gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.26.1.pdf

Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 26-1 Filed 01/08/16 Page 1 of 26 EXHIBIT A  Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 26-1 Filed 01/08/16 Page 2 of 26 Green v. Cosby, --- F.Supp.3d ---- (2015) [7] dismissal on basis of self-defense privilege was not 2015 WL 5923553 warranted. Only the Westlaw citation is currently available. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. Motions denied. Tamara Green, Therese Serignese, and Linda Traitz, Plaintiffs, v. William H. Cosby, Jr., Defendant. West Headnotes (37) Civil Action No. 14–30211–MGM | Signed October 9, 2015 [1] Federal Courts Substance or procedure; determinativeness Federal courts sitting in diversity apply state Synopsis substantive law and federal procedural law. 28 Background: Alleged sexual assault victim filed U.S.C.A. § 1332. complaint alleging that male celebrity had publicly defamed her in statements made by individuals operating at his direction or within scope of their employment. Cases that cite this headnote Complaint was subsequently amended to include similar claims by two additional plaintiffs. Defendant moved to dismiss. [2] Federal Courts Conflict of Laws; Choice of Law Holdings: The District Court, Mastroianni, J., held that: [1] Federal court sitting in diversity determines newspaper’s republication of allegedly defamatory which state’s law applies by applying forum statement gave rise to new defamation claim; state’s choice of law rules. [2] celebrity’s statement that alleged victim’s accusation that he had sexually assaulted her was “10-year-old, Cases that cite this headnote discredited accusation that proved to be nothing at the time, and is still nothing” was not substantially true; [3] press release describing plaintiff’s allegation that [3] defendant had sexually assaulted her “fabricated or Libel and Slander unsubstantiated stories,” “ridiculous claims,” and “an What law governs absurd fabrication” could form basis of viable defamation claim; Under Massachusetts choice of law rules, law of state where defamed person was domiciled at [4] press release in which defendant criticized women who time of publication applies if matter complained had publicly accused him of sexually assaulting them of was published in that state. could form basis of viable defamation claim; [5] plaintiffs pled plausible claim that defendant was Cases that cite this headnote personally liable for allegedly defamatory statement made by his agents under respondeat superior theory; [6] plaintiffs pled plausible claim that defendant was [4] directly liable for alleged defamation; and Libel and Slander By others in general © 2016 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 1  Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 26-1 Filed 01/08/16 Page 3 of 26 Green v. Cosby, --- F.Supp.3d ---- (2015) Under California law, repetition by new party of that is false; (3) defamatory, meaning damaging another person’s earlier defamatory remark to good reputation of person who is subject of generally gives rise to separate cause of action statement; (4) made by actor with requisite for defamation against original defamer, when degree of fault; (5) is not protected by any repetition was reasonably foreseeable. privilege; and (6) causes injury to subject. Cases that cite this headnote Cases that cite this headnote [5] [8] Limitation of Actions Libel and Slander Torts Actionable Words in General Under California law, newspaper’s republication Under California and Florida law, in order for of allegedly defamatory statement gave rise to defamation claim to survive motion to dismiss, new defamation claim against purported allegedly defamatory statement must contain at defamer, and thus statute of limitations did not least one false factual assertion that is also bar plaintiff’s claim, even though statement was defamatory. originally published nine years earlier, where plaintiff’s claim was based on entirely different issuance of statement, and it was foreseeable to Cases that cite this headnote purported defamer that his statement would be republished if plaintiff’s allegations against him were reported again in future. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 340(c). [9] Libel and Slander Truth as justification in general Cases that cite this headnote Under California law, even if statement is offensive, it cannot be basis for defamation suit if it is true. [6] Libel and Slander By same person Cases that cite this headnote Under California law, “single-publication rule” provides that, for any single edition of newspaper or book, there was but single [10] potential action for defamatory statement Libel and Slander contained in newspaper or book, no matter how Truth of part of defamatory matter; many copies of newspaper or book were substantial truth distributed. Cal. Civ. Code § 3425.3. Under California law, while defendant need not justify literal truth of every word to prevail in Cases that cite this headnote defamation action, defendant must prove charge’s substance to be true. Cases that cite this headnote [7] Libel and Slander Nature and elements of defamation in general Under California and Florida law, essential [11] elements of defamation are: (1) publication; (2) Libel and Slander © 2016 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 2  Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 26-1 Filed 01/08/16 Page 4 of 26 Green v. Cosby, --- F.Supp.3d ---- (2015) Truth of part of defamatory matter; substantial truth Totality of circumstances test used in California in determining whether an allegedly defamatory Male celebrity’s statement that alleged victim’s statement is capable of being interpreted as accusation that he had sexually assaulted her asserting or implying a fact has three parts: (1) was “10-year-old, discredited accusation that whether the general tenor of the entire work proved to be nothing at the time, and is still negates the impression that the defendant was nothing,” was not substantially true, so as to asserting an objective fact, (2) whether the defeat victim’s defamation claim under defendant used figurative or hyperbolic California law; statement could be understood as language that negates that impression, and (3) expressing false factual assertions and could whether the statement in question is susceptible reasonably be interpreted as insinuating that of being proved true or false. plaintiff’s sexual assault allegation had been discredited and was capable of negatively impacting victim’s reputation within the Cases that cite this headnote community. Cases that cite this headnote [15] Libel and Slander Imputation of falsehood, dishonesty, or fraud Male celebrity’s allegedly defamatory statement [12] Libel and Slander that alleged victim’s accusation that he had Falsity sexually assaulted her was a “10-year-old, discredited accusation that proved to be nothing Under California law, statement is considered at the time, and is still nothing” was not a false for purposes of defamation if it would have expression of opinion protected by the First different effect on reader’s mind from that Amendment under California law; statement which pleaded truth would have produced. was not a “predictable opinion” because there was no pending litigation between the parties at the time it was made, and general tenor of the Cases that cite this headnote statement negated the impression that the defendant was asserting an objective fact. USCA Const. Amend. 1. [13] Libel and Slander Cases that cite this headnote Construction