Hal? Chet. Got a minute?
Sure, what's up?
Listen, remember that diagnostic interview Eaton did?
Yeah, what a stupid waste of time. How inept are those Butz Cox idiots anyway? Who'd choose a moron like her, still wearing her intellectual training bra?
So what if they had a different expert, someone who actually knew how to pick apart the blog and try to make something lucrative out of their claims of insult and legitimate injury?
You think they have someone who is smart enough? I think it's shit-easy to fake dire emotional injury and requires no brainpower to pretend those fake injuries are serious and worth some kind of compensation. But how are they going to handle the comedy angle? You think they can show somehow that the comic nature of the blog is either non-existent or irrelevant?
They can easily find witnesses who they'll no doubt offer as experts. Who can seem really sincere when claiming that no sane person could find the blog funny. Some jurors will be convinced by it. Nobody should be convinced, but our society is pretty damned ignorant in 2014, Hal. People get steamrollered by pseudo-science and other kinds of intellectual fraud whenever there's an angle available to play on emotional issues and identity politics. A lot of people treated as experts in the media are expert only in hucksterism. There's a lot of gullible people out there, Hal. Some of them will make their way onto the jury panel.
The same sort who drop by and leave really angry comments.
The ones who think Barney the Purple Dinosaur speaks for everyone.
The ones who insist that everything be fancy and polite on the surface. No rough edges.
Yep. That's them.
You'd think we were talking about Mormons or Christians here.
Well to be fair I wouldn't think that. But I bet a lot of people who somehow were able to eavesdrop on our conversation -- well they'd think that.
Isn't it funny how a lot of people out there under a certain identity--
Hal, let's not name anyone in particular here.
--they like to talk about how repressed their tribal enemies are? How they need to loosen up on some of their moral strictures, quit telling others how to live?
Sure. I hear you.
You really would think we were talking about Mormons or Christians. Or Islamic Fundamentalists. Or NRA members.
So, anyway, Hal -- try to think about the opposite side securing a better-qualified expert than Eaton. I'm wondering if the reason we aren't seeing Eaton's report is because they're not going to use her. If there's enough money behind that lawsuit, they'll find a more ...err... persuasive expert the second time around. Know what I mean?