Ok, I watched the video (and, oh, by the way, how could someone open up a topic like this, and have 2+ pages of posts, without any one supplying a link to the video? How in the name of all that is holy-in-one, can one make an intelligent determination of the impact of the golf club on her derriere, without going to the videotape? Forcing me to actually google something like that on my own is in direct contradiction of my Prime Directive, namely don't do anything that someone else can do, and probably better).
So, my own now-informed opinion is that the playboy model's lawsuit has little merit. She was laughing for a good 30 seconds after being struck by the errant (though i guess he could have been aiming for a piece of the cheek) swing. She didn't recoil in horror as her "assailant" tried to,interview her immediately after. And another woman in the background says something like she has a "little welt" there. Not the HUGE bluish bruise she has in the "later" picture.
I guess its conceivable that the bruise popped up afterward, internal injuries etc which caused it. I'm not a doctor, nor do i play one on tv or anywhere else, but it still seems unlikely that such a wimpy swing would produce such an ugly bruise. If i were on the jury, they would have to convince me otherwise, likely with several CSI-like demonstrations of bottoms being smacked with a variety of implements, in addition to close-up contact with the bottom in question. All in the name of justice, of course. |