Posted on 07/09/2014 2:27:42 AM PDT by nickcarraway
Donald Sterling railed on the witness stand Tuesday against the doctors who deemed him mentally incompetent, the executives who bounced him out of the NBA and the opposing lawyer who struggled to get him to answer a question.
Sterling was consistently combative during his hourlong testimony that came as he fights to keep ownership of the Clippers. He briefly cried when he professed his devotion to his wife, Shelly. He predicted he would win a $9-billion judgment in an antitrust case he filed against the pro basketball league and would one day sell the team for as much as $5 billion.
That would be 21/2 times the record $2 billion the Clippers brought in a late May sale conducted by Shelly Sterling, which her husband wants to void.
"Just be patient for another two years," Sterling, 80, vowed as his time on the stand neared a close, "and you are going to see things you never saw."
Many in a packed courtroom in downtown Los Angeles alternately laughed and shook their heads as Sterling unleashed his fury. He suggested that the two doctors who found him mentally incapacitated were directed to do so and that one was drunk when she examined him. He berated his inquisitor — Bert Fields, the renowned Hollywood lawyer representing Shelly Sterling — as incompetent and possibly guilty of fraud.
Sterling testified on the second day of a Los Angeles County Superior Court trial, in which Judge Michael Levanas will determine whether Shelly Sterling acted legally when she seized control of the Sterling Family Trust on May 29 and sold the Clippers to former Microsoft chief executive Steve Ballmer.
After the hearing, lawyers for both sides agreed on one thing: Donald Sterling had been himself. His lawyers deemed him appropriately feisty.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Who knows but I hope he eats their cake.
No, if he has dementia, that will not help him keep the team.
I don’t really care about professional sports, and I had never even heard of this man before the leaked phone call comments were in the news, but a thought has occurred to me regarding private property and the progressive agenda.
Stirling is told that he can’t keep his team, and then the owner of the Redskins football team is stripped of his copyright. I have no knowledge of the law, but I suspect that this is just the beginning of a widespread push to redefine private property. They started with these rich white guys because there are probably people who are envious of their wealth and, therefore, don’t see a problem with this.
Next step, some more prominent white guys are deprived of their private property based upon some contrived offense. Eventually, the public is taught that the concept of private property is evil and so unfair. And the progressives’ propaganda ministry, also known as the media, will do its part in this educational program. The media and political elite, of course, will have their private property untouched, comrade.
Stirling = Sterling
Go, Don, GO!!!
I don't think it matters. What does happen if Sterling loses this court hearing is that his wife takes control of the family trust and sells the team to Ballmer. When she does that then Silver's ban is pretty much moot; Sterling isn't an owner anymore. As part of the deal, Sterling's wife had to agree to indemnify the league from any legal actions by any member of the family. So looney or not, Sterling can continue his suit against the league and if he wins then his wife is on the hood for the whole billion. And the way he's going he's going to lose the competency hearing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.