Will Dana White cut Overeem if he's found guilty?

Unless what he does in his personal life detracts from the quality of his work, then I don’t think it bears any relevance on their job. This goes for politicians as much as it does for fighters, singers, actors, etc… anyone in the public eye, or otherwise.

Richard Wagner is one of the most revolutionary and important composers of all time. He quite literally disintegrated the harmonic systems in music, and changed the structure of tonality. His operas and symphonies are beautiful and epic in scale, and he composed some of the most rousing arias and most recognizable tunes in the world. But he was also a noted anti- semite, and given his status in society, is credited with contributing to the rise of anti- semitism in late 19’th century Germany. So, maybe he wasn’t the best person, but his personal flaws don’t detract from his professional accomplishments.

Just my ¢2

I’m not saying it’s right, but nothing is going to happen to him.

While I agree that it isn’t that big of a deal if he simply pushed her away, we have to be honest and admit that Reem does seem to have a bit of a issue with the ladies and not knowing when enough is enough. That said, so does Rampage and he seems to still have a job.

Nothing will come of this while he is employed by the UFC.

I mean rampage hit someone in his truck (with his name plastered all over it) and ran from the scene I dont remember Dana even mentioning it.

Rogers was violent, Overeem was not.

The following elements must be proven to establish a case for battery: (1) an act by a defendant; (2) an intent to cause harmful or offensive contact on the part of the defendant; and (3) harmful or offensive contact to the plaintiff.

The Act The act must result in one of two forms of contact. Causing any physical harm or injury to the victim—such as a cut, a burn, or a bullet wound—could constitute battery, but actual injury is not required. Even though there is no apparent bruise following harmful contact, the defendant can still be guilty of battery; occurrence of a physical illness subsequent to the contact may also be actionable. The second type of contact that may constitute battery causes no actual physical harm but is, instead, offensive or insulting to the victim. Examples include spitting in someone’s face or offensively touching someone against his or her will.

Touching the person of someone is defined as including not only contacts with the body, but also with anything closely connected with the body, such as clothing or an item carried in the person’s hand. For example, a battery may be committed by intentionally knocking a hat off someone’s head or knocking a glass out of some-one’s hand.

Intent Although the contact must be intended, there is no requirement that the defendant intend to harm or injure the victim. In Tort Law, the intent must be either specific intent—the contact was specifically intended—or general intent—the defendant was substantially certain that the act would cause the contact. The intent element is satisfied in Criminal Law when the act is done with an intent to injure or with criminal negligence—failure to use care to avoid criminal consequences. The intent for criminal law is also present when the defendant’s conduct is unlawful even though it does not amount to criminal negligence.

Intent is not negated if the aim of the contact was a joke. As with all torts, however, consent is a defense.

cuz you seems to struggle with the reply button, the caffeine might help you focus.

You don’t realize you’re in one until it’s way too late.