How are we not talking about the Hogan trial rn?
 

It is wild!

Because then we'd have to think about him being naked with Mrs Love Sponge and nobody wants that.

Because he is a racist and TPWW is anti racism.

I saw some funny tweets about it. They were funny. If you wanna make this an official "Hogan V Gawker Tweets" thread, I'll talk about it here.

The Erin Andrews trial got more attention than this.

That's why we ain't talking about it, BROTHER!

From his Stern interviews alone, it definitely seems like Hogan knew he was being filmed. The man is a dirty liar.

To be fair, the Erin Andrews tape was WAY hotter.

But that's just one man's opinion.

:lol:

And somehow Titus O'Neil wins father of the year??

Travesty

The fucking doo rag in court. Unbelievable

Why the fuck do judges permit that.

did she sponge his love

He was given permission as long as it was a solid colour.

Hasney has provided a series of helpful/informative posts in casual about this matter

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Daulerio's depo ends with the question: Can you imagine a scenario in which a celebrity sex tape is not newsworthy? <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/hulkvsgawk?src=hash">#hulkvsgawk</a></p>&mdash; Anna Phillips (@annamphillips) <a href="https://twitter.com/annamphillips/status/707589622377934849">March 9, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Daulerio responds: &quot;If they were a child.&quot; <br>Atty: Under what age?<br>&quot;Four.&quot;<br>Atty: No four-year-old sex tapes, okay. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/hulkvsgawk?src=hash">#hulkvsgawk</a></p>&mdash; Anna Phillips (@annamphillips) <a href="https://twitter.com/annamphillips/status/707589861839081472">March 9, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

lmao Gawker are so fucking done. He could have said any age for it not to be OK about a celebrity sex tape and he said four years old.

Also:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">&quot;Did you want to be sure your readers saw Hulk Hogan's penis?&quot;<br>AJ Daulerio: &quot;yes&quot;<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/hulkvsgawk?src=hash">#hulkvsgawk</a></p>&mdash; Anna Phillips (@annamphillips) <a href="https://twitter.com/annamphillips/status/707583611453710337">March 9, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Cook is now having to explain why he posted a picture of an uncircumcised penis in the workplace chat threat. Oy. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/HulkVsGawk?src=hash">#HulkVsGawk</a> stream</p>&mdash; Anna Phillips (@annamphillips) <a href="https://twitter.com/annamphillips/status/707323193531506689">March 8, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

News From The Future:

Head of Gawker arrested on child porn charges. Read more at www.gawk... o wait...

Read more at www.bolleagawker.brother.com

That makes me angrier.

What could possibly be the reason he would need to wear it? What would be the reason he asked permission for it? Real American

He has spoken at length about him having self-esteem issues regarding his baldness due to Linda Bollea being a twat about it.

Well most of us are anyways

Who fucking cares anyway? Fucking OUTRAGE about what he wears to court is dumb.

Special treatment for a celebrity pisses me off.

It's Florida. You could probably walk in with just a thong if it was a solid colour

Next time you are in court Theo, ask the nice judge if you can wear your "doo rag" or whatever the fuck they call it. :heart:

I wonder if a black guy on trial for armed robbery could wear a doo rag in court

Definitely would, along with a baseball cap reading "FUCK DA POLICE".

Pretty sure the bandanna is surgically attached to his head nowadays

I never understood when hogan did the plugs for some shit movie and wore them in WCW back then why didn't he just keep it that way. Dude's been bald since eye of the Tiger was his theme song

Gawker editor clarified he would not publish a sex tape of anyone under the age of four.

http://nypost.com/2016/03/09/gawker-...-a-4-year-old/


Annnnnnnd that is the moment that will win this lawsuit for Hogan. Goodbye Gawker, you're scum and you're done.

It will be an lol how as soon as hogan wins the lawsuit he will be welcomed back to dubdube with open arms immediately

:lol:"I don't lie under oath"
Just every other time he opens his mouth.

You know ddp wife swapped with his buddies and never ended up in this situation. So obviously

Ddp>hogan

Vince "I guess we can let Hogan back"
"Why?"
Vince "He won his lawsuit"
"You fired him for being a racist"

They didn't fire him for being a racist, they fired him for publicly embarrassing the company. If he wins the lawsuit it'll be a step towards rehabilitating his image, and as soon as the company feels like his presence won't be a detriment they'll hire him back in a second. It's not like he's still rolling down streets yelling slurs at the top of his lungs.

Next you should go back in time and say

"Hey George Carlin those seven words are not an exact enumeration of the dirty words banned by the FCC"

His racial slurs were only limited to the prospect of his daughter being railed by mandingo brut has during her music career. Which was being discussed prior to him fucking his friends old lady. No need to split hairs

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Feels like I've been down selling and it's really ,really time to Hulk Up,make that huge comeback and drop the biggest leg ever brother HH</p>&mdash; Hulk Hogan (@HulkHogan) <a href="https://twitter.com/HulkHogan/status/707878729498935296">March 10, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Lol even though you're being completely foul, I understand this viewpoint.

He deserves the repercussions but at the end of the day he was just being a big dumb dad upset with his daughter's romantic choices. I've heard better people say worse things. Didn't mean they MEANT it. He was also recorded without his consent.

At the end of the day though, he surrounded himself with poisonous people and said poisonous things. These things have a way to come back and bite you in the ass.

Somewhere Billy Kidman is at a flea market laughing his ass off

God damn right!!

I constantly think this is happening

He fucked Torrie Wilson though. We didnt. We only jerked it to her playboy pics

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Hogan's lawyers tell jury about an incident in which Gawker linked to a video of sex. Woman begged for it to be taken down. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/hulkvsgawk?src=hash">#hulkvsgawk</a></p>&mdash; Anna Phillips (@annamphillips) <a href="https://twitter.com/annamphillips/status/708297025889107968">March 11, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">AJ Daulerio's response: &quot;Blah blah blah&quot; He tells her Gawker won't take it down. &quot;Do not make a big deal of this&quot; he writes. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/hulkvsgawk?src=hash">#hulkvsgawk</a></p>&mdash; Anna Phillips (@annamphillips) <a href="https://twitter.com/annamphillips/status/708297233159028736">March 11, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

This guy is probably the biggest heel of all time.

"You can run if you want to, Gawker
Run, but you can't hide..."

Big update in regards to Hogan vs Gawker trial and things going against Hogan's side at the moment. The biggest being files concerning some potential shady stuff done by Hogan's side no longer allowed to be sealed or off-limits for the trial.

Jury is out to delibirate, but Gawker knows they've lost. On to the appeals court!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cd2MPjlWEAAYZdy.jpg:large

So with this trial - is Gawker pretty much dead if they lose?

Depends how much the judge awards I'd guess. No way is Hogan getting the full 100m.

I did read that to appeal in Florida, you have to have the full amount of the award in escrow, so if they can't afford that, they can't appeal.

Pretty much, they said they can't pay and they'd be done.

http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/...20080902204342

Documents in evidence are becoming unsealed, This ain't over yet, drama wise.

http://rs80.pbsrc.com/albums/j191/So...ument.gif~c200
http://i.imgur.com/Y0W23ub.png?1
http://i.imgur.com/W5ZIAZS.png?1

Now I'm curious.

The stuff Ive listened to between Bubba and Hogan they had different stories as far as being taped was concerned.No side to take in this one though because its just scumbags facing scumbags.Content to just sit and watch.

http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/...20140217181159

Turns out that what Mr. The Love Sponge told the FBI differs from what he said in a sworn desposition.

http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/...20140706004944

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cd3C4HIWoAEGiV0.jpg

Somebody stop the damn match. Gawker has a family!
 

Juriy's back, Gawker are fucked.

http://i.imgur.com/KOyerOF.png
http://i.imgur.com/M2ZTwyo.png

I didn't realise that the jury sets the amount too in Florida.

Considering Gawker's money issues, how much of that are they even going to be able to pay?

They were already talking about appealing, but if what I read about having to put the amount in escrow for Florida before an appeal, they might be just done.

<iframe width="854" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/LC6SJ4_bCIY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Hogan being told the vedict and the amount by his legal team over Skype:

https://media.giphy.com/media/elXsMnYugZbkA/giphy.gif

WTF BREAKING NEWS ON BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35849140#_=_

Gawker property Kotaku writer Patrick Klepek on Twitter:

http://i.imgur.com/7tmOWm1.jpg

Maybe he can get hairplugs for 115m so he doesn't have to wear a doo rag for his next court appearance when Linda comes after half of that

He doesn't need to. he can get away with a doorag even in court, it seems.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/RKM1AAzeRCg?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/8-20-2015/4RGC5o.gif

http://a.fod4.com/misc/Hulk%20Hogan%20Swim%20Flex.gif

I broke that news 2 hours ago.

Hopefully that's enough money to buy him a robotic back and any other robotic body parts that will allow him to wrestle for 20 more years. Wrestling is dying. We need a hero.

Somewhat "conflicted" about the idea of "journalists" having to pay millions of dollars for reporting on things (due to fear of "slippery slope," even though I side with Hogan in this case), but I think this is really funny since Gawker and most of their other sites are fucking pieces of garbage who have gladly ruined multiple people's lives for ad revenue.

Yeah, if it wasn't Gawker and it wasn't posting a sex tape AND refusing to take it down despite a judge order, i doubt anyone would side with Hogan. But Gawker are shit and have no morals, so fuck em.

At least it clears the way for the dream political ticket.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cd3wyt1UEAAwhVk.jpg

I suppose the law of averages says somebody would want him back.

