Anonymous wrote:The woman was identified only as “Jane Roe” in the suit, but yesterday (October 8) evening Brooks shared her name in a court filing in Mississippi.
“Garth Brooks just revealed his true self. Out of spite and to punish, he publicly named a rape victim."
He's an a$$hole.
Anonymous wrote:The woman was identified only as “Jane Roe” in the suit, but yesterday (October 8) evening Brooks shared her name in a court filing in Mississippi.
“Garth Brooks just revealed his true self. Out of spite and to punish, he publicly named a rape victim."
He's an a$$hole.
Anonymous wrote:The woman was identified only as “Jane Roe” in the suit, but yesterday (October 8) evening Brooks shared her name in a court filing in Mississippi.
“Garth Brooks just revealed his true self. Out of spite and to punish, he publicly named a rape victim."
He's an a$$hole.
Anonymous wrote:The fact that he’s suing her now makes me think he didn’t. It would be cheaper for him to settle. Truly clearing my name would be worth the extra money, though.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:She worked for the family for 20 years.
Link?
Anonymous wrote:She worked for the family for 20 years.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I want to see how this plays out? If he admits to an affair but not assault he’ll look guilty. If he denies all of it he might stand a better chance.
If you look at her actual accusations,they seem a bit far fetched, even for a star.
My vote is souped up revenge and blackmail for a mutual affair gone sideways.
Anonymous wrote:The fact that he’s suing her now makes me think he didn’t. It would be cheaper for him to settle. Truly clearing my name would be worth the extra money, though.
Anonymous wrote:The fact that he’s suing her now makes me think he didn’t. It would be cheaper for him to settle. Truly clearing my name would be worth the extra money, though.