O'Reilly Hit with Sexual Harassment Suit

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

[scottybk]

O'Reilly in trouble!

[CaptSkip]

It's embarrassing no doubt, and you may be right.

I've always thought that this election might be the last election to be based on an informed and educated electorate.

My pessimism is based on voter fraud from the Dems, and the realization that very soon, what I call the "JayWalking" voters will become overwhelming. These are the on the street, everyday folks interviewed on Leno that are not sure how many moons orbit the Earth, and can't name the body of water to the "Left" of California.

These voters are the key to the intellectual left's victory. How ironic.

[blogbat]

Still, we have yet to hear her side of the conversation. And assuming recordings were made, which seems to either be the case or she has a steel-trap memory (or at least for the defense, a challengable memory), we'll get to hear what occurred in the white space between his quotes in the Mackris complaint

[bobwoodard]

Did you read the things he said to her. Calling her on the phone and masturbating. EEW!!!

At least she was polite enough to wait until he finshed, before hanging up...

[bigeasy_70118]

I have a question re settlement negotiations: At the time they 'offered to settle' they had not (a) identified O'Reilly by name, or (b) given fox a list of exactly what was being alleged, or (c) filed their complaint. How can those be considered settlement negotiations for purposes of Rule 608?

It's actually rule 408. Sorry about the typo in the above post. Keep in mind, that Fox made those allegations in their lawsuit. They may or may not be true. But if true, I am not sure why any of it would affect the prohibition against using settlement negotiations in court. I would think that in order to settle the claim, FOX would want detail the allegations in any Waiver or Release. So at some point during the settlement process, names dates etc. would have to be exchanged. Just because it hadn't happened (according to Fox) doesn't mean it wouldn't have, if Fox were negotiating in good faith.

[BearCub]

I'm still having a hard time believing this whole thing. O'Reilly could have settled - maybe not for 60M but he could have slipped her a million bucks to go away. I just can't believe that if this is true he wouldn't have done that - instead he sued her preemptively. That doesn't seem to me to be what a guilty guy would do. Or maybe that's exactly why he did it. Argh! My head is going to explode!

[since1868]

I would love to see Oliver North in that time slot

[MichelleWSC]

I was reading the statement on page 17 where O'Falafel was using the vibrator on himself At the same time on TV Judy Garland was singing "buzz buzz buzz went the buzzer" ROTFFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I always thought he was a little buzzy now I know why LOLOLOL

[Mr. K]

hate to say it... but when you read this it sounds like she was an active participant

She frequently mentions long passages of dialog with "" quotes as to what O'Reilly said, and then says Plaintif declined to participate, then goes on for many more paragraphs...

1) Since she quotes him (verbatim?) why doesn't she include her quote.

2) Why would O'Reilly continue for many more paragraphs if she DECLINED

It sounds to me like his quotes are out of context.

Was her declination "Oh Bill now stop that..(giggle)" or "Sir that is language I dont care to hear- please stop this instant or I will contact the authorities"

Do you see the difference? Am I wrong?

[vrwcagent0498]

I wonder if they might've been having an affair and he dumped her. (or she seduced him, got what she wanted, and dumped him)

Possibly a set-up?

Reminds me of Anita Hill. Why would any smart, professional woman stay in the same job (for 4 years in this instance) if she was being treated like this?

[fooman]

oh, I 've seen those in the Bahamas. Got it. You can buy them next to the senior frogs...

[Cboldt]

Didn't O'Reilly convince Fox to file another lawsuit on his behalf a while back?

Yes, against Franken. I don't recall what the gravamen of the complaint was.

[phxaz]

dish it, sweetie!

[BearCub]

I would think that in order to settle the claim, FOX would want detail the allegations in any Waiver or Release. So at some point during the settlement process, names dates etc. would have to be exchanged. Just because it hadn't happened (according to Fox) doesn't mean it wouldn't have, if Fox were negotiating in good faith.

Okay. It just seemed like their initial approach was "one of your big guys (and we're not saying who) did some bad stuff. Give us 60M or we're going to sue."

That screams extortion - and IIRC, extortion is illegal even if the action you threaten (suing) is otherwise perfectly legal.

[stockpirate]

Mr. O is a lib, admitted to being friends with Kerry for over 20 years. When a lib is going to take down another lib I just watch and laugh.

[GreatOne]

Even though I don't like O'Reilly, these "quotes" seem awfully suspicious. Especially the one about Roger Ailes......

The one extended quote makes me wonder if she has him taped. I have no other explanation as to why any lawyer would quote that extensively if it were a mere recollection; they would say it was a paraphrase in that event.

I think that half of this is true and half b.s. Can't imagine he's that big a bore.

[bobwoodard]

If her work environment was so hostile on account of Bill O, then why did she come back to Fox after 6 months at CNN? It doesn't add up.

Very true and it turns out she ended up having to work with him on both his TV and radio show to make up the salary differential after leaving CNN. If it was that bad, wouldn't the news that she'd be 'exposed' to more BoR cause her to rethink the job?

Or perhaps she could have reported the harassing, which she was supposed to do...

[Mamzelle]

Active or no--he's a self-indulgent idiot. His stock just took quite a dive.

[vrwcagent0498]

The cover of Franken-stein's book looked like the O'Reilly's show. (and FNC)

[Endeavor]

"i'll bet he wants to talk about the war in iraq now"

Priceless!

[blogbat]

If so, and there is nothing in his defense, then let's make a note of his attorney- he is even more lacking in good sense than O'Reilly, if that be so.