Discussion: O'Reilly Sexual Harassment Settlement Required Victim To Lie In Court

TPM Article Topics
63

  1. Probably so;

  2. It looks that way

  3. I don’t know. I don’t know what is still ongoing.

2 Likes
64

I could write this for every topic, every day, I think.

5 Likes
65

Millions or to quote Carl S Billions and Billions

1 Like
66

Please, sirs, lecture us some more about your superior devotion to Christian and traditional American values.

2 Likes
67

A lawyers advice to a client who has signed such an agreement is pretty straightforward. No one but a judge can make you talk about anything. If you are contacted or asked by anyone about the subject covered by the contract, you have no comment. If shown documents alleged to be in any way related you have no comment. You don’t admit; you don’t deny; you simply do not comment.

If a judge orders you to testify, you tell the truth as you know it.

9 Likes
68

Lock him up!
And take down the rest of Fox with him!

3 Likes
69

Oh I get that, but the money isn’t really hers since Bill can leak the stuff she’s not suppose to talk about and the expense of defending herself starts all over again.
I’m probably making a wild comparison but to me it’s like a women is raped, gets impregnated by the rapist, she keeps the baby, and lives in a state where rapist has legal rights to the child. She’s never free from the act.

70

Conspiracy to procure perjured testimony?

71

I can believe that it’s not legal.

I can also believe that they did this. Like Spanky, they thought it would never see the light of day.

Sucks to be them.

3 Likes
72

Yeah there is nothing that says you can’t draft a contract with something like this in it - it’s up to the person on the other side to object.

2 Likes
73

Only one word comes to mind: classy.

74

I’d love to pull some late 90’s B-roll from his show where he is chastising Clinton for his fibs about sex under oath.

5 Likes
75

The clause that @cervantes quoted does not explicitly require lying under oath, but it doesn’t exclude it from the requirement that the parties state that any disclosed materials are counterfeit. Even if it only required lying when not under oath, such an agreement might be void as against public policy, depending on state law.

4 Likes
76

Ahhhh! This is why a pledge of loyalty is soooo important to T rump and other mobsters.

2 Likes
77

Any legal counsel associated in any way with this agreement should be disbarred. There, I said it.

2 Likes
78

I can’t imagine that an agreement that requires someone to lie under oath is ethical, legal or binding. Not only are O’Reilly and his lawyers scum, the women’s lawyers are idiots or tools.

79

Oh happy day!

More crap NDA’s in line to get shredded.

(ok…maybe a bit prematurely optimistic there)

@katscherger are you in this discussion thread already?

2 Likes
80

Yeah she’s really up on this kind of thing far more than I am.

3 Likes
81

Here’s what it is, unenforceable, or at least portions of it, you cannot suborn perjury.

82

Count me in on that exact same sentiment! Lots of ‘learned’ folks on this forum.

3 Likes