Woman sues Match.com for $10 million

[TheMadMonk]

161. Because all too often in cases like this it never...

...gets to the stage where a judge and jury can weigh evidence and make an informed judgement.

Instead the sued party, looks at it in terms of profit and loss, settles for less than the cost of fighting the suit (including likely losses due to damage to their reputation) AND wraps it up in a non-disclosure agreement which means NO ONE ever knows the truth.

Instead we end up with cases like the RC church knowingly aiding and abbetting paedophiles, (and us knowing too) but their remaining absolved of blame, because judges (and juries) are rarely, if ever, given a chance to assign it.

At the other end, we've got fraudsters, ably abbetted (if not approached in the first place) by their lawyers, making absolutely ludicrous claims, in the hope that they'll be offered a fraction of the ask, to shut up and go away. Thirty percent of even $100,000 is a good payday for a couple of mediation meetings and a few minutes with the judge to get it all squared away.


And once again, she is not being attacked for what happenned to her, she is being attacked for her response to what happenned to her.

If she has a problem with the bills, then (it is America after all) why didn't she carry sufficient health insurance coverage for anything that might ever possibly happen to her?. What if it had been a complete stranger? She would have been in exactly the same financial boat.

Please note this is not any attempt to "blame the victim" it's a probably fruitless attempt to point out how bloody ridiculous you're being with your attempts to smear.