Washingtonienne Claims Destitution

With credit card debt, student loans, and ever mounting legal fees, Jessica Cutler recently declared bankruptcy, hopefully ending her brief period of notoriety. Of course, in the wake of a $20-million lawsuit, I’d probably be trying to declare bankruptcy, too…

9 Comments so far

  1. Don (unregistered) on June 1st, 2007 @ 11:46 pm

    We’ll see if she succeeds in her filing. The bankruptcy reform laws instituted a ‘means test’ to determine if someone could work and earn the money to repay their debts. I find it hard to believe there’s nobody left willing to pay for anal sex and she’s made it clear she’s willing to take money in exchange for it.


  2. Tom Bridge (unregistered) on June 1st, 2007 @ 11:51 pm

    Man, can you imagine having to take it up the ass on a regular basis in order to pay your debts?

    That would suck.


  3. Don (unregistered) on June 2nd, 2007 @ 12:59 am

    Yeah, that’s the alternative way.


  4. walt (unregistered) on June 2nd, 2007 @ 10:00 am

    Um, don’t knock it til you’ve tried it. Also, Jessica is by proxy defending the rights of all bloggers, so why the hate?


  5. Tom Bridge (unregistered) on June 2nd, 2007 @ 10:38 am

    I’m not sure I want her defending me, or other bloggers, Walt.


  6. Don (unregistered) on June 2nd, 2007 @ 11:30 am

    I don’t see how it can be claimed she’s defending any of us. She’s defending a libel suit over something she wrote in a tell-all book marketed as fiction. There may be bloggers who view her fame as desirable but my wildest (or tamest) visions of success don’t remotely resemble her path, paid sex or not.


  7. SUlawprof (unregistered) on June 4th, 2007 @ 1:37 pm

    It’s not a libel suit. She’s being sued for disclosure of private facts. Regardless of whether or not you guys like her, she actually is defending people like you (although you can’t even get your facts straight).


  8. Don (unregistered) on June 4th, 2007 @ 4:22 pm

    I happily plead guilty to not previously giving enough of a crap about her to know the specifics of the case. Having now checked out the exact filing over that the Smoking Gun I am not swayed in the slightest.

    I whole-heartedly dispute the idea that she is defending “people like” us. May her case have implications for us? Certainly. However if you think that just because I write online that I am in favor of moving the legal goalposts so it’s okay to reveal intimate details about ones lovers then you don’t know me, buddy.

    If you think that because I write online that I should be in favor of such legal changes then, well, you’re entitled to your opinion and I’m entitled to think it’s moronic.

    However if you want to paint with a wide caselaw brush then I’m going to also look at the case as one where she may have opened a can of worms such that the eventual ruling might have a negative impact on me. A negative impact that wouldn’t have come to pass if she hadn’t brought about this case by feeling like she needed to share with the world details about how one of the dudes she was fucking liked to spank and be spanked, likes submissive women, and various other private details.

    Along with those revelations she identified him as counsel, which brings the number of possible folk down notably. Initials reduces that number tremendously, after which she revealed his past job, that he has a twin, and who knows what other information in there (I reached my disgust threshold at 70% read) – more than enough to allow someone to figure out who the dude is.

    You add that all up together than I’ve got no problem with him going after her. She’s defending people like me about as much as the Unabomer is.


  9. Tom Bridge (unregistered) on June 4th, 2007 @ 4:25 pm

    Honestly, if you’re airing laundry like that on your blog, I certainly don’t want to be lumped into the same bunch.



Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.