Stupid is as stupid does. Hanging up the phone could have been an option?
Posted on 10/18/2004 1:37:23 AM PDT by kattracks
Edited on 10/18/2004 2:53:02 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
"If Linda Tripp had only hired a transcriptionist to make a written record of the conversation, or dicated it from memory later on, and published it in a magazine article, she would have been fine."
Of course, she might also have been dead. You know what they say, better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6.
I think after sex in the city, we should expect more these kinds of cases.
There should be no outrage when our interactions have been cheapened to this extent.
Stupid is as stupid does. Hanging up the phone could have been an option?
IMHO, he is toast...the issue is he had "control" over her...that is the real problem with sexual harrasment...it is a "quid pro quo" of a sexual deviant having the luxury of hitting on an insubordiante at his liking and figuring he is SO powerful that he will "backed" by the investors and the lawyers, people like him are always convinced THEY will get away with it...look at Bill Clinton!
O'Reilly strikes me as the "type" who feels entitled to this type of work place behavior...
I have always been disgusted with his horny boyish behavior when certain women are guests on his show...
Here in Penna, it is; Florida, too. I'm sure there are more. Remember the Flori-duh lib-dem who taped the GOP operative's strategy cellphone call, and gave the tape to the Klintoons, a few years back? Charges were later dropped, when a fine was paid, IIRC.
Setting up bosses could be her cottage industry or ... I am of two thoughts concerning her Little Sisters of the Rosary attire - one for public consumption or she may really be very easily offended.
Of course. And that was clearly an illegal interception of a third party cell phone transmission, where the listener was not an intended party to the conversation.
But, of course, this was a dim protecting us from evil conservatives so, like Sandy Burglar, he gets a pass.
ml1954 wrote:
Further, I don't think she ever thought this would all go public. I think she expected a big (and hushed up) out of court settlement. BOR called her bluff. She and her attorney didn't expect this. Thus her, "I never expected my life to take this acute left turn" statement.
If she wants her life back, she'd be wise not to air the tapes- if she has 'em. A little late to be wanting life back.
If her allegations are true, O'Reilly is a pervert.
If untrue, O'Reilly is the poorest judge of character on the planet and ought to be kicked off the air post haste.
Do you suppose if true the pictures of O'Reilly being booked as a sex offender will be spread across the net like his competitor Larry Kings booking for his own criminal acts?
If she has tapes then he is done
If not then out of court settlement is more likely which is most likely what she wants in first place""
Don't most states have statutes in place that a worker who claims Sax Harrassment from her workplace CANNOT be fired while everything is be handled by the judicial system?
Wouldn't that paint her as guilty of something even before the situation was sorted out? If she can be fired, it sure places a woman in a bad place, trying to stop the harrassment and not lose her job all at the same time. No wonder these creeps are called predators.
Let's see if she claims the advances started in 2001, then it takes THREE years for a lawsuit?
Not logical. The whole thing REEKS!!!
The alleged calls in the O'Reilly case were placed during normal working hours. ""
I thought some of the calls were to her home in the later hours of the evening. Is that NORMAL working hours for that kind of job?
I was the subject of harrassment from a "boss" many years ago, and he threatened me with lots of things if I went to the big boss and told on him. It was very intimidating.
I tolerated it just long enough to find another job. When the big boss asked why I was leaving, I was too young and scared to tell him the truth. I had lots of sleepless nights and didn't answer the phone at night for many months. Answering machines weren't as common in households then.
Maybe she has the Anita Hill syndrome.
Pray for W and Our Troops
More immediately to the point, unless she told him she was recording the conversations, they are illegal and inadmissible in court.""
I believe in New York, only ONE person in the conversation taping must be aware of the taping going on. Therefore, the evidence would be admissable. Some other states have the statute.
She said she was afraid of persecution as Bill had warned her he would break any woman who said anything. The appearance of that thug Bo Deitz or whatenver his name is on FOX proclaiming that he was hired by O'reilly and he was going to ruin this women, investigate every corner of her life from birth and drag it out in public and show it all pretty much substantiated her allegations. I hope she has the tapes so we can get rid of O'Reilly. He had NO character long before these charges.
Wouldn't that paint her as guilty of something even before the situation was sorted out? If she can be fired, it sure places a woman in a bad place, trying to stop the harrassment and not lose her job all at the same time.
Not an attorney, but I think that job protection only comes into play if the alleged victim/employee follows the employer's in-place process to pursue a complaint. It sounds like in this case she went straight to her own attorney and threatened to file a claim directly against BOR without informing Fox News and thus not giving them an opportunity to correct the alleged problem in the work place.
At first take, it seems unreasonable that Fox News is in the process of firing her, but note that they are going through the courts to get approval. My hunch is that it is on the grounds that she did not follow company policy in reporting an illegal act.
Suppose the "crime" was instead theft, rather than sexual harrassment. An employee who has property stolen by another employee in the work place fails to report the crime, and instead takes civil action outside the company. This does not allow the other employees to be protected from the thief among them, and does not appear to be ethical in the part of the initial "victim".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.