Reply to Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]lolol.  Wright was their teacher and he had affairs with multiple female law students.  He was in a position of power over them and took them to conferences with him where (surprise!) there was only one bedroom and only one bed.

Newsflash:  teachers, don’t sleep with your students.

His basic defense was that his students benefitted from their sexual relationship with them because he procured internships and jobs for them — well, at least until he lost interest.

Wright used to be a Commissioner on the FTC and a law professor at Scalia school of Law at George Mason. He now has none of those positions.  George Mason investigated him and as a result he resigned:  “ Wright resigned from George Mason following eight allegations of sexual misconduct from former students, and a determination by George Mason University that he violated university policies relating to consensual relationships and professional ethics that constituted grounds for termination.”

But please, yes, go off on how Joshua Wright is a wronged and misunderstood man just like Baldoni. I beg you to do this.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_D._Wright

[/quote]

I'm not defending Wright, I'm criticizing Dorsey, there's actual a distinction. Wright sounds like a weird loser who had it coming, but Dorsey also sounds like a grifter who got upset Wright was seeing other women. [/quote]

Just another woman failing to meet that ineffable perfect victim standard, I guess. Let me know when you find one. Dorsey was nearly bankrupted by Wright’s defamation suit, even though in his deposition he couldn’t explain his claimed damages and wound up abruptly leaving.  But sure, go off speculating she’s a grifter. A++

Here’s what Wikipedia said about Wright’s $108M damages claim, which is 4x smaller than Baldoni’s:

“Landry's motion noted Wright's "eye-popping" $108 million damages claim was "more than double the amount Johnny Depp sought when making defamation claims related to multi-billion dollar movie franchises," and quoted Wright as saying he might file "defamation for fun but not to win," that he intended to "Raise the cost," "Break her" and potentially "bankrupt" her, referred to defendants as "b******," and agreed he would like to "make their lives hell." Wright responded that he never instructed attorneys to drive up the costs of litigation and that he "filed the lawsuit because lies were told about me that did immense damage."”

Aww, poor guy. Those hurtful, hurtful “lies” worth 4 times as much to Baldoni.[/quote]

It sounds like you just don’t believe in defamation suits.  Reputational damages for high earners are always going to be high.  [/quote]

Note that Dorsey didn’t sue Wright for SH or anything by she just, I believe, filed a complaint with the school and spoke publicly about Wrights actions while she was his student that led to the complaint.

I guess you guys think it was a good idea and totally fair for him to bring this defamation lawsuit against two of his former students, where he literally admitted he was trying to bankrupt them and was doing it for “fun” and not because it was right. One wonders if there is a defamation suit against women who claim SH that you wouldn’t like.  Seems like you’re much more concerned about the men. Which fits. [/quote]

No he sounds like a scum bag but I don’t think he or anyone else should not have access to defamation because of the nature of the accusations against them.  The plaintiff ultimately has to meet their burden of proof and truth is a defense.  Here, Wright dropped his claims outright before trial, so she paid no damages and had no trial costs.  It actually sounds like an action where Rule 11 sanctions might have been appropriate against him.  [/quote]

Adding she was a big law lawyer.  His suit should not have bankrupted her, that sounds llike an exaggeration.[/quote]

You are wrong, actually. Her insurance company appears to have settled for somewhere around a $300K payment to Wright.  The case was also in Virginia as the Depp case had been, which probably figured into their decision.  Nothing you or I couldn’t pay, right?  Totally reasonable for women filing harassment claims to have these completely disproportionate defamation claims hanging in wait for them. [/quote]

As you just wrote, she didn’t pay $300,000, her insurance company did.  Nothing about her case is a textbook harassment case, it became a consensual relationship where she chose to stay with him, personally and professionally.[/quote]
She didn’t sue him for harassment. She didn’t try to make any money off of him in a lawsuit. She just reported him to the school and discussed the lawsuit in a news article, I think on Law 360. And for that, he sued her for defamation, and sued the school for discrimination. Yet you are faulting her and defending his discrimination suit.

You sound exactly like male feminist Justin Baldoni. Protect the mens![/quote]

PP again and I think I was wrong about this — Dorsey filed a Title VII and Title IX complaint against Wright and I believe she and her fellow complainant did recover money, though I think it was from the school, whoops. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics