Posted on 01/31/2013 8:42:29 AM PST by jimbo123
Infamous hoaxster Tawana Brawley whose outrageous rape lie 25 years ago inflamed racial tensions nationwide yesterday was finally slapped with a court order to settle a hefty defamation case against her.
For at least 25 years, she has been living a major lie, said former Dutchess County prosecutor Steven Pagones, who was falsely accused of raping Brawley in 1987 and finally tracked her down, thanks to The Post.
To me, this has always been about responsibility and accountability, added the former ADA, who won the $190,000 defamation lawsuit against Brawley, 40, now a nurse in Virginia, more than a decade ago.
At 9 percent interest, that debt, which Brawley never attempted to pay off, now totals $431,492, according to the wage-garnishment papers filed in Virginias Surry County Court.
-snip-
According to Pagones lawyer, Garry Bolnick, the single moms wages could be docked 10 to 25 percent per paycheck as retribution for her lies.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
He is the "principal owner of a private investigations firm" but couldn't find her for 25 years?
I thought she had gone to jail for some recent criminal act.
I remember reading an article by the NY Post years ago about her moving down South, converting to Islam and changing her name to some five syllable Muzzie name.
Like anyone gives a sh!t what you think.
If it weren’t for her, he’d be pimping underage girls wearing his trademark purple jogging suit.
“As far as Im concerned she acted out of childish stupidity.”
Not a chance.
A bunch of chest thumping over a little fish.
You’ll be back to screaming like a little girl the next time the big fish bites.
Its no wonder the democrats outsmart us so much.
I believe Brother Al only gets involved when there's MONEY to be made, not paid.
You have far more confidence in this country's courts (and lawyers) than do I.
Not a little fish to the people she screwed over. You probably think that Crystal Mangum is a little fish too. There are people on this forum whose opinions I respect. You're not even in the top 99.99%
Pagones subsequently filed a civil suit against Al Sharpton and lawyers C. Vernon Mason and Alton H. Maddox, seeking $395 million in damages for 22 alleged defamatory statements.
On July 13, 1998, after an eight-month trial, a jury found Sharpton liable for defamation for seven of the statements, Mason for one, and Maddox for two. On July 29, 1998, the jury awarded Pagones a total of $345,000 in damages.
Sharpton was found liable for $65,000 of the amount, Maddox for $95,000, and Mason for $185,00
I agree that collecting may be a problem, but he’s gotta try. She’ll probably pi$$ away her seizable assets(*) and then file for bankruptcy.
(*— Or illicitly hide them, and then lie about it under oath in the bankruptcy proceedings. She’s good at lying.)
No just totally irrelevant.
I believe Sharpton has a similar judgment against him, which he never has paid.
And nobody is guiltier than him. Brawley would have dropped it and confessed early on but Sharpton saw his big score and encouraged her to lie.
I agree almost 100%. Sure, she was young and stupid and probably “put up to it” by others, but she committed a horrific crime. She should have done time in juvenile hall.
As to the money, I agree it is appropriate. Frankly I am surprised she wasn’t advised to declare bankruptcy decades ago, listing these (Pagones’s and others) debts to be discharged. (Perhaps they couldn’t be, as the perjury was a willful tort as opposed to negligent? Dunno.)
$430K? His clothing allowance from MSNBC is probably larger than that.
I agree that Sharpton and the other adults who used Brawley’s story are more culpable. I wonder how it is that he’s avoided paying the civil judgments against him? I mean, he’s openly paid by MSNBC and other entities that could be served with a garnishment order. Oh well.
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.