|
|
Â
|
| Quote: |
| John Suk sits with shoulders slouched and his head down at the defendant’s table in Courtroom 301, a stuffy wood-paneled space inside the Somerset County judicial complex. The 31-year-old middle school teacher scribbles in a notebook as his reputation is shredded. The plaintiff’s attorneys in Civil Docket No. L-000629-15 have spent two full days portraying the co-defendant as an inattentive and unqualified lout. He is, they argue, a villain who destroyed the future of a teenager he was supposed to protect. “He must be held accountable for what he did,” one of the plaintiff’s two attorneys tells jurors during opening arguments. The attacks intensify when Suk takes the witness stand to defend himself on a split-second decision he made seven years earlier. He is accused of taking a reckless course of action that showed a callous disregard for another person's safety. He sounds like an awful person. Then you remember what Suk did to end up here. He instructed a player he was coaching during a junior varsity baseball game to slide. Not into an active volcano. Not into a shark tank. Into third base. |
Quote:
keeps coming back to the fact that you're judging an entire man's career, integrity, character, and everything else on three words said in a court, without ever attending a single practice that this man was coaching at.
Does that sound right?
You've determined he's a horrible coach and basically negligent because he said it was not safe to slide under two feet.
So to be clear here. You want to defend a coach (not the lawsuit) that gave a dangerous answer of when it was safe to slide? That he could be a safe coach even though clearly sliding that close at full speed no one would agree with as a safe proper answer?
Playing your game...
That was NOT the question. The question is when is it NOT SAFE to slide. His answer of inside 2 feet fits your criteria.
In comment 14678670 Amtoft said:
Quote:
Quote:
Would you want a coach, any coach (not your brother like this guy must be) telling you (or your kids if you have them) to slide at two feet away from the base while you are running full speed?
That he actually told any of the kids he's coached to go ahead and slide up til two feet away from the base?
I have proof of his willingness to do this by his answer. He feels two feet is safe. Are you actually arguing that while he thinks two feet is a safe distance to slide, if he continued to coach he would only have them slide at 6 feet because that is what this one slide was?
seriously? What distance is not safe to slide... ANY DISTANCE INSIDE OF 2 FEET. What does that mean to you? Maybe your not accepting of his dangerous answer is why we have these dumb lawsuits.
In comment 14678670 Amtoft said:
Quote:
In comment 14678655 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
Quote:
Would you want a coach, any coach (not your brother like this guy must be) telling you (or your kids if you have them) to slide at two feet away from the base while you are running full speed?
That he actually told any of the kids he's coached to go ahead and slide up til two feet away from the base?
I have proof of his willingness to do this by his answer. He feels two feet is safe. Are you actually arguing that while he thinks two feet is a safe distance to slide, if he continued to coach he would only have them slide at 6 feet because that is what this one slide was?
Why is that? I want to hear your dumb answer.
You've said it was a dumb lawsuit, that shouldn't have been in court or thrown out. Frivilous.
The lawyer, as he is trained to do, planted a seed of doubt in your head that maybe the coach was negligent by the letter of the law. And you, as a responsible juror, would have to throw out common sense in the jury room and go only by testimony given. Which then could confuse and/or sway other jurors.
Basically, the lawyer would have played you like a fiddle.
You've said it was a dumb lawsuit, that shouldn't have been in court or thrown out. Frivilous.
The lawyer, as he is trained to do, planted a seed of doubt in your head that maybe the coach was negligent by the letter of the law. And you, as a responsible juror, would have to throw out common sense in the jury room and go only by testimony given. Which then could confuse and/or sway other jurors.
Basically, the lawyer would have played you like a fiddle.
You are an idiot. You can't separate what is not a legit lawsuit from someone who shouldn't be coaching. The fact that you think there could be a seed of doubt on this lawsuit by what a lawyer asked would more reflect your inability to think outside of a legal sense. To me you would be the worst on a trial because of this reason. You can say that sliding that close is dangerous, but by no means makes him negligent. Multiple things can be true and stupid lawyers and people like you love to try and make to black and white. It is people who see in black and white that cause this bullshit. Just because someone is bad at there job doesn't make a lawsuit valid. The fact you think it is not ok to say that the lawsuit is stupid, but also he shouldn't be coaching is obtuse.
I would contend the idiot is the person so easily swayed by that.
I would contend the idiot is the person so easily swayed by that.
