UPDATE: Jiggling Boobs Do Not Equal Implied Consent

Back in July, a woman lost her lawsuit against the producers of Girls Gone Wild (“GGW”) for filming and selling a video of her tank-top being pulled down by a GGW cameraman without her consent.  As  Siouxsie Law said, the jury got it wrong.  No matter how low cut the top or how jiggly the breasts, no one should be able to commit assault and battery, then sell a video of the whole incident.

Looks like this story may have a better ending.  As reported at Jezebel, the judge in the case just granted a retrial.  The order states:

The Court believes it is highly questionable whether a reasonable person reading the notices defendant contends were posted at the Rum Jungle would believe she was consenting, merely by dancing fully clothed, to the use of her image being spliced into and/or used for the promotion of pornographic material not filmed at the location. It is apparent to the Court that plaintiff did not voluntarily expose her breasts, and it would have been apparent to the person making use of the footage that she did not content to such exposure.

Siouxsie tips her tiny top hat to Judge John J. Riley for restoring justice.

A copy of the order is at this link.

The link below is from Fox News.  The clip has a few shots of the GGW camerman pulling the woman’s top down. Watch at your own risk.  The commentary and legal analysis is dangerously dumb.


~ by siouxsielaw on November 6, 2010.

4 Responses to “UPDATE: Jiggling Boobs Do Not Equal Implied Consent”

  1. “she is assuming the risk by wearing something like that”

    Ohhh…pulling out the old “slut” rationalization. Good choice- it is also a favorite of rapists.

    “she virtually consented”
    Virtually is not the same as actually consenting…


  2. Yeah! Women should now feel free to wear bikini tops to Girls Gone Wild events again.

  3. That video is crazy. I can’t believe a jury fell for it the first time. Lionel Hutz or whoever was the Joe Francis’ counsel must have been proud.

  4. Mercedes Colwin is definition 1A of “Quisling”. Sure, we all handle defense every now and again, but I do not understand how a woman can carves a litigation niche out of defending creepers at Fortune 500 from sexual harrassment/discrimination claims.

    Simply amazing. And the groder up there, rolling his eyes and the barely-veiled contempt when he utters “assault”, is not just disgusting; it’s frightening.

    I’m 7000 miles away from the Fox NYC desk, and I’m covering my drink just watching him.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: