[Gamecock]

[2ndDivisionVet]

Why didn’t she just get that “Dragon” speech recognition software? [snort]

[Hardraade]

It’s not up to website to “dismiss” the case, is it?

She’s just the wh*re, not the judge.

[Vermont Lt]

I got an email to join for free. So my wife and I set up profile. Every day for a week I would send my wife the “profile of the day.”

One day it was a 5’2” woman who was 300 pounds and who had a list of requirements two paragraphs long.

Any wonder why they are lonely?

I canceled my fake account after a week. It was getting a little scary in there.

[JimSEA]

It somehow satisfying when a con game gets scammed itself.

[AndyTheBear]

In its statement, Ashley Madison said its service is “100 per cent authentic,” as described in its terms of use, and that “we resent any implication otherwise and are certain we will be both vindicated and victorious in court.”

Sounds like a weasel worded denial--why not just say what the employee was hired to actually do and state directly that she was not hired to make fake profiles?

Also...using the words "100 per cent authentic" for a site dedicated to people not being authentic is rather ironic anyway.

[Gamecock]

It is reported on USA Today that she entered profiles for their Brazilian site.

___________

Brazilian. They speak Portuguese, no? I once knew this Portuguese waitress....

[martinidon]

any guy that signs up to this website and thinks there are married women or single women looking to hook up with them deserves what they get. The same is true for guys who go to strip clubs and think the strippers are really into them...

[bramps]

Ashley Madison sounds like an old sponsor of the Charlie Brown shows. Actually I believe it was Dolly Madison. Either way Linus is not going to be happy about this.

[Revolting cat!]

[JSDude1]

ASHLEY MADISON sounds like bottom feeding scum (at least it would have been in years past) now this is “mainstream” still this idea and website gives me the creeps!

[MacMattico]

I don’t doubt she hurt her wrists, just not sure it was typing...!

[Swordmaker]

Something doesn't jive with this. Unles Miss Silva was an independent contractor working for Ashley Madison, her work typing these so-called fake profiles (and it is irrelevant whether they are fake or not) was under their direction and their employment, had to be covered under Canadian law, just like US law, by workers' compensation insurance for ANY work related injury or illness. Even if she were an independent contractor, she would have to provide the employer with proof she had her own WC coverage, or they would have to add her to their policy for the work time she provided them.

All workers' Compensation Policies are the sole remedy for an injured worker. The worker may not sue unless the employer can be shown to not carry such coverage and/or actively prevent the employee from making a claim. Ashley Madison, according to the article, WAS covered, and had her examined by doctors who recommended treatment. Independent examiners found NO INJURY. She was offended that they (AM) looked at her Facebook page to find her using her hands doing things incompatible with her injuries. . . but is was the WC insurance company investigators, not Ashley Madison that did the background checks on Miss Silva and found she was using her "injured" wrists in riding Jetskis and other sports while claiming debilitating wrist problems. My girlfriend is a Nurse Case Manager for Workers' Compensation and tells me this is not unusual in questionable cases like this one. I'll bet the insurance company has video on her using her hands for normal recreation things. . . they make DAMN sure when they make such a flat benefit denial. I would not be surprised if she does not have a long claims history of minor WC claims. The fact they went so quickly to a QME argues that is the case.

Ergo, since the doctors who independently examined her (Qualified Medical examiners — QMEs) found no justifiable work injury, this will be found by the courts to be an illegal suit under Canada's Workers' Compensation law.

My analysis of this case is that this attorney (barrister?) is attempting to claim a fraudulent activity to make the whole enterprise a "criminal" activity which cannot be protected under workers' compensation! That's why the 'fraud' claims.