Originally posted by Snively65
View Post
It sounds like there was a small block of jurors who just weren't going to move off the concept that what happens on the ice doesn't belong in a courtroom, so it may very well be moot. Maybe the Boucha legal team in his civil case did some digging into the AIC Athletics archives, located Forbes' history of major penalties, and started asking questions of former teammates and opponents? Hard to believe, in these days where the video of virtually anything is accessible if you ask and preserve soon enough, but this is how private investigators used to do their work. And you would be left to go on the contemporaneous accounts from eyewitnesses drawing on their memories. Hardly precise, but in Boucha v. Forbes it sounded like they got testimony from the two combatants, nearby players, the refs, the penalty box attendant(s) and the local PA announcer, so combining the various accounts should have painted a pretty clear picture.
I also encountered another very interesting follow-up from later in 1975 - a year where earlier, the Broad Street Bullies had just won a second straight Stanley Cup - which touched on another NHL scrape that ended up in the courts ... here is another piece from the SI Vault which serves as an aftermath of the Forbes case, and an intro to Glennie v. Maloney ...
WANTED: AN END TO MAYHEM - Sports Illustrated Vault | SI.com
Leave a comment: