Dodgers Lawyer: Stow Has Blame for Beating Too

Bryan Stow left the hospital for a rehabilitation center recently, but the attack on Stow, 42, remains at the forefront of several legal disputes.

And now it appears the Dodgers, in filing a civil complaint against Stow's attackers, are trying to shift the blame for the Opening-Day attack against the two men arrested for assault.

And, apparently, put part of the blame on Stow himself.

"One of the things the jury will be asked to do is to determine what percentage of fault various individuals have for this event," Jerome Jackson, attorney for the McCourt family, told ESPN Los Angeles. "You're saying to the jury, '[The Stow family] are saying [the Dodgers are] 100 percent liable.

"But does that mean [Marvin] Norwood and [Louis] Sanchez, who beat this guy up, have no liability? And, does it mean Mr. Stow himself has no liability?'"

Wow -- that's not exactly a sentiment that should go over favorably with the public, considering that Stow, despite "magical" progress, is still struggling through recovery from a vicious attack.

That attack, obviously, took place at Dodger Stadium and under what appears to be poor security standards.

The Dodgers noted over a month ago that they intended to file a lawsuit against Sanchez and Norwood, and on Thursday Jackson did just that.

"What happened to Bryan Stow was a tragedy," he said. "The Dodgers have held fundraisers. The Dodgers have helped police in solving this case. That doesn't mean we're legally responsible for what happens here.

"What baffles me is that the level of public outrage at the Dodgers seems to be higher than the level of outrage at the people who inflicted the blows."

Jackson also noted that he's been working on "these cases for 23 years" and has never seen one where it didn't "take two to tango."

Yes, he means exactly what you think he means -- when it comes time to speak in court, there's a good chance that Jackson and the Dodgers attempt to push part of the blame for Stow's condition on Stow himself.

And while the court of public opinion might not decide this case, don't expect it to sit well.