October 13, 2004

This Is Just Hilarious

O'Reilly and his phonesex fetish. Naturally he is claiming it is extortion...although the interesting thing is, it doesn't looke like he is denying it.

Posted by Steve at October 13, 2004 02:32 PM
Comments

Ok, when I heard this on the radio this morning, the emphasis was on the claim that he forced her to have phone sex. And although the "forced" part gave me pause, the text of the complaint does point clearly toward sexual harrassment.

Oh, and I feel like I need to shower (not in the Carribbean, either) and rinse out my eyes thoroughly after reading that. Good grief, what a perv.

Posted by: Slartibartfast on October 14, 2004 06:28 AM

O'Reilly is my new hero. Thug shyster lawyers have been practicing extortion for decades. Finally someone has the power and ability to fight back.

Posted by: yportne on October 14, 2004 01:02 PM

Best guess is that with this lengthy citation of O'Reilly's allleged words, it's on tape and ready to be put in evidence.

If so, it's hard to see how he spins out of this. Calling charges 'scurrilous' and 'the most evil thing I've seen,' yet somehow failing to actually deny they are true, is telling. Good call on that, Steve!

Posted by: sofla on October 15, 2004 05:02 PM

Last I heard, O'Reilly was calling for his accusers to release the tapes, if any. Odd behavior if he's guilty.

Posted by: Robert Crawford on October 15, 2004 07:23 PM

A lawyer on an MSNBC panel suggests that if guilty, reasonable monetary compensation for a case of this sort in NY would be around $100,000. If so then the other $59.9 million is extortion. O'Reilly and Fox both have deep pockets but if insurance is involved, we all eventually pay with increased premiums. O'Reilly has had previous confrontations with evil lawyers such as those birds in San Diego.

Posted by: yportne on October 16, 2004 01:32 PM

Well, the tapes might have been recorded illegally, if done in NY as seems certain. An ILLEGALLY recorded tape, if shown to be that, might be of LEGAL advantage to O'Reilly's case. But still deadly to his reputation, his image, and likely, his career.

Posted by: sofla on October 16, 2004 06:04 PM

Sofla,

I think the spin is going to be as follows:

  1. Find out if a tape exists.
  2. If the tape exists then point out the following:
    1. First Ms. Mackris was fully aware of Fox's sexual harassment policy.
    2. Ms. Mackris did not follow the policy.
    3. Ms. Mackris began taping O'Reilly without his knowledge.
  3. Then point out that the reason for tha last point was to maximize the award settlement.
  4. This will be the case for claiming extortion.

Now, not being a lawyer, this strategy might not work for O'Reilly, but it does show the rather coniving behavior of his accuser. That she appears to have been motivated by monetary concerns. This, IMO, would seriously undermine a sexual harassment charge as one could argue in a rather convoluted manner that the "harassment" was welcome. Ms. Mackris welcomed it as she saw it as her chance to pocket tens of millions of dollars.

Not that this excuses O'Reilly of his rather dubious behavior. Personally I think they are perfect together...a pervert and a blackmailer.

Posted by: Steve on October 18, 2004 09:04 AM
Post a comment