guilty o' what? whose standard o' guilt? you gonna leave up to the courts to decide for you? and keep in mind is civil litigation, which means is not guilt which the court would be assigning. am already knowing vol won't care what the nfl decides.
legitimacy o' ab preserved messages to the plaintiff don't appear to be a matter o' controversy, which in our mind makes ab, at the very least, guilty o' crimes 'gainst the english language. moreover, am not able to think o' any situation or circumstances when such words would be appropriate. foul. vulgar. crude. vile.
if had been Gromnir who sent messages, would we be able to explain self to our grandparents why such messages were anything other than damning? am not sure what is the true north for vol's moral compass, but whenever am unsure, we call up the ghosts o' our grandparents and ask 'em... metaphorical 'course, am not complete loony. grandma would weep.
vol is not gonna suggest the plaintiff were possible "asking for it"? 'course not. hope not. and even if the plaintiff were a world class grifter and liar, it wouldn't change what the messages says 'bout ab.
unless is proof ab messages is fake, then am o' the opinion ab is already guilty o' being a world-class dirtbag. answering in the affirmative the accusations central to civil suit itself would only have the possible result o' magnifying and cementing such conclusions.
answers to questions o' guilt and innocence is rare ending concerns 'bout right and wrong.
HA! Good Fun!