With the medical evidence, we could prove that was not the case.

Whatever relevance such evidence may have to prove other elements of plaintiff's case, it does not have anything to do with the issues presented by the president's and Ferguson's motions for summary judgment. I.e., whether plaintiff herself was the victim of alleged quid pro quo or a hostile work environment, sexual harassment, whether the president and Ferguson conspired to deprive her of her civil rights, or whether she suffered emotional distress so severe in nature that no reasonable person could be expected to endure it.

Why would we do that? ... If that's the case, why did we even start this? So, we decided we were going to work on it.

Many jurisdictions still do not prosecute these cases without medical evidence. The evidence is not in the medical, but what the child states.

There's a lot of evidence to the contrary. If that were the case, then we certainly would not be doing this.

This isn't about DWI. It's about whether he murdered someone.... There is not any evidence of malice in this case. If you find him at fault, you certainly can't convict him of anything more than manslaughter.