Anonymous wrote:Now that the jurors are speaking out, it's interesting to know that the first 2 I've seen are skiiers. The foreperson is an avid snowboarder. They were very aware of details to help decide who to believe. I wonder if the dcum ski "experts" still think they know better than the jury?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The thing is, none of it makes any sense. He had no proof, it was just his word against there. He stood to gain much less in damages than he stood to lose in attorneys fees (his and hers) if he lost. The only way it makes a smidgen of sense is if he was telling the truth and therefore thought he would win. And also, he has really unethical lawyers who let him pursue this to his own destruction over $300K.
I agree
Anonymous wrote:The thing is, none of it makes any sense. He had no proof, it was just his word against there. He stood to gain much less in damages than he stood to lose in attorneys fees (his and hers) if he lost. The only way it makes a smidgen of sense is if he was telling the truth and therefore thought he would win. And also, he has really unethical lawyers who let him pursue this to his own destruction over $300K.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:A lot of outlets are reporting that she was awarded attorney fees.
https://ew.com/celebrity/gwyneth-paltrow-wins-ski-crash-trial-verdict/
Yep, this was an expensive case for the gifter. Wonder if he'll still be able to afford his pricey trips.
Anonymous wrote:A lot of outlets are reporting that she was awarded attorney fees.
https://ew.com/celebrity/gwyneth-paltrow-wins-ski-crash-trial-verdict/
Anonymous wrote:Wait she got a 1 and didn’t get $$ for attorney fees. That says a lot of what the jury thought.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Sorry ladies, this is just too unintelligent. But carry on amongst yourselves dears. Maybe you could shop on Goop to celebrate.
Is this cartoon supposed to be GP?