Skip to main content

David Letterman, or Why Extortion Works (Apparently)

Here's what I don't understand about the David Letterman case.

Somebody tries to extort money from you by saying that they'll reveal something you did if you don't comply with their demands.

So you do the right thing, and turn them in. At which point, what you didn't want revealed is not only revealed, but made public record.

Basically, extortion works.

This is why I'm confused.

If David Letterman was being blackmailed because he did something illegal, then I could understand bringing it up in court. Had he not done (illegal activity), he wouldn't be able to be blackmailed in the first place.

He was being extorted, however, because of an embarrassing, but not illegal, matter, and the whole thing was still dragged out in front of the media.

Is this not letting the extortionist win?

Wouldn't there be less instances of this happening if the law were able to make it so that a person's privacy is protected if they're being blackmailed and they decide to come forward?

I understand that in court cases everything has to be put on the table, but why is it relevant to know EXACTLY what he was being blackmailed for? Why can't it just be said that it was something personal and leave it at that? Once it's established that it was nothing illegal, is it even still relevant to the case?

I'm very confused, and I also feel bad that someone has to be put through the ringer first by an extortionist and then by the judicial system itself.

There's gotta be a better way to do this, right?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A List of People Who Can Go to Hell Now That I Can't Have Elizabeth Warren

So today was a rough day for everybody who isn't a @#$%-ing #$%hole. Let's just start there. If that upsets you, by all means, go straight to hell. This entire rant is going to be exactly what it sounds like. I am mad and I am going to exercise my right to BLOG ABOUT IT LIKE IT'S 1995, SO BUCKLE UP, BUTTERCUP. I really don't even know where to start, so let's just jump right in with the first person who comes to mind. Bloomberg, go to hell.  You really didn't have anything specific to do with today, but you can just go to hell for spending an ungodly amount of money on literally nothing.  I mean, you could have lit millions of dollars on fire and at least warmed the hands of the homeless, but instead, you made tv stations across the country that are already owned by Conservatives rich, so kudos to you and go to hell. Amy Klobuchar, I STUCK UP FOR YOU AMY.  I got into FIGHTS on SOCIAL MEDIA while DEFENDING your sorry, self-interested ass.  You know ...
42 comments
Read more

Theater and the Outbreak

After last week's interview, a representative from a theater that recently experienced the results of opening too soon reached out to speak with me. I want to thank this person for coming forward in the hopes that it'll change some minds about what's safe and what isn't when it comes to the performing arts. Here's the interview: ME:  So this wasn't a full production or-- THEM:  No. It was us trying to do a little something for friends and donors. ME:  Who is 'us?' THEM:  The board of _____. ME:  And how long have you been on the board? THEM:  Three years. ME:  What was this going to be? THEM:  There's a, uh, beautiful park here in town, and we wanted to do an outdoor performance of a Shakespeare as a benefit, because, as you know, theaters are having a hard time right now paying the bills. We checked with the local government and the health department for the state to make sure we were doing everything the way we needed to in order to keep everyon...
7 comments
Read more

People You Know Are More Important Than People You Don't Know

This post is in response to arguing with people--straight and gay alike--about a certain celebrity, whether or not she's an ally, if she's pandering, if pandering matters, and whether or not I'm an asshole. The last part is probably an enthusiastic "Yes" but let's reflect on this for a bit anyway without actually giving more time to an argument about a person none of us know, which is a crucial part of what I want to talk about. People you know are more important than people you don't know. I realize it's tricky in an age where we've never been closer or more engaged to our celebrities to keep in mind that we do not know them, they are not our friends, and while we may love them and stan and feel like we're attacked when they're attacked-- That is not true. That is not real. They are in no tangible way connected to us. Now, as someone who is obsessed with pop culture, I get that it's a little hypocritical for me to be making...
Post a Comment
Read more