoo and more class. I also like to think I'd never put myself in that situation in the first place because I wouldn't go around injuring NHL superstars (Naslund and Martin St. Louis) with cheapshots as a rookie.
Todd Bertuzzi is the villain in this story.
Steve Moore is just a weasel.