- Joined
- Jul 18, 2017
Well yeah. She has made the issue of whether she legally a prostitute or otherwise engages in sex for compensation as an issue in her cause of action. The court HAS to press her on this and the defense will have to investigate her sexual history.I don't know much about law, if anything. But I feel like the courts would press her about her sexual proclivities. She would be under oath, if she were to lie about her sexual activities, pleasure or otherwise, then that's perjury. Law kiwis are free to correct my minimal knowledge of the law.
If she did not want her sex history to be public and all her sexual partners subject to Subpoena, she should not have made one of her causes of action a defamation claim around her being a prostitute.
I wonder if she's dumb enough to assume that as a "victim" she is subject to the same protections a criminal rape victim is. That is not the case here. She is a Plaintiff making accusations in a civil trial. The court will have to look into the merits of her accusation. Which centers around a claim she sucked dicks for money. Well, that means looking into every dick she's sucked.
Discovery is going to take forever I think. Assuming we get that far.