These people never had any shame, but at least the PR blowback, and potential (probably minor) legal punishment, was enough to deter them from attacking the victim again. Now they see the POTUS get away with raping, being "proven" innocence by someone bought and paid for, then suing the victim, so they know they can get away with it too.
> Schmidt has denied the accusations under oath. The arbitrator said that Ritter did “everything she could possibly do” to avoid discussing the rape accusations under oath.
Uh huh. Everyone knows that it's physically impossible to lie under oath. I don't believe you, Mr. Arbiter.
Mrs. The arbiter was a female progressive judge, if that matters. What she’s hinting at is the avoidance of speaking to details, perhaps to avoid perjury.
If you are worth $52 Billion how petty do you have to be to go after your ex girlfriend for cash for any reason?
Also the arbiters write up is incredibly biased and not at all what I would expect a neutral party to write. “One can also conclude that Ritter engaged in self-centered efforts to obtain revenge against Schmidt in a way that was more damaging than helpful to her cause.”
This is about a man who went after a girl less than half his age and then decided the power imbalance wasn’t severe enough so went into business with her as well. Are we really supposed to believe sexual assault is outside the realm of possibility in those circumstances?
It’s interesting that they signed an agreement and then it seems she decided it needed to be litigated / arbitration agreement shouldn’t stand, because of events before that agreement.
8 comments
[ 0.26 ms ] story [ 22.1 ms ] threadUh huh. Everyone knows that it's physically impossible to lie under oath. I don't believe you, Mr. Arbiter.
Also the arbiters write up is incredibly biased and not at all what I would expect a neutral party to write. “One can also conclude that Ritter engaged in self-centered efforts to obtain revenge against Schmidt in a way that was more damaging than helpful to her cause.”
This is about a man who went after a girl less than half his age and then decided the power imbalance wasn’t severe enough so went into business with her as well. Are we really supposed to believe sexual assault is outside the realm of possibility in those circumstances?
Isn't it better that he choose a judicial (or quasi-judicial) method to discourage this behavior rather than extrajudicial?
That seems a bit absurd.