Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: HelenaGrace
She was being dishonest from Day 1 about her history. And that dishonesty is what is so offensive, not the videos.

Well, the problem with your analysis is that it is presumptuous.  The fact is, you don't know exactly what the language of the contract actually says. Frankly, we can't rely on media reports to settle this.  The language might say, for example, that no nude videos or pics exist for commercial purposes, and not personal purposes.  If that's the case, she would not be violating the terms of her contract at all, and she wouldn't be lying either.  In order to make your point, you have to presume terms in the contract, and the fact is, we don't know the exact terms of the legal document.

I made it clear that I believe she made a stupid mistake and I have no qualms about saying so. I just don't gloat about the past failures of youthful indiscretions.  Going on and on about every little bit of negative information (which may be of dubious veracity) and to draw pleasure in trashing someone who has publicly taken responsibility and is sorry for what she has done is wrong.

And yes, some people tend to lie to protect themselves. The same can be said about retreads.

57 posted on 11/16/2009 8:49:34 PM PST by Victoria Delsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]


To: Victoria Delsoul

If you’re ok with her lying, I think we just need to agree to disagree.


59 posted on 11/17/2009 6:36:56 AM PST by HelenaGrace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson