Posted on 12/12/2007 11:48:45 AM PST by enough_idiocy
"Halliburton", gang rape, and fear of arbitration: the Jamie Leigh Jones case In February 2006, Jamie Leigh Jones filed an arbitration complaint, complaining that, for her administrative assistant job with KBR in Iraq, she was placed in an all-male dorm for living arrangements, and a co-worker sexually assaulted her. (KBR says the co-worker claimed the sex was consensual, though Jones claims physical injuries, such as burst breast implants and torn pectoral muscles, that are plainly not consistent with consensual sex. The EEOC's Letter of Determination credited the allegation of sexual assault.)
Fifteen months later, after extensive discovery in the arbitration, Jones, who lives in Houston, and whose lawyer is based in Houston, and who worked for KBR in Houston, sued KBR and a bunch of other entities (including Halliburton, for whom she never worked, and the United States), in federal court in Beaumont, Texas. The claims were suddenly of much more outrageous conduct: the original allegation of a single he-said/she-said sexual assault was now an allegation of gang rape by several unknown John Doe rapists who worked as firemen (though she did make a claim of multiple rape to the EEOC, though it is unclear when that claim was made); she claims that after she reported the rape, "Halliburton locked her in a container" (the EEOC found that KBR provided immediate medical treatment and safety and shipped her home immediately) and she threw in an allegation that a "sexual favor" she provided a supervisor in Houston was the result of improper "influence." (But she no longer makes the implausible claim that she was living in an all-male dorm in Iraq.)
The US got the claim dismissed quickly (Jones hasn't yet followed the appropriate administrative claims procedure); the case was transferred back to Houston where it belonged (the trial lawyer's ludicrous brief in opposition didn't help). But the fact that the defendants are pointing out that the lawsuit over a pending arbitration violates 28 U.S.C. § 1927 and are asking for the court to mandate only one single proceeding in arbitration rather than a multiplicity of parallel proceedings, is now being treated as a cause célèbre by the left-wing blogosphere in its campaign against the contractual freedom to arbitrate. (Note that two elements explicitly designed to arouse the ire and inflame the passions of the left—Halliburton and gang-rape—only came about after Jones switched attorneys.)
The Public Citizen blog complains that "the allegations of corporate and governmental misconduct will never see the light of day" in arbitration. Which is absurd:
1) For crying out loud, her case is on 20/20, which, as is its ken, happily unquestioningly gives the plaintiffs' opening statement in handy manipulative video newsertainment form without mentioning any of the counterevidence. That sort of widespread publicity is hardly the lack of "light of day." 2) If the government fails to offer Jones an adequate settlement for their alleged bungling of the criminal investigation, she has recourse under the Federal Tort Claims Act against the federal government—though she likely will not have any more recourse against them than any other criminal victim does when the government fails to protect them against crime or prosecute the criminal. 3) If the court system is about having recourse for injuries, she has that recourse. The judicial system is not for public storytelling; if you want to send a message, use Western Union (or ABC News, as the case may be). 20/20 repeats the meaningless claim that "In recent testimony before Congress, employment lawyer Cathy Ventrell-Monsees said that Halliburton won more than 80 percent of arbitration proceedings brought against it"—meaningless because (1) it doesn't include the cases that settle before arbitration with a favorable result to the employee and (2) there's no comparison with how well such employees would do in the far more expensive forum of litigation (where the vast majority of employees lose at trial as well).
20/20 also adds the claim (absent in the arbitration and in the otherwise-lurid civil complaint) that Jones was threatened that she would be fired if she sought medical treatment.
It goes without saying that any criminal assault should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I haven't seen any support for the contention that there is a loophole that leaves an American contractor's attack on an American outside the scope of criminal prosecution, as some left-wing blogs have claimed. The Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act of 2000, 18 U.S.C. § 3261 ff., permits prosecutions of criminal acts committed by defense contractors working with troops overseas, and there has been a child porn and an attempted rape prosecution under this law for crimes committed in Iraq. The loophole in the news applies to contractors working overseas with the State Department.
People with legitimate claims usually don't have lawyers trying so desperately to forum-shop that they file amateurish briefs like this, and Jones loses a ton of credibility with me over that. At a minimum, Jones's story has changed over time, and has gotten considerably more lurid. The original allegations are bad enough, and, if true, actionable. If the implant rupture and other physical injuries are true, I'm inclined to believe that she was raped, perhaps even gang raped. (Machismo environments like fraternity houses and athletes' dorms are responsible for a disproportionate number of gang rapes, which is why the Duke Lacrosse allegations had so much weight in the early going.) I'm inclined to believe that there was a hostile work environment, and that it was possible that KBR was not doing enough to correct that problem. I'm not currently inclined to believe that the criminal action was the employer's fault, unless the employee in question had shown signs of criminal behavior while working for KBR. And it is entirely consistent with what I know about government if Jones's allegation that the government botched the criminal investigation is true.
Of course, more facts could come to light that change my mind in either direction. There's already been a lot of discovery, but Jones's papers in court seem to focus on me-too evidence (that should eventually be held to be inadmissible) rather than evidence related to Jones. I'd love to see the pending motions for summary judgment in the arbitration that led Jones to file a second lawsuit.
And one hopes Jones realizes that she's being used by attorneys who are pursuing their own agenda to promote the litigation lobby's pet anti-consumer/pro-lawyer legislation. The shenanigans of bringing a second lawsuit and suing the irrelevant Halliburton are not helping her case if she has a legitimate one.
Here is the EEOC Letter of Determination. Bill Childs provides many other court documents. A typical unskeptical adoption of the Public Citizen line can be found at Jezebel and many other blogs. Some Republican partisans are even more skeptical than I am. A more nuanced discussion is at Amber Taylor's blog and Ben Domenech. (And welcome Malkin readers.)
Update: The is a Jamie Jones Foundation; its chronology omits the arbitration claim Jones filed in 2006. The "take action" page makes clear the ulterior motives of lobbying for a Congressional ban on arbitration clauses—though the arbitration clause has nothing to do with bringing any rapists to justice.
A Congressional investigation into the Justice Department's criminal investigation is now in the works, so we should see some answers about why there were no prosecutions.
For some reason I find the topic fascinating, in that I'd think there would be health issues.
Apparently, ABC didn’t learn a damn thing about fake but accurate reporting from the Rathergate scandal with 60 Minutes. If this is exposed as the trumped-up media fantasy it appears to be, they’re done.
The Jury can reach neither a ‘guilty’ nor a ‘not guilty’ verdict on this woman’s face. I am going to have to ask for more pictures to make a determination.
Health problems from Saline? They put Saline into IV tubes at the hospital. What health issues would come about?
It doesn't appear to be. With the Congressional help required to dispatch the State Department to rescue this woman, there is going to be an enormous amount of documentation. If this rescue didn't occur, the State Department would have stated so. Instead the State Department has clammed up because they know they should not have given the rape kit away (which will also be documented).
It is a pity the US military wasn't sent in to rescue her instead. I have no doubt that this would have been thoroughly investigated in that case.
Another blond useful idiot of the left I’m afraid.
You just called a military wife a useful idiot. Her Republican Congressman is the one who sent the State Department to rescue her. Have you no shame?
I am totally disgusted with this comment. I fully expect an immediate apology. And I hope you learn to hold your tongue in the future.
So now a military wife is in a protected class? All republocants are somehow keepers of the shield of conservativism and all that is true and right? Give me a break. Everything I have read about these claims is BS. It smells like a perverted version of the Duke rape travesty. And NO I will not apologize, who am I supposed to apologize to? If, only IF, over time when this all play’s out it is proven my opinion was wrong I will then apologize, until then, hold your breath.
It “deflated” almost immediately. The saline was absorbed very quickly. There was no discomfort or health issue except for the cosmetic problem of having one “flat tire.”
She got replacements a few weeks later.
“Oh... and she’s sold the film rights to her story already. Well isn’t that interesting.”
According to a guest on Glenn Beck’s broadcast today, a senator from Texas, she tried quietly and discreetly to get someone in authority to go to bat for her, to no avail. And it was at THAT point that she went public, including selling her story.
I’m the biggest male chauvinist pig you ever met......in a good way; but it bothers me greatly to read between the lines of many of the comments on this story and to detect a strong leaning toward BLAMING THE VICTIM via snotty little remarks here and there, including yours. At least, that’s how you came across.
