Photo credit: Chris Brown (Instagram)
Chris Brown is asking a judge to grant him a new trial after a jury ordered him to pay $12.9 million in a dog-bite lawsuit.
The singer has filed additional court documents explaining why he believes the trial was unfair. His arguments include concerns about the jury and testimony involving his past.
Brown’s legal team is also challenging the decision to allow discussion of his history with Rihanna during the proceedings.
Chris Brown challenges $12.9M dog-bite verdict
Brown’s latest filing comes after the jury reached its multimillion-dollar verdict in the case.
The lawsuit stems from an incident involving Brown’s dog and a man who was bitten. Brown has argued that the jury’s decision should be reconsidered.
His new court documents reportedly focus on several issues that he believes affected the outcome.
One of his main concerns involves information about his past that his attorneys previously argued had no connection to the dog-bite allegations.
Chris Brown argues past arrest prejudiced jury
Brown is particularly challenging the inclusion of testimony about a past arrest.
His legal team had previously asked the court to prevent such information from coming up during the trial. They argued that the incident had no direct connection to the allegations involving his dog.
The court ultimately allowed the testimony.
Brown now argues that bringing up the old incident could have unfairly influenced the jurors against him.
His attorneys contend that jurors should have focused on the facts surrounding the dog-bite case rather than forming opinions based on unrelated events from his past.
Rihanna testimony also becomes part of appeal
Brown’s legal arguments also address testimony concerning his history with Rihanna.
His team had objected to the inclusion of information about their relationship and the domestic violence incident from 2009.
Brown’s attorneys argued that the decades-old incident had no relevance to whether he was responsible for the dog-bite allegations.
The court nevertheless allowed the testimony during the trial.
Brown is now pointing to that decision as another reason he believes the proceedings were unfair.
Why Brown says he deserves a new trial
At the center of Brown’s argument is whether evidence about his past improperly affected the jury’s view of him.
His legal team appears to be arguing that jurors may have judged Brown’s character instead of focusing solely on the circumstances surrounding the dog incident.
The case, however, also involves questions about responsible pet ownership. The opposing side has argued that Brown could be held responsible if his dog escaped and injured someone.
That issue is separate from Brown’s personal history.
A judge has not yet ruled on Brown’s request for a new trial.
For now, the $12.9 million verdict remains in place while the court considers his latest filings.
The legal battle could continue depending on how the judge responds to Brown’s request.
Source: The Breakfast Club Power 105.1 FM
About the Author
