Jackie Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Terry
I don't think Anita Hill even thought of taking out a suit. Didn't she offer to
provide information in the senate hearings, but didn't want it public? That is
a little different than scouring the laws to find an innovative way to start a
civil action to get money, no matter how little the sum in the beginning. So
the circumstances appear to be somewhat different.
Your observations about most women not reporting incidents or rape is changing,
although slowly. So that is not as viable an excuse as it once was. She worked
for a state agency. Sexual harrassment workshops are held annually in most
government agencies, as well as business places. So women and men are much more
aware of their rights and are able to complain without publicity in most places.
jackief
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> Hi Sue,
>
> >Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >
> >Hi Terry:
> >
> >There are two reasons why I wonder about her story, other than the fact
> >that things do seem to get added.
> >
> >First being she took until just a short time before the statue of
> >limitations ran out to file her claim. If she was so humiliated and
> >hurt why did it take so long?
>
> Most women never report such an incident or a more serious rape. Jones says
> she had no intention of reporting anything until the continuing stories of
> her dalliances with Clinton were put in print.
>
> You should understand that suit was filed under a somewhat novel
> interpretation of one law and that time had expired on normal charges.
>
> I think the time women take to level charges is a complete red herring.
> Most of those who use this argument against Jones have no problem with Anita
> Hill's much longer silence.
>
> >Secondly she was id'd as only Paula in the obscure magazine The
> >Spectator, and no one even knew who this person was even if they
> >happened to be the one person who happened to read this publication.
>
> She didn't read it. It was pointed out to her by a friend who did read it.
> Her circle of acquaintances was quite well aware of the whispers and knew
> damn well who "Paula" was.
>
> >Now she is saying that her sexual ability has decreased due to this
> >happening. Which IMO is something that will be impossible to prove one
> >way or the other.
> >
> >Sue
>
> I think personally that is a silly claim and is only a ploy by her lawyers
> to shore up the legalities. Seems a blunder to me but what do I know.
> Fantastic claims are upheld in court.
>
> That Jones was upset should be obvious to anyone. Her determination and
> unwillingness to compromise is incredible. She has taken blasts from the
> Clinton hatchet men and broadsides from the like of Sam Donaldson that would
> unnerve a charging rhinoceros.
> Best, Terry
>
> "Lawyer - one trained to circumvent the law" - The Devil's Dictionary
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
--
In the sociology room the children learn
that even dreams are colored by your perspective
I toss and turn all night. Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room"
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
