Tuesday, May 4, 2010

Quote of the Day-- and, Is It Extortion?

The quote of the day comes from actor David Boreanaz, one of the stars of a show called "Bones," that I confess I have never seen, and "Angel" and "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," which I confess I have seen.

(Full disclosure: I used to be attracted to a woman who wanted to have an affair with him, back in his "Angel" days, and actually dated a woman who wouldn't have turned him away if he'd asked her, but wasn't obsessed the way the other woman was.)

The actor has recently confessed to having an affair (a single affair, which is pretty quaint in the age of Tiger Woods and Jesse James), and had this to say about the situation, to People magazine:
"I was associated with a woman who I was involved with and had a relationship with," he says. "She asked for money. I felt as though I was being blackmailed or there was some sort of extortion."
I have read that quote far too many times, and wasted too many precious seconds of my life trying to figure out what it's supposed to mean. I still cannot. Oh, I get the part about the money/blackmail/extortion (and I do actually like that he says I felt as though I was being blackmailed, and not I was being blackmailed. can't be sued now for slander!) The part that gets me is the first part-- He was associated with a woman, he was involved with her, and he had a relationship with her.


Why does he phrase it like that. It's pretty clear from his "I felt I was being blackmailed" bit that this statement was carefully parsed. So what is the point of saying associated-involved-relationship.

Anyway, because it's so far advanced from my understanding, I am making it my quote of the day.

As for the question of extortion or blackmail, well, as TMZ reported,
TMZ knows what went down. We're told Boreanaz had a short-term relationship with the woman -- one source says they hooked up "2 or 3 times." Sources say he started paying her money -- several thousand dollars here and there -- but she began demanding more, threatening to go public with the affair. Boreanaz then confessed the affair to Jaime Bergman, his wife of 9 years.

Enter Gloria Allred, who reps the mistress. Allred contacted Boreanaz' lawyer -- legal pit bull Marty Singer -- and demanded 6 figures.

Boreanaz then blunted the attack by going public with his affair. He has refused to pay the mistress another cent.
That sounds like a blackmail attempt to me, what with the apparently threatening to reveal embarrassing information about someone if they do not (continue to) pay you money. But wait! Now TMZ reports,
Allred claims Boreanaz's lawyer -- legal pit bull Marty Singer -- tried contacting the mistress and only then did Allred get involved. Allred says, "We discussed the possible resolution of my client's legal claims against Mr. Boreanaz by mediation." Allred does not say what legal claims the mistress had.

But Singer was more than willing to tell TMZ about Allred's legal claim. He says Allred's claim was that Boreanaz had promised the mistress that she was "exclusive," even though she knew he was married.

As we first reported, the woman had a very short-term liaison with Boreanaz -- 2 or 3 times -- he paid her money but she allegedly kept demanding more, and then threatened to go to the media unless he upped the ante. Boreanaz told the story publicly yesterday, and shut down Allred's claim.

Now Allred says, "My client has not told her story to the press, but now that Mr. Boreanaz is attacking her she has decided to tell the story of their relationship, so that the truth will come out."
I'm not sure how Mr. Boreanaz is supposed to be "attacking" this woman since, as People pointed out, he refuses to name her. His statement just says that he was associated with her, involved with her, and had a relationship with her.

Maybe in lawyer talk that's considered an attack; if so, I just don't get it.

Also, as TMZ points out, Allred doesn't mention what her client's "legal claims" might be. Maybe he signed a contract offering her money or gifts in exchange for services. But that's illegal.

This story is beyond me.

Doesn't it get tiresome when someone points out that a man is crazy to cheat on his wife when she's so beautiful? I mean, really, that is the most tired observation ever. But I really have to wonder why a man would cheat on a woman like that. She is gor-GEOUS!

Pic source.

1 comment:

shampoo said...

I don't get it either. how does he owe the unnamed mistress anything? it seems like the only legal issue at this point would be whether or not his wife divorces him.

as far as the "exclusive" thing, if the mistress can use google she would've known all about the wife.

but, if his mistress is even half as pretty as his wife the tabs are probably hoping to do one of those split covers with this...