« Friday Fun: Shelving Books on the Night Shift Music Video | Main | Round-Up of Practitioner Blogs »
November 13, 2010
Court Voids Jury Verdict: Evidence Does Not Support Woman "Going Wild" in "Girls Gone Wild" Video.
So ruled a St. Louis judge who threw out a jury verdict in an involuntary nudity case, finding that the evidence showed a woman did not consent to appearing topless in a "Girls Gone Wild" video by dancing flirtatiously for the cameraman. "It is clear from viewing the video that plaintiff was an unwilling participant in the exposure of her breasts and can be seen visibily mouthing 'no,'” Circuit Court Judge John J. Riley ruled in granting the woman's motion for a new trial. The Court also noted that the film production company “did not produce any written or oral waiver by plaintiff in which she authorized the defendants to make use of her image in commercial film products or advertisements,” and held that “[a] finding of consent or waiver here is against the evidence.” One has to wonder what the jury was thinking, assuming they were not simply mesmerized by watching a video of a topless woman.
Text of court order. Details at Judge Finds Woman in 'Orgy' Video Did Not Go 'Wild'. [JH]
November 13, 2010 in Litigation in the News | Permalink
Comments
Average citizens tend to see overtly sexual behavior by young women as a sign of "bad character", so they're deciding "she deserved what she got" instead of looking at how far she actually intended to go. You have the right to dance like a whore fully clothed, and to remain fully clothed while doing so. Kudos, Mr Judgey-man.
Posted by: taterbizkit | Nov 13, 2010 9:41:44 AM