$15,000 lie detector software shows Cain is telling truth, accuser is not.

[Ravi]

The video shows that the woman was speaking truthfully when she said that Cain pulled her head to his crotch.

If the software is to be believed....

hahaha

You are absolutely right.

Does this mean the PI was lying about who was lying?

I think the whole thing was a stunt for the local television station. For reasons I described in post 115, I seriously doubt the ability of the software in this instance.

I believe that the software can work, just not in this case.

I have my doubts that it can work well enough.

But is is just funny what you pointed out as I hadn't bothered to watch the video.

 

[MikeK]

Having working in the insurance industry in some capacity for most of the last two and a half decades, and having lived and worked through the militant women's liberation phenomena of the 70's and 80's, I can say with absolute confidence and first hand knowledge that NUMEROUS settlements are made despite there not being a shred of evidence of the accusations made in all sorts of cases including sexual misconduct. Why? Because the organizations or businesses don't want the negative publicity that invariably ensues and don't want the distraction and expense of a lawsuit. And in the sexual harrassment cases, some of the reported 'offenses' were so minor and unintentional or inconsequential as to make a person's head spin, but the women got money just the same. $35k is a pittance compared to what is paid in some of these cases.

Unscrupulous lawyers, including Gloria Allred, know this all too well. And they are easily bought or are most eager to accept very VERY lucrative fees for high profile lawsuits and legal actions no matter how dubious. And I am pretty confident they will accept a lucrative fee to smear a popular political candidate.

Reallly?

What company did you work for? And can you give me the name of one of its more prominent accounts? Because I will lodge a claim against them on Monday and buy myself a new Cadillac with the settlement.

Thank you for this valuable information.

 

[Foxfyre]

Having working in the insurance industry in some capacity for most of the last two and a half decades, and having lived and worked through the militant women's liberation phenomena of the 70's and 80's, I can say with absolute confidence and first hand knowledge that NUMEROUS settlements are made despite there not being a shred of evidence of the accusations made in all sorts of cases including sexual misconduct. Why? Because the organizations or businesses don't want the negative publicity that invariably ensues and don't want the distraction and expense of a lawsuit. And in the sexual harrassment cases, some of the reported 'offenses' were so minor and unintentional or inconsequential as to make a person's head spin, but the women got money just the same. $35k is a pittance compared to what is paid in some of these cases.

Unscrupulous lawyers, including Gloria Allred, know this all too well. And they are easily bought or are most eager to accept very VERY lucrative fees for high profile lawsuits and legal actions no matter how dubious. And I am pretty confident they will accept a lucrative fee to smear a popular political candidate.

Reallly?

What company did you work for? And can you give me the name of one of its more prominent accounts? Because I will lodge a claim against them on Monday and buy myself a new Cadillac with the settlement.

Thank you for this valuable information.

Actually if you have a slick enough lawyer and were sufficiently unethical, were highly coachable and a good liar, you probably could pull that off. There are lots of professional 'claimant's out there. All you have to do is spend a few days observing in work comp court or city or district court to identify the easier marks.

I'm thinking of one case I personally worked. Grandpa and Grandma who live in a small town south of here took the truck to the city to bring back a purchase leaving their live-in 15-yr-old granddaughter at home. Their Cadillac was left parked under the carport; as it was springtime, the windows and front door were open.

With no idea they are coming, an ex-daughter-in-law drops off her two kids - a nine-yr-old and a 13-yr-old - at the curb, doesn't exit her car herself, and she takes off leaving the kids there.

The 13-yr-old finds the keys to the Cadillac on a peg in the kitchen and decides to take the others for a spin. She runs the Cadillac into a house doing considerable damage to the house and totalling the Cadillac which was an absolutely gorgeous car. The nine-yr-old is slightly injured requiring evaluation at the E.R. Was not hospitalized.

Settlement the insurance paid the mother of the 13-yr-old and the 9-yr-old? $50,000. Why? Because the claim was negligence that the keys were available to the kids and, though the insurance company probably could have won, they knew it would cost them more to go to court than it would to pay the claim.

And that, is the way it is.

A $35k severance package for an opportunistic employee with a good lawyer and threatening to go to court is peanuts.

 

[Foxfyre]

Also, a friend sent me the following information this morning just before leaving for a two week vacation, and I won't be able to reach him for a link. So I am posting this with a qualifier that I do NOT currently have a link to support it. If true about Ms. Allred's client, however, it is quite interesting:

In the courts, Ms. Bialek has had a lengthy record in the Cook County Court system over various civil lawsuits. The following cases on file in Cook County are:

■2000-M1-707461 Defendant against Broadcare Management
■2000-M1-714398 Defendant in lawsuit against Broadcare Management
■2000-M1-701522 Defendant in lawsuit against Broadcare Management
■2005-M1-111072 Defendant in lawsuit against Mr. Mark Beatovic.
■2007-M1-189176 Defendant in lawsuit against Midland Funding.
■2009-M1-158826 Defendant in lawsuit against Illinois Lending.
Ms. Bialek was also sued in 1999 over a paternity matter according to ABC 7 Chicago (WLS-TV). Source: WLS-TV, November 7, 2011

In personal finances, PACER (Federal Court) records show that Ms. Bialek has filed for bankruptcy in the Northern District of Illinois bankruptcy court in 1991 and 2001. The respective case numbers according to the PACER system are 1:01-bk-22664 and 1:91-bk-23273.

Ms. Bialek has worked for nine employers over the last seventeen years. Source: WLS-TV, November 7, 2011

Curiously, if Ms. Bialek had intended to take legal action, the statute of limitations would have passed a decade ago.

Which brings up the question of why she would make such reprehensible statements now?

The questions should be – who is financing her legal team, have any media agreed to pay for her story, and has she been offered employment for taking these actions?

For More Information:
J.D. Gordon, Vice President of Communications
Friends of Herman Cain, Inc.

 

[rdean]

Republicans believe a machine made by scientists over any scientist.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Republicans believe a machine made by scientists over any scientist.

You forgot to add "but only if it proves their point".

 

[MikeK]

Having working in the insurance industry in some capacity for most of the last two and a half decades, and having lived and worked through the militant women's liberation phenomena of the 70's and 80's, I can say with absolute confidence and first hand knowledge that NUMEROUS settlements are made despite there not being a shred of evidence of the accusations made in all sorts of cases including sexual misconduct. Why? Because the organizations or businesses don't want the negative publicity that invariably ensues and don't want the distraction and expense of a lawsuit. And in the sexual harrassment cases, some of the reported 'offenses' were so minor and unintentional or inconsequential as to make a person's head spin, but the women got money just the same. $35k is a pittance compared to what is paid in some of these cases.

Unscrupulous lawyers, including Gloria Allred, know this all too well. And they are easily bought or are most eager to accept very VERY lucrative fees for high profile lawsuits and legal actions no matter how dubious. And I am pretty confident they will accept a lucrative fee to smear a popular political candidate.

Reallly?

What company did you work for? And can you give me the name of one of its more prominent accounts? Because I will lodge a claim against them on Monday and buy myself a new Cadillac with the settlement.

Thank you for this valuable information.

Actually if you have a slick enough lawyer and were sufficiently unethical, were highly coachable and a good liar, you probably could pull that off. There are lots of professional 'claimant's out there. All you have to do is spend a few days observing in work comp court or city or district court to identify the easier marks.

I'm thinking of one case I personally worked. Grandpa and Grandma who live in a small town south of here took the truck to the city to bring back a purchase leaving their live-in 15-yr-old granddaughter at home. Their Cadillac was left parked under the carport; as it was springtime, the windows and front door were open.

With no idea they are coming, an ex-daughter-in-law drops off her two kids - a nine-yr-old and a 13-yr-old - at the curb, doesn't exit her car herself, and she takes off leaving the kids there.

The 13-yr-old finds the keys to the Cadillac on a peg in the kitchen and decides to take the others for a spin. She runs the Cadillac into a house doing considerable damage to the house and totalling the Cadillac which was an absolutely gorgeous car. The nine-yr-old is slightly injured requiring evaluation at the E.R. Was not hospitalized.

Settlement the insurance paid the mother of the 13-yr-old and the 9-yr-old? $50,000. Why? Because the claim was negligence that the keys were available to the kids and, though the insurance company probably could have won, they knew it would cost them more to go to court than it would to pay the claim.

And that, is the way it is.

A $35k severance package for an opportunistic employee with a good lawyer and threatening to go to court is peanuts.

Thanks for the effort but your (negligence re: property damage) example is not circumstantially analogous to the settlements made in the potentially criminal complaints made against Herman Cain, which may be regarded as tacit admissions of guilt.

