A woman who accused a former colonel of rape will be forced to pay millions in defama

[Peter1469]

A woman who accused a former colonel of rape will be forced to pay millions in defamation damages

Sounds like a good result.

Former West Point cadet Susan Shannon took to her blog in 2013 to recount the story of being raped by a fellow cadet in 1986 while at the military academy.

Her accusation came amid a storm of press coverage about the prominence of sexual assault in the military, and it led to a criminal investigation and the end of the fellow cadet’s Army career.




The problem, a Virginia court found on Aug. 1, is that it wasn’t true, and in naming the colonel whom she claimed raped her, she defamed him to the tune of $8.4 million, the Associated Press reported Aug. 11

Sexual assault and rape is inexcusable. But so is the false accusation of those crimes.

Too bad we can't keep her from living off welfare for the rest of her life.

[donttread]

A woman who accused a former colonel of rape will be forced to pay millions in defamation damages

Sounds like a good result.



Sexual assault and rape is inexcusable. But so is the false accusation of those crimes.

Too bad we can't keep her from living off welfare for the rest of her life.

False accusers should face the penalty their victim would of faced if charged. But 8 mill seems a tad high. Someone is welcome to defame me for 1 million!

[DGUtley]

The compensatory damages will be reduced -- that's the actual damages he suffered. Punitive damages were the rest, which are awarded to punish the wrongdoer and to deter future conduct. Such damages, punitive damages, are awarded only upon a finding of malicious conduct (spite, hatred or ill will). The jury was clearly angry at her.

[The Xl]

I wonder how much of a cut the lawyer gets.

[Standing Wolf]

While the ultimate blame belongs, of course, to the accuser, I have to fault "Army leadership" for allowing her provably false allegations to negatively affect the man's career - if that is, in fact, what happened. That he was unfairly accused of a crime should in no way have prevented his nomination for promotion, and if it did, that's on the Army.

[Peter1469]

While the ultimate blame belongs, of course, to the accuser, I have to fault "Army leadership" for allowing her provably false allegations to negatively affect the man's career - if that is, in fact, what happened. That he was unfairly accused of a crime should in no way have prevented his nomination for promotion, and if it did, that's on the Army.

That typically happens in any institution. Once there are allegations the business decision is to toss the accused. Otherwise you are liable in future lawsuits.

[DGUtley]

I wonder how much of a cut the lawyer gets.

The lawyer will get 1/3 to 40%. I know that seems like a lot but the lawyer takes a tremendous amount of risk when he/she takes on a case like this. The lawyer fronts the cash (my firm recently fronted cash of $85,000 and lost the cash and all the hours when our expert flipped on us) and the time. You can always take these on an hourly but the clients don't have the money to pay hourly usually. I had a case once where we recovered $3,600,000 for a client accused of burning down his building. 6 other firms in Akron turned him down but we took the case. We had over $235000 in the case financially that we advanced and over 2100 hours in attorney time. Remember, the risk of losing the money and the time. My partners -- to this day -- think we lost on that case for our $1,200,000 recovery.

[Common]

These false claims puts a cloud over all such claims and thats unfortunate.