See and I would say the idiot is the one who thinks because someone says that is a dangerous answer that now somehow that makes the lawsuit valid to anyone is the idiot. You can't admit sliding that close is dangerous is on you.
Quote:
is the one that determines a man's entire career worth from a five word answer to a question delivered by a professional interrogator who designed the question to make him slip up.
I would contend the idiot is the person so easily swayed by that.
See and I would say the idiot is the one who thinks because someone says that is a dangerous answer that now somehow that makes the lawsuit valid to anyone is the idiot. You can't admit sliding that close is dangerous is on you.
The irony is the coach never said that either.
No evidence exists that he ever taught a person to slide within 2 feet or even at 2 feet. The evidence of where he's told people to slide in 6 feet.
Everything else is a hypothetical. I mean, this thread really turned out weird, especially throwing doubt on the coach for something he didn't actually do.
You are dredging him through the mud on an answer that had nothing to do with the actual play the lawsuit was about.
Show where he says that he's taught players to slide at or within 2 feet. Otherwise, calling otehrs idiots here is really foolish.
Quote:
But that wasn't the question. By design.
seriously? What distance is not safe to slide... ANY DISTANCE INSIDE OF 2 FEET. What does that mean to you? Maybe your not accepting of his dangerous answer is why we have these dumb lawsuits.
What it means to me is the defendant smartly gave an answer that couldn't have led to there being any question about whether he could have thought starting a slide at 6ft was dangerous.
Quote:
In comment 14678812 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
is the one that determines a man's entire career worth from a five word answer to a question delivered by a professional interrogator who designed the question to make him slip up.
I would contend the idiot is the person so easily swayed by that.
See and I would say the idiot is the one who thinks because someone says that is a dangerous answer that now somehow that makes the lawsuit valid to anyone is the idiot. You can't admit sliding that close is dangerous is on you.
The irony is the coach never said that either.
It isn't? He was asked when it wasn't safe, meaning at what point is it dangerous and his answer was within 2 feet. So for him it becomes dangerous inside 2 feet which is a wrong answer for a coach. You can't admit that fine. That is on you and you hate to be wrong I get it, however... I am going to love when you try the "what is your definition of "IS" argument. As I said you are the reason we have these dumb lawsuits. You are a lawyers dream.
Forget the lawsuit. Forget anything else. Just show where the coach advocated that he's told players to slide at or within 2 feet.
That's really what you're railing about.
No evidence exists that he ever taught a person to slide within 2 feet or even at 2 feet. The evidence of where he's told people to slide in 6 feet.
Everything else is a hypothetical. I mean, this thread really turned out weird, especially throwing doubt on the coach for something he didn't actually do.
You are dredging him through the mud on an answer that had nothing to do with the actual play the lawsuit was about.
Show where he says that he's taught players to slide at or within 2 feet. Otherwise, calling otehrs idiots here is really foolish.
Ok we disagree. I give up. I am not going to word play now that his answer of when it becomes dangerous within 2 feet. A slide that close is not only dangerous, but risky in getting the runner out. It would be bad coaching plain and simple. If our HC gave a similar stupid answer like that he would be ripped to pieces. You think his answer is ok and I don't.
Have a great day.
Quote:
is the one that determines a man's entire career worth from a five word answer to a question delivered by a professional interrogator who designed the question to make him slip up.
I would contend the idiot is the person so easily swayed by that.
See and I would say the idiot is the one who thinks because someone says that is a dangerous answer that now somehow that makes the lawsuit valid to anyone is the idiot. You can't admit sliding that close is dangerous is on you.
Good lord, you are obtuse. Most people are inherently poor at gauging distance. Ask 100 people to show you how long two feet actually is and you'll get 100 very different answers, and I doubt most of them would even be within 6 inches. There are no yard or distance markers on a baseball field and the safety of a slide is based on multiple factors including the player's speed, weight, and experience. The coach gave an answer to essentially an unanswerable question based on his own likely false perception of distance.
The lawyer asked him a question to try to trip him up and create doubt about the coach's ability and it worked magnificently, especially in your case.
He was asked a safe distance to slide. He was asked when the player began the slide. Why is that CORRECT answer being dismissed, but a hypothetical is being held to a higher standard?
I probably coached a thousand kids over the years, many with no athletic ability at all, (just like me) so if they are unable to execute a basic play what are you supposed to do?
