Replies

I'll bet Moore gives her everything she's asking for.

Because she has some sort of proof other than her drug-addled-promiscuous-suicide-attempting-40-year-old claims?

I doubt it.

What say you?

I say that I very much doubt she can prove any of her claims, and that she will likely regret opening this can of worms, because her life will be put on trial, and from what i've read of it so far, it's not going to play well.

This case would probably be dismissed pretty quickly. Defamation cases are hard to pursue, mainly because the plaintiff can rarely ever demonstrate that he/she has actually suffered any harm that can be measured in a court of law. Ask Sarah Palin about that.

The fact that the "relief" she's seeking includes an apology from Moore pretty much exposes this thing as a PR stunt.

She doesn’t have to prove her claims. She has to prove that Moore didn’t rule out mental illness on her part when he said her actions were politically motivated.

If he filed a counter-suit, because he is a “public figure” he would have to prove that she is not mentally ill (and thus didn’t simply “mis-remember” stuff like not having a phone in her bedroom, which is critical to her story and admittedly false according to her mother).

Those who make this about Roy Moore - you know, the trollish posters who clog all the threads about him - are ignoring the legal danger here. If Allred can flash a $100 bill in a trailer park and get people to lie about stories way beyond the statute of limitations and thus unprovable, AND THEN sue for defamation anybody who says a peep against the accuser, then there is NOBODY that Allred can’t destroy with impunity.

This isn’t about Roy Moore. This is about the reason that there is a statute of limitations. And it’s about inequality under the law, where public figures can be libeled anytime because the legal bar for proving libel is so high - especially when the libel is based sheerly on one person’s memories and that person can plead mental illness rather than knowingly lying).

If Allred gets away with this, the lawlessness totally wins the day.

But then, the people I see on this thread don’t seem to care much about lawlessness and even say that Christianity is incompatible with a democratic form of government - IOW, truth, life, property, etc have no place “counting” in this country.

Sad. And incredibly short-sighted, to say that only unscrupulous liars should ever be allowed to win in a democratic process.