O'Reilly Sueing Producer for Attempted Extortion

[dmp]

She's a money-grubbing whore...





http://www.drudgereport.com/fox.htm

 

[nakedemperor]

If you cover Chris Farley in your avatar, D, leaving only the frilly on his right hand (left side of the image) it looks like a sabretooth tiger with bloody teeth.

I also see a cloud out the window that looks like Mikhail Gorbechov.

 

[5stringJeff]

So O'Reilly is pre-emptively suing because she is going to file sexual harassment charges?

 

[Jimmyeatworld]

Looks more like a Rottweiler to me.

 

[dilloduck]

If you cover Chris Farley in your avatar, D, leaving only the frilly on his right hand (left side of the image) it looks like a sabretooth tiger with bloody teeth.

I also see a cloud out the window that looks like Mikhail Gorbechov.

I assume this to mean you think Ds' post to be imaginary?

 

[dmp]

So O'Reilly is pre-emptively suing because she is going to file sexual harassment charges?

No, he is suing because she's trying to extort money from him.

 

[nakedemperor]

No, he is suing because she's trying to extort money from him.

What's the difference between an out-of-court settlement and asking for settlement before a court hearing ever takes place?

 

[dmp]

What's the difference between an out-of-court settlement and asking for settlement before a court hearing ever takes place?

I must have missed what exactly Fox/O'Reilly are asking for, monetary-wise.

IF they are asking for $$ the difference is:

"they" said "give us money, or we'll make up some sexual-harrassment charges which will embarass you"

Fox says

"Fuck that, that's illegal...we're sueing YOU now. "

 

[Palestinian Jew]

A Yahoo! article I read mentioned that the girl might have some kind of tapes.

Also, it appears that all of the accusations are verbal sexual harrassment, not physical.

 

[nakedemperor]

I must have missed what exactly Fox/O'Reilly are asking for, monetary-wise.

IF they are asking for $$ the difference is:

"they" said "give us money, or we'll make up some sexual-harrassment charges which will embarass you"

Fox says

"Fuck that, that's illegal...we're sueing YOU now. "

Yeah I understand the circumstance but leaving out the "we'll make something up" bit, I'm talking purely from a legal standpoint. Why is it legal to go to court, and then say, ok, for this much money we'll DROP the charges, but illegal to go directly to the accused and say for this much money we won't FILE any charges.

Possibly because without a court's presence you technically couldn't prove a decision was reached or that the decision was carried out...? I dunno, looking for more on this.

 

[dmp]

Also, it appears that all of the accusations are verbal sexual harrassment, not physical.

Problem is, without adverse working conditions, such as described by law, it's impossible to have sexual harrassment.

 

[Yurt]

Yeah I understand the circumstance but leaving out the "we'll make something up" bit, I'm talking purely from a legal standpoint. Why is it legal to go to court, and then say, ok, for this much money we'll DROP the charges, but illegal to go directly to the accused and say for this much money we won't FILE any charges.

Possibly because without a court's presence you technically couldn't prove a decision was reached or that the decision was carried out...? I dunno, looking for more on this.

First, if one has gone to court, then one has presumbly filed a complaint or lawsuit. That being, once you file a complaint, there are legal ramifications for such an act. For instance, should you be full of donkey horse pucky (???) then you can be not only sanctioned, but counter-sued for malicious prosecution, vexatious litigant and so forth.

An out of court settlement at this point has some merit, ie, the person who brought the complaint, will most likely think a bit before incurring such legal ramifications.

Second, if the person has not gone to court, but still wants to tell the other party about this "complaint," they are free to do so, so long as they do not threaten criminal prosecution. If only legal, say asking for money in a sexual harrassment case or here possibly extortion in this case, then there is the risk of being counter-sued for extortion. This is similar to the being sued for malicious prosecution, except there has been no legal proceedings at this point.

Regardless of either defense or counter suit, the person countering must still prove their claim in court.

hope that helps...

 

[lilcountriegal]

A Yahoo! article I read mentioned that the girl might have some kind of tapes.

Also, it appears that all of the accusations are verbal sexual harrassment, not physical.

I heard on the radio coming to work today that the charges were brought because Bill O'Reilly "forced" her to have phone sex.

Helllllllllllloooooooooooooooooooooo Andrea.... HANG UP DUMBASS!

 

[lilcountriegal]

Apparently I was a bit off... its a bit more extensive than phone sex and it sounds like she has some taped evidence.

I'm still reading the complaint (warning for lewdness), but figured I'd share...

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1013043mackris1.html

 

[lilcountriegal]

If true, O'Reilly is one sick puppy.

However, my questions for her are:

1) if she was so repulsed by his "come ons" and sexual talk, why did she return to Fox's/O'Reilly's employment after landing a substantially better paying job at CNN.

2) if she was so "frightened and repulsed", why did she agree to go to O'Reilly's hotel room to watch the President's press conference.

3) why did she continue to have telephone contact with O'Reilly numerous times after she said he had unwilling phone sex with her (complete to ejaculation each time...). She continued to take his calls and call him in return. I believe the first "phone sex" contact even came before she agreed to go to his hotel room.

I smell a money grubbing scheme.

(for those who want to skip the formality of the smoking gun complaint, i believe the details start on page 7)

 

[dilloduck]

If true, O'Reilly is one sick puppy.

However, my questions for her are:

1) if she was so repulsed by his "come ons" and sexual talk, why did she return to Fox's/O'Reilly's employment after landing a substantially better paying job at CNN.

2) if she was so "frightened and repulsed", why did she agree to go to O'Reilly's hotel room to watch the President's press conference.

3) why did she continue to have telephone contact with O'Reilly numerous times after she said he had unwilling phone sex with her (complete to ejaculation each time...). She continued to take his calls and call him in return. I believe the first "phone sex" contact even came before she agreed to go to his hotel room.

I smell a money grubbing scheme.

(for those who want to skip the formality of the smoking gun complaint, i believe the details start on page 7)

I heard O'Reilly wants to tapes released NOW. He can't be too worried about his behavior !

 

[lilcountriegal]

I just read that too Dillo.... O'Reilly's going to the courts to force her to release the tapes. Her attorney isnt even acknowledging there IS tapes.

Fox has also released emails from her to various friends about the "wonderful working environment", etc., that she is in.

The whole thing smells like a money making scheme to me.

 

[dilloduck]

I just read that too Dillo.... O'Reilly's going to the courts to force her to release the tapes. Her attorney isnt even acknowledging there IS tapes.

Fox has also released emails from her to various friends about the "wonderful working environment", etc., that she is in.

The whole thing smells like a money making scheme to me.

She may have ALREADY made money. Some behind the scenes schmuck may have paid her to bring the suit against O'Reilly. He has lots of enemies !

 

[Palestinian Jew]

Does this mean O'Reilly isn't looking out for me anymore?