Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BlueCrab who wrote (16254)	1/22/1998 3:25:00 PM
From: Lady Lurksalot	Respond to of 108807

Jeff and All, Yes, but does Michael Crichton's "Disclosure" ring a bell? Role reversal? Same with the frequently alluded to spousal/SO abuse. We've come a long way, Baby (paraphrased from a 1970s cigarette commercial)! Holly

To: BlueCrab who wrote (16254)	1/22/1998 3:28:00 PM
From: Janice Shell	Respond to of 108807

And the laws created to protect the innocent have often enabled the guilty. Yes. Taht's my view of Paula. Monica--based on what we know so far--seems simply to be an indiscreet idiot. She really DID find herself between a rock and a hard place (so to speak), having blabbed to several equally unreliable people about her cosmic affair, and suddenly realizing she could be forced to testify about it. Though there's something here that just doesn't seem right. Alexa? What if I had an affair with an important guy five years ago? Then it ended. Suddenly I'm called upon to talk about my personal life--no crime involved here--under oath, in connection with a sexual harassment suit I am in no way involved with. Can I be compelled to testify? If I can be compelled to testify, can I not simply refuse to answer? This is, after all, a civil suit.