October 22, 2004
Neither love nor money.
So, it looks like Bill O'Reilly's accuser wants to 'settle' (translation:$$$). When Kobe Bryant's accuser filed a 'civil lawsuit' (translation: $$$), Dawn Summers proclaimed Kobe 'not guilty'. And, while there was a point in time when Dawn Summers was a big O'Reilly fan, going so far as to argue with me over whether he was one of 'mine' or 'hers' (and then it got to where both of us wanted the other to claim him), how much are we betting that she doesn't make the same proclamation now?
Posted by Karol at October 22, 2004 04:04 PM | TrackBackTechnorati Tags:
I'm not sure what the big deal is here. She tried to settle before filing. O'Reilly called her attempt to settle "extortion" in his own (ridiculous) suit. She wants to settle now, before discovery has started, so it isn't too expensive to pursue the case.
It is a lawsuit, not a criminal complaint. All Mackris ever asked for was money. Did you expect the relatively poor person (or her contingency-fee (probably) lawyer to fight a rich person and a media conglomerate until they were broke?
I don't know about the merits of the case, but lawyers tend to see settling as a good thing.
Posted by: ugarte at October 22, 2004 05:36 PMI think it is extortion, if you don't want to take it to trial and just want to take the cash and run. The point should be to punish the guilty not monetarily reward the accuser.
Posted by: Karol at October 22, 2004 05:47 PMAre you familiar with our legal system? The cost of moral justice is wicked high. We've chosen as a society to substitute money for justice because Justice + $1 = begging for change to take the train home from the courthouse.
Can I assume you also think that Edwards' clients were "extorting" the companies that made products that mangled them?
Posted by: ugarte at October 22, 2004 06:02 PMHell yes.
Posted by: Karol at October 22, 2004 06:09 PMDude, Kobe and Bill are two dogs of entirely different...umm...I want to say feathers here, but that just doesn't seem right. Moving on, a better analogy would be Mcgreevey and O'reilly (purported work place sexual harrassers). You went on and on about how mcgreevey was guilty of this and that, not once did you mention extortion then. Suddenly ohhhh extortion-- psshaa, ugarte is right on the money on this one.
Posted by: Dawn Summers at October 22, 2004 06:13 PMThe fact that Golan dropped the charges definitely lead me to believe he was extorting McGreevey. It's the lack of follow-through in both of these cases that make the accuser look like money-hungry liars.
Posted by: Karol at October 22, 2004 06:19 PMWell, Karol, if you can tell that the parents of the woman killed by the Boston PD how to get their daughter back, I'll bet they would agree not to sue the city. Otherwise, I would expect them to 'extort' Boston for upwards of a mil. That case is NEVER going to see the inside of a courtroom.
Posted by: ugarte at October 22, 2004 06:22 PMIs that mil going to bring their daughter back?
Posted by: Karol at October 22, 2004 06:36 PMNah, but it'll get them some phat bling bling ya heard!
Posted by: Dawn Summers at October 22, 2004 06:38 PMNo. So I guess Boston shouldn't pay at all. I suppose that they feel really, really bad about it though, so that's probably punishment enough.
Posted by: ugarte at October 22, 2004 07:04 PMOtherwise, file criminal charges. I don't know what money does other than corrupts the process (see: Brooklyn, NY car accident lawsuits).
Posted by: Karol at October 22, 2004 07:05 PMSo the cop should go to jail for doing his job?
Posted by: Dawn Summers at October 22, 2004 09:36 PMDawn would you be defending the cops if this victim had a darker hued skin?
Posted by: Radical Redneck at October 22, 2004 10:29 PMhmm, why Radical Redneck? Do you only support cops who kill people of a darker hue?
Posted by: dawn at October 22, 2004 10:55 PMAnswer the question.
Posted by: Radical Redneck at October 23, 2004 03:12 PM"Otherwise, file criminal charges. I don't know what money does other than corrupts the process "
1. The average citizen does not have the right to file criminal charges.
2. Civil law is designed to deter a range of behavior normally not covered by criminal statutes. If you want people to go to jail for failing to shovel their sidewalks or making lewd comments to the secretary, I guess I'm OK with that, but it seems kind of inefficient.
3. If pushing through to trial is the mark of a litigant truly committed to the justice of his/her cause, why did O'Reilly settle? He undoubtedly has more resources to fight this battle than this chick suing him.


