“Wait for you to serve you, the pigs!” Jake Paul gives off the lawyers after Chavez Jr. Win

Jake Paul is turning his victory after Chavez Jr. in a complete legal show. After improving his record up to 12-1 with a boring and clear victory over Julio Cesar Chavez Jr. Anaheim, Paul has a zero patience for anyone who shouted on his rise. Now, he and his manager are in sight with threats of slander, and seems more desperate than dominant.

Paul – Chávez: Do Piers Morgan have problems?

The television host Morgan triggered two beards to X:

“I had a better struggle with Jake Paul on Thursday than the unmatched farce that took place tonight.”
“The boy is covering his pockets with $$$ buns, but he is killing boxing with these bored bulls staged *** against the biggest fighters passing in front of his first.”

A few days earlier, Paul had sat in Piers Morgan without censorship, only to mark the anchor in “Fat A **” before finishing the interview dramatically.

Jake Paul’s legal threats after Chavez Jr.

“After years of leaving it as” haters who are haters “, I asked my team to go vigorously after anyone who makes lies about my boxing career. Wait for pigs to serve,” Paul snorned on social media.

The Nakisa Oparari Manager Cutted with -even tougher:

“ This statement is non -foundable and irresponsible. The night struggle against Chavez Jr. It was a totally sanctioned ten -vaults attack, formalized by the Athletic Commission of the State of California with official judges. Without staging / equipment: only a hard work and a legitimate victory.To say the opposite not only decreases the integrity of the sport, but also the defamatory damage to MVP. Paul and the commission is enough.

Now even podcasters and bloggers are sweating. Paul’s team tracks all the tweet, post and article that dares to question their legitimacy? They have warned of appointments, depositions and claims of damage that could bury small points of sale in legal fees.

The Symplane Sink: What Peace has to demonstrate

According to the California Act, prevail in a demand for defamation, a plaintiff must show that the statement in question:

1. Transmitted an affirmary fact (not pure opinion)

2. What fake

3. Was published to others

4. Caused reputational damage

As Jake Paul is a public figure, he also faces the standard of “ real malice ”: he must show that critics knew that his statements were false or acting on a reckless discussion because of the truth that it is a great elevator, which requires clear and convincing evidence that the defendants entertained serious doubts about his comment.

It is hard to see this like anything other than a pan of PR. Instead of letting the punch the conversation, Paul is armed by his lawyers. Will this legal blitz silence critics or only amplify the show? One thing is true: Jake Paul’s next struggle may not be in the ring, but in a courtroom. Haters, consider -you warned.