Reminder to Hogan: It is still in fact FUCK MONEY FRIDAY

http://i.imgur.com/RSi7otd.png

Stay classy, Virgil! #FuckMoneyFriday

:lol: Virgil

Think even other big tabloid sites feel Gawker is way too sleazy even by tabloid standards. Don't think any of them bothered to rally behind Gawker's side for the case.

Forgot what tabloid site said it but even they wouldn't have gone as far as Gawker did when it came to their stance on the tape.

Is the judge either Judge Mills Lane (because he allows literally EVERYTHING) or the judge from hit 80s sitcom Night Court?

This judge didn't allow everything, the foorag had to be of a solid colour. Clearly legit ruling.

http://i.imgur.com/VT7XQ.gif

WOOOOOOOOOOO XERO POST, BROTHER!!! XEROMANIA IS RUNNIN' WILD, BABY!!!

How DARE he make Hogan pick between red or yellow?!

He went with black #heel

Makes sense to me. Who knows, maybe one day we'll see the nWo in WW--Oh. Wait...

Yeah but is a guy who would loan his wife out to another man a trustworthy witness? Probably not.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/TyHcckgkqj4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/2_JTzEppKy8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Read the post after that. I wouldn't cast doubt on someone for being a swinger, but if you tell two different stories... Yeahhhh....

I don't know the details surrounding the judge's decision to not allow Bubba's testimony. That being said, based on the info we have, I don't see why Gawker would feel confident of this being over turned on appeal due to Bubba's testimony being deemed inadmissible.

Admission of evidence and testimony is decided at the discretion of the trial judge. Unless the judge abused his discretion when deciding not to allow Bubba's testimony, Gawker won't win on appeal because of it. An appellate court will evaluate whether the trial judge’s decision was arbitrary, fanciful, or unreasonable. If reasonable people could differ regarding whether it was proper or not for the judge to decide to not allow Bubba's testimony, then the judge was not unreasonable and there can be no finding of an abuse of discretion.

The judge likely disallowed Bubba's testimony because it would amount (although not literally of course) to putting Bubba on trial. The jury would spend too much time arguing over whether Bubba was credible and not on whether Gawker was guilty of public disclosure of private facts.

In addition, whether Hogan did or didn't know about the tape when it was recorded is irrelevant. If Hogan was aware he was being recorded and it even occurred to him that it might leak, that doesn't mean Hogan intended for the tape to be disclosed publicly or distributed on the internet.

It seems like the only defense Gawker had in this case, that there was public interest in the sex tape, the jury didn't buy. Hogan had to prove that there was:

• a public disclosure (internet obviously)
• of private facts (the sex occurred at a private residence indoors)
• lack of public interest (maybe there was public interest in the existence of the tape and Hogan's comments but NOT the sexual content of the tape itself)
• and the disclosure would be objectionable to a reasonable person in Hogan's position

Why would this Bubba person testify in court to something completely different than what he told the FBI? Isn't his testimony in court considered perjury, and furthermore, if he perjured himself in court, how does he have any shred of credibility left? This whole thing should be done, IMHO.

Wouldn't be just Bubba's testimonial but include other evidence like recently unsealed files the judge didn't allow Gawker to use for the trial.

Observer hinted the unsealed files alone are pretty damaging for Hogan's side since it might prove stuff Gawker was trying to argue in their trial or even tie into rumored claims of Hogan's side interfering with investigations and/or possible bribes to make things harder for Gawker.

But when they talked about appealing, they purely talked about Bubba being a witness in court. Since he's already lied at least once, it's fucking hilarious that Gawker would hang their head there.

It likely won't matter. If the judge had any remotely legitimate reason (as long as the reason wasn't strictly prejudicial) for suppressing any evidence he chose to suppress, this decision won't be reversed based on any evidence that wasn't allowed to be presented, including testimony.

The judge likely felt the evidence he suppressed, if presented, would've been too prejudicial and/or confusing for the jury and would've gotten the trial and jury off into the weeds, so to speak. Any evidence the judge reasonably felt would've distracted, delayed or prevented the jury from dealing with whether or not Gawker was guilty and liable for publicly disclosing the private recordings, should've been suppressed.

His deposition testimony was for the civil lawsuit and any info he disclosed to the FBI would've been for a criminal investigation. His testimony is irrelevant in this case anyway. Even if it is true that Hogan knew he was being recorded and even contemplated the possibility of it leaking, that in itself does not prove that Hogan intended to make it public nor remove Gawker's liability of making it public. As long as there's no evidence that Hogan himself planned to or actually did leak the tape to Gawker for Gawker to distribute online, then Hogan's knowledge of the recording is irrelevant.

Couple more which might be fitting:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gd40Fhgducg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Ebg8JaRTgFI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

so does Hogan buy tna now

lol :'(