[quote=“cutter99, post:4531, topic:780076, full:true”]
2 Likes
I understand about not wanting to spend time and resources trying to hold RG responsible, esp. since he doesn’t currently have any assets. But wouldn’t it be better to have a judgement against him on the off chance that he wins the lottery one day?
4 Likes
Esp. when you consider the fact that LK’s father is an attorney and has proven himself to be very, very, very involved in managing his daughter’s affairs.
15 Likes
Except, you know, cooperating with a subpoena to help his kid out in her lawsuit…
14 Likes
MB didn’t start this disaster by suing everyone and his brother in civil court, LK did.
I think he’ll do fine just responding with a cross claim against her.
13 Likes
LK has children?
1 Like
Whether it’s a legally married couple or an unmarried couple, would you say a female providing services to the household without outside monetary compensation (childcare, cooking, cleaning, laundry) is the employee of the male who is providing monetary income for household expenses?
I wouldn’t.
If you object to that statement with the traditional gender roles (female providing household labor/ male proving monetary income) and equally object to describing the partner providing household labor as “an employee” of the other when the gender roles are reversed, there’s no sexism involved.
I don’t really see how the couple’s status as married or unmarried enters into it.
But, yes, I do have another question: if by some legal definition, RG were LKs employee (I don’t think he was), how does that make LK legally responsible for making the recordings, if he was the mover to place the recorders?
Sometimes, it’s a cost basis analysis. Is MB willing to fork out the money to a) add RG, b) deal with the inevitable delays caused by doing so, and c) all of the other litigation costs involved to maybe get a judgment that odds are good RG will never, ever be able to pay? That judgment becomes a very expensive piece of paper for MB.
16 Likes
Good points! Esp. considering that the odds are pretty much slim and none of RG ever winning the lottery or having any kind of assets of much value.
5 Likes
He said he was her employee, but I digress.
Did you read the statute?
I’ll paste again for reference:
2A:156A-24. Civil action for damages, attorney’s fee by persons whose communications are intercepted unlawfully
24. Any person whose wire, electronic or oral communication is intercepted, disclosed or used in violation of this act shall have a civil cause of action against any person who intercepts, discloses or **uses or procures any other person to intercept, disclose or use, such communication;**and shall be entitled to recover from any such person:
a. Actual damages, but not less than liquidated damages computed at the rate of $100.00 a day for each day of violation, or $1,000.00, whichever is higher;
b. Punitive damages; and
c. A reasonable attorney’s fee and other litigation costs reasonably incurred.
Bolding mine. Hypothetically, if texts exist that show LK directing RG to place the recorders, um…she violated the statute.
If she directed RG to USE the recordings, she’s responsible.
If she USED the recordings herself, she’s on the hook. And god knows she has bragged all over the internet about those recordings. Oh, and her Mom and Dad have posted here, on this forum, that they heard and (in Kirby’s case) the recordings. That counts as distributing.
That’s on Lauren Kanarek.
I have another picture, if you’d like.
28 Likes
What you think does not really matter in this situation @CurrentlyHorseless. Robert Guy Goodwin/Jim E Stark/Superman has said not only under oath at the criminal trial, but also on social media that Lauren Kanarek is his employer. So you can say he is not all you want, but he says he is and of the two of you, I would assume he knows more about the situation than you do.
26 Likes
Yes please! Your pictures are great! (And very educational.)
10 Likes
Nuh-uh! s/
5 Likes
Omg. I love it that Rosie got included!
Poor Rosie.
12 Likes
I figure she’s probably barking on one of those 81 recordings (that we know about).
18 Likes
Well, she certainly made enough noise on the 911 call, so it’s probably a safe bet.
8 Likes
Not that I know of.
A certain someone was just questioning me as to whether or not I thought that stay at home moms were essentially the employees of their husbands and boyfriends, because the men make money outside of the home and pay the bills.
I answered the question, even though I suspect it was an attempt to personally shade me since I have been open on the forums that I am a stay at home mom.
Ironically, immediately prior to that line of questioning, the same someone actually accused me of sexism.
I find it slightly annoying, to be honest. But then, I take a moment and pause, and realize that I would MUCH rather be goaded and subtly insulted because I am a bit of a 1950’s throwback to June Cleaver, than receive the sort of goading and subtle insults I might get if:
- I had a prior career as a stripper
- I had a lengthy arrest record
- I had a long term smack addiction problem
- I had been shacking up with a fellow smack addict for over a decade, and paying all his bills, but he never even put a ring on it
Etc, etc, etc
30 Likes