I dislike engaging in pissing contests but in this case I need to tell you I retired as a (supervisory) Investigator for the New York City Department of Law, Corporation Counsel's Office. When I worked the field the bulk of my caseload involved lawsuits filed against NYC police, Transit police, Housing police and Correction officers. The majority of these cases were dismissed on the first motion because there was no evidence to support the complaints. In situations where there was some tenuous evidence to support a complaint (typically a minor civil rights violation) the average settlement offer was around $10k and in most cases it was accepted because an active defense was most likely to prevail. To justify a settlement offer of $35k or more (1960s/1970s dollars) there would need to be substantially supportive evidence.

I don't know the jurisdiction of your experience but in New York City there is a constant flow of suits filed against law enforcement agencies. So, as outlined above, the process is categorically routinized. And you may rest assured if a complainant is offered a $35k or more settlement (unusual) there is considerable cause to believe a jury will be sympathetic to the plaintiff.

A critically important aspect of our function was discreetly advising complainants and witnesses of the importance of clarity and accuracy and of the criminal nature of and potentially severe penalties for perjured testimony and for lodging false or exaggerated complaints. And you might be surprised at the effect such advice has on the progress of a case.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Doesn't it ring a bell with any of you that when Clinton was undergoing his bimbo eruption, the media and leftists attacked the WOMEN? They were in it for the money it was said. They had no proof it was said. They were being paid to do it, it was said. Until he himself had to admit it was true, there was nothing but denial, denial, denial from the leftist media and his supporters.

So what makes the difference now? We have faceless women and vague accusations, one woman with a very dubious track record and one of the most famous and expensive high profile lawsuit filing attorneys in modern history--how is she affording that do you think?--accusing a man with an exemplary track record and impeccable reputation up until now? But all of you leftists and even some on the right are proclaiming him guilty. Where is the element of doubt now?

The difference is that he is registered Republican and he is a conservative. And most especially he is a conservative black man who MUST be destroyed lest others get a notion to stray off the reservation too. Is that it?

But no, no innocent until proven guilty mentality here. That's only reserved for the guys on the other side.

We have the evidence of two settlements being paid to shut the woman in question up.

Bimbo eruption? Is that what you think of women that are harassed? Even women you believe, in Clinton's case?

Sad.

The settlements were paid because it was cheaper to pay the settlment than pay lawyers to go to court...not because cain was guilty.

Its smart business and big companies do it all the time.....it would cost more in legal expenses and potential negative publicity so they just settle which is cheaper.

 

[Ravi]

Doesn't it ring a bell with any of you that when Clinton was undergoing his bimbo eruption, the media and leftists attacked the WOMEN? They were in it for the money it was said. They had no proof it was said. They were being paid to do it, it was said. Until he himself had to admit it was true, there was nothing but denial, denial, denial from the leftist media and his supporters.

So what makes the difference now? We have faceless women and vague accusations, one woman with a very dubious track record and one of the most famous and expensive high profile lawsuit filing attorneys in modern history--how is she affording that do you think?--accusing a man with an exemplary track record and impeccable reputation up until now? But all of you leftists and even some on the right are proclaiming him guilty. Where is the element of doubt now?

The difference is that he is registered Republican and he is a conservative. And most especially he is a conservative black man who MUST be destroyed lest others get a notion to stray off the reservation too. Is that it?

But no, no innocent until proven guilty mentality here. That's only reserved for the guys on the other side.

We have the evidence of two settlements being paid to shut the woman in question up.

Bimbo eruption? Is that what you think of women that are harassed? Even women you believe, in Clinton's case?

Sad.

The settlements were paid because it was cheaper to pay the settlment than pay lawyers to go to court...not because cain was guilty.

Its smart business and big companies do it all the time.....it would cost more in legal expenses and potential negative publicity so they just settle which is cheaper.

They don't settle if there is no merit to the charge.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

We have the evidence of two settlements being paid to shut the woman in question up.

Bimbo eruption? Is that what you think of women that are harassed? Even women you believe, in Clinton's case?

Sad.

The settlements were paid because it was cheaper to pay the settlment than pay lawyers to go to court...not because cain was guilty.

Its smart business and big companies do it all the time.....it would cost more in legal expenses and potential negative publicity so they just settle which is cheaper.

They don't settle if there is no merit to the charge.

Actually they do.

 

[L.K.Eder]

my expertise in voice analysis proves that obama is to blame