First, most people have the common decency not to assume that a potential rape victim is lying (they wait for the evidence to play out). This rape may or may not have occurred, but any holes in this story are cosmetic at best. There HAS NOT been a federal prosecutor investigating this case. A civil lawsuit and an upcoming Congressional investigation were required to even hear about this story. This is nothing like the Duke rape story. The Duke rape story at least had an investigation (which was bungled).
Second, yes, military wives deserve our respect. If I made a crass comment about a military wife like that when I was in the Navy I would have been punched in the face—and for good reason. Those who question the integrity of a military wife had better have very good evidence.
Third, you should apologize because you called her a useful idiot without justification. That apology should be to everyone who happened to read your vile statement.
You didn't happen to see Jimmy Hoffa did you?
“Apparently she didn’t see the Mythbusters episode where they demonstrated that breast implants are virtually indestructible. Can’t be run over, can’t be exploded via low pressure, etc.”
In fairness, her website states that the implants had been dislodged due to a torn pectorial. I dont think she said they ruptured. The slick “foundation”, the website, movie deal, marketing director and the “glam shots” make me suspicious of her story.
Me too. Whether she is telling the truth or not, she needs to fire whoever designed that website.
That was funny! XD
Ah well then the Mythbusters guys must have been using silicone implants instead of saline.
Fair enough. It bothers me that I came across that way. If you've seen any of my posts on similar stories over the years, I think I can show a strong record of always coming down on the side of the victim-- and blasting those who even hint at blaming the victim for any part of their situation.
I tend to fight against that kind of cynicism. It really ticks me off when I see it around here.
But I'll admit that my cynical side jumped up right away in this case, and I'm not sure why. There's just something not quite snapping into focus here. Something isn't right about the story. My spidey-sense is usually pretty trustworthy in this regard, so I listen to it.
If she truly was assaulted in any way then she deserves every benefit of the doubt, any of my comments notwithstanding. I'm the first one to step up to defend people when I think they're getting a raw deal.
But like the phony-soldier media set-ups... Halliburton and KBR are ripe for somebody fishing for publicity and deep pockets. I've read several different accounts of this woman's story and dang it if every single one of them wasn't completely different-- on some truly material points. My initial knee-jerk to defend HER didn't stand, after a few more stories and now this article with some even more different angles... well, something just ain't right. IMHO.
There is more information here. Her story definately has some credibility. The State Department did rescue her from the container.
I am totally disgusted with this comment. I fully expect an immediate apology. And I hope you learn to hold your tongue in the future.
I’ve met some military wives who were slightly to the left of Cynthia Mckinney and also tried to wear their husbands’ authority.
Most military spouses are fine hardworking women but their status doesn’t place them above reproach.
I’m not going to assume guilt or innocence without more evidence. Remember the Duke case? How about the TANG memos that “proved” President Bush shirked his duty?
If accusation is valid, hang them. If she’s lying, hang her.
Here is part of the transcript of US Representative Ted Poe on Glenn Beck's show.
REPRESENTATIVE POE: Well, as soon as I got the call from her father who was, you know, tremendously excited and worried, we contacted officials at the State Department and within 48 hours they had two agents there in Baghdad and found her, rescued her. And she needed much more medical attention, and she received that and finally was brought back to the United States very shortly thereafter.Then things seemed to have just fallen off the radar. We've tried to find out what has happened to the perpetrators, these criminals. Who are they, where are they and what has been done, and really haven't gotten satisfactory answers.
REPRESENTATIVE POE: Well, a lady in that situation who's brutalized and, you know, thousands of miles from home and has nobody and alone, we can't really second-guess what she does as a sexual assault victim. She did what she thought was best. And we didn't get any results from our government and so she's made the choice to go public, which is a difficult situation for any sexual assault victim to do, and whether this happened or not, well, the proof is in the medical. The medical reports are -- without question show that she was brutalized over there in Iraq and now people need to be brought to court and held accountable and let's air it publicly now and find out who was there, who was responsible and why nothing happened until recently.
REPRESENTATIVE POE: No. As a former judge and prosecutor, there is federal law that applies to this case and here's the reason. The jurisdiction of where this happened in the green zone, in Camp Hope in Baghdad is under the jurisdiction of the State Department and since it's under the jurisdiction of the State Department, federal law does apply and people can be prosecuted for crimes against American citizens.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.