I probably coached a thousand kids over the years, many with no athletic ability at all, (just like me) so if they are unable to execute a basic play what are you supposed to do?
That wasn't even the case, here. He signaled the slide when the runner was 6 feet away. It was a basic play, and a freak accident. Nothing more.
He was asked a safe distance to slide. He was asked when the player began the slide. Why is that CORRECT answer being dismissed, but a hypothetical is being held to a higher standard?
I am not dismissing it. Look even if he told him to slide at 2 feet and the player got hurt that doesn't mean he has a lawsuit. Just because in a game he makes a bad judgement or a rush decision wouldn't hold him accountable in a lawsuit. However if you ask a good coach this question (which I am sure he was prepped for) do you think he would answer within 2 feet? I don't care about the dumb lawsuit, but as a player and one time coach that answer is dumb and would be dangerous and not someone I would want coaching me or my kid. I don't understand why people are fighting so hard to defending the stupid answer he gave. Clearly we disagree about his answer and that is that.
Quote:
In comment 14678672 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
But that wasn't the question. By design.
seriously? What distance is not safe to slide... ANY DISTANCE INSIDE OF 2 FEET. What does that mean to you? Maybe your not accepting of his dangerous answer is why we have these dumb lawsuits.
What it means to me is the defendant smartly gave an answer that couldn't have led to there being any question about whether he could have thought starting a slide at 6ft was dangerous.
I have resisted chiming in on this argument because it seems so ridiculous to go around and around about it, but this is also what I first thought when reading it, and I believe is the obvious answer.
The lawyer was hoping he would say something borderline in distance to where the kid did slide from but the coach smartly answered in a way that separates that answer from what occurred.
Thank you for this. All the talk about 2 feet being dangerous but no one gave any thought of what is considered "safe". I was looking online for the "safe" distance and couldn't find it.
6ft is plenty of distance to start your slide, 4ft probably isn't an issue either for some. I'd agree that 2ft or less is considered dangerous. But I'm sure we've all seen a major league player slide withing 2ft of the base.
What also seems to be lost in all this is that the plaintiff was regarded as a talented athlete, who played varsity basketball in the winter.
I'm surprised Gill St Bernard's didn't get sued for poor field conditions.
There was a bang bang play in a county lacrosse game in 2010. Home team midfielder was going down the sideline and a long poled came over and cleanly hit him out of bounds at the end of the home team bench. The home team had their bags lined up at the end of the bench. Both players go crashing over the bags and the midfielder stays down the ground. Turns out he tore his ACL. Defender who made the hit is being sued
"For Mesar to win, his attorneys must prove Suk’s actions met a standard of recklessness under New Jersey case law that is defined as 'an extreme departure from ordinary care in which a high degree of danger is apparent.'”
Just pointing that out. Carry on...
It doesn't change the culpability at all. I mean really if you want to get into it, the coach doesn't have some control button on the player dictating when the slide would start. The job of a 3rd base coach is to let the runner know if a play is coming in and he needs to slide to avoid the tag or standing stop on the bag or round the bag, etc. If he signals the runner 15 feet out he will need to slide, it doesn't mean the runner starts sliding at 15 feet like he pushed some button. Really the players should be coached how to slide properly and safely to his ability and then it is the 3rd base coaches job to give him the correct signal in as much advance as possible.
I am sorry to derail the thread, but that answer really bugs me. Dangerous for the player to attempt that close and even if the player doesn't get hurt chances of most people trying to stop at full speed from 2 feet away in a slide will almost always lead to flying off the bag. The answer is just bad for so many reasons from a person who should have been prepped for this and was coaching.
I am sorry to derail the thread, but that answer really bugs me.
You act like he answered the question in a coaching seminar teaching other coaches how to slide.
He is involved in a lawsuit and answered a trick kind of question in a way that the answer couldn't be blurred into anything close to what occurred. For all you know his attorney advised him to do so.
It shouldn't bother you at all.
I feel like if my coach yelled for me to slide around the 6ft mark being described, its now on me to either slide right away or trust my instincts and slide a little later
Quote:
I am sorry to derail the thread, but that answer really bugs me.
You act like he answered the question in a coaching seminar teaching other coaches how to slide.
He is involved in a lawsuit and answered a trick kind of question in a way that the answer couldn't be blurred into anything close to what occurred. For all you know his attorney advised him to do so.
It shouldn't bother you at all.
That isn't a trick question though. That could have been answered a number of correct ways without saying stupid like less than 2 feet is when it becomes dangerous. If his attorney told him to answer like that he shouldn't be coaching either!
Quote:
Quote:
I am sorry to derail the thread, but that answer really bugs me.
You act like he answered the question in a coaching seminar teaching other coaches how to slide.
He is involved in a lawsuit and answered a trick kind of question in a way that the answer couldn't be blurred into anything close to what occurred. For all you know his attorney advised him to do so.
It shouldn't bother you at all.
That isn't a trick question though. That could have been answered a number of correct ways without saying stupid like less than 2 feet is when it becomes dangerous. If his attorney told him to answer like that he shouldn't be coaching either!
But the answer wasn't about coaching, it was about answering a question in defense of being sued. How do you not see that?
Amtoft, this isn't a coaching clinic on proper slide techniques. This is a lawyer who is defending his client.
Quote:
In comment 14678980 steve in ky said:
Quote:
Quote:
I am sorry to derail the thread, but that answer really bugs me.
You act like he answered the question in a coaching seminar teaching other coaches how to slide.
He is involved in a lawsuit and answered a trick kind of question in a way that the answer couldn't be blurred into anything close to what occurred. For all you know his attorney advised him to do so.
It shouldn't bother you at all.
That isn't a trick question though. That could have been answered a number of correct ways without saying stupid like less than 2 feet is when it becomes dangerous. If his attorney told him to answer like that he shouldn't be coaching either!
But the answer wasn't about coaching, it was about answering a question in defense of being sued. How do you not see that?
The answer was about what a coach thought when a slide became a dangerous distance to slide. If you are saying the coach lied about what he thought was a safe distance in defense of being sued then I would say that is perjury. If you are saying the answer was what the coach believed that is when the distance becomes dangerous then I would say that is a coach giving a wrong answer. The thing is even if he thinks less than two feet is when it becomes dangerous that doesn't make him liable. Just makes him wrong.
He did NOT say that it was safe to slide at 2 Feet. Or 3 Feet. Or 4 Feet.
Just that it was NOT safe to slide within two feet. He agrees with you!
He did NOT say that it was safe to slide at 2 Feet. Or 3 Feet. Or 4 Feet.
Just that it was NOT safe to slide within two feet. He agrees with you!
YES! Depends what your definition of "IS" is... Thank you Clinton and that is why we have this lawsuit.
Say he would have answered, "Oh of course some of it depends on the runners skill at sliding but I guess at minimum 3 1/2 to 4 feet, but ideally probably even at least five".
Much better answer if talking sliding with another coach, but a horrible answer given the circumstances he was in when answering, and probably opens a lot of doors for the opposing attorney to then proceed through.
But again, I think we are just seeing it entirely differently and just talking past each other because if it. No big deal.
Say he would have answered, "Oh of course some of it depends on the runners skill at sliding but I guess at minimum 3 1/2 to 4 feet, but ideally probably even at least five".
Much better answer if talking sliding with another coach, but a horrible answer given the circumstances he was in when answering, and probably opens a lot of doors for the opposing attorney to then proceed through.
But again, I think we are just seeing it entirely differently and just talking past each other because if it. No big deal.
I hear you ... we just see it differently because to me the lawsuit is a joke. To me it seem people are saying it is ok to lie and say less than two feet to save his skin. To me I wouldn't of even said any feet because it depends on the player. It could never be the same for each runner.
At least you didn't try and say "Any distance inside two feet" could mean 3 feet or 4 feet or any feet inside of two feet. That is why case like this proceed. Maybe I can trick someone that he actually means 3 or 4 or even 6 feet thus liable.
That's what everybody has been trying to point out to you.
And if somebody is trying to trick you into saying something, then you say all you need to say to answer the question without incriminating yourself.
Everybody on this thread seems to see that except you!
That's what everybody has been trying to point out to you.
And if somebody is trying to trick you into saying something, then you say all you need to say to answer the question without incriminating yourself.
Everybody on this thread seems to see that except you!
So you are saying that he lied? Ok Clinton thanks for your input.
No Clinton... You are saying he could have meant 3 feet or 4 feet also. So did he mean 3 feet or 4 feet or less than 2 feet? It sounds like you are saying he answered less than 2 feet even though he knows that is much to close to save his ass? Thus the answer is dishonest. He either believes it or he doesn't.