CM Punk chat

[Mr_Danger]

Can anyone elaborate on what Punk did to make Tony Khan fear for his life? Only just caught that snippet yesterday and I can’t be arsed scrolling through a million buzzfeed articles to find out.

[Michael_3165]

1 hour ago, Mr_Danger said:

Can anyone elaborate on what Punk did to make Tony Khan fear for his life? Only just caught that snippet yesterday and I can’t be arsed scrolling through a million buzzfeed articles to find out.

He is the son of a billionaire, I doubt anyone has even shouted in his direction. A few raised voices and an aggressive posture may have been enough. Who can tell what one person deems a threat to their safety? 

[LaGoosh]

1 hour ago, Mr_Danger said:

Can anyone elaborate on what Punk did to make Tony Khan fear for his life? Only just caught that snippet yesterday and I can’t be arsed scrolling through a million buzzfeed articles to find out.

Well no one actually knows for sure other than Punk "lunged" at him. It's unlikely Khan actually did legitimately "fear for his life" - it's probably a term his legal team told him to use to justify Punk's firing.

[Nick James]

I often thought that it was more than Tony misspoke and meant he feared for his safety rather than life, but think LaGoosh is spot on that it was more a legal wording to avoid any potential legal issues with Punks firing. 

[BomberPat]

yeah, I'm almost certain "feared for his life" was a very specific phrasing for legal purposes.

But also, there were reports (maybe Meltzer, honestly can't remember) when Punk was released that it was the result of an investigation involving the CCTV footage from Wembley, and that it wasn't for the Jack Perry fight. So reading between the lines, and with the suggestion that he "lunged" at Tony, I don't think it's remotely out of the question that he at least threatened to get physical with Tony.

[Keith Houchen]

Saying you feared for your life on a scripted show about play fighting isn’t the water tight legal defence you think it is, lads. 

[Liam O'Rourke]

Think back to how absolutely zero was said about Brawl Out on TV. Tony isn't saying anything like that on his television show, regardless of the context of the show, without lawyers agreeing he could easily justify it if legally challenged.

[TheScarlettChad]

Nakamura hitting a GTS on RAW was....something wasn't it? Imagine if they're trolling and he isn't actually coming in.

 

 

He's coming in, I know but still.

[Infinity Land]

2 minutes ago, TheScarlettChad said:

Nakamura hitting a GTS on RAW was....something wasn't it? Imagine if they're trolling and he isn't actually coming in.

 

 

He's coming in, I know but still.

KENTA's coming back! Sorry, Hideo Itami. Black & Gold is taking over. 

[Keith Houchen]

1 hour ago, Liam O'Rourke said:

Think back to how absolutely zero was said about Brawl Out on TV. Tony isn't saying anything like that on his television show, regardless of the context of the show, without lawyers agreeing he could easily justify it if legally challenged.

And that justification when challenged would be “It’s a tv show mate”

[Hannibal Scorch]

There is footage. Whatever it was that happened was obviously enough for him to be sacked in the way he was. 

[Keith Houchen]

Which adds to why saying something on a scripted tv show as some sort of legal manoeuvre is patently bollocks. 

[Hannibal Scorch]

17 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

Which adds to why saying something on a scripted tv show as some sort of legal manoeuvre is patently bollocks. 

Surely he could sue if that were true?

[Keith Houchen]

Just now, Hannibal Scorch said:

Surely he could sue if that were true?

Who could sue who?

[Hannibal Scorch]

1 minute ago, Keith Houchen said:

Who could sue who?

If you're saying the claim made isn't true, Punk could sue for defamation of character surely? They obviously felt from a legal perspective there was enough to terminate his contract over it.