|
I believe that most readers would agree to a statement that "many agendas are on the table here". Also, that many will hear (or read) things as they want to read them, as objectivity has left the building. There is some fixation on whether or not money exchanged hands as part of any settlement, and that this would then indicate guilt, or at least a "lack of ethics".
Don't know just how the money flowed there, but would guarantee that the lawyers' cut could easily have been the largest, and as in many minor civil proceedings, is also the greatest motivator for settlement. While Jeff B. filed the suit seeking damages, his greatest threat easily could have been being able to "bleed" Rich, that is, to compel him to spend more money defending himself than was practicable, and is an exceedingly common "litigation" tool. I believe it is also accurate to say that many civil proceedings, while involving disputes and money, have nothing to do with ethics, as many completely ethical people and businesses settle rather than go to trial. Just IMNSHO again, but many of the posters here seem to have little if any clue about the legal system, yet in their pretense are seeking to spin evidence for a conclusion they have already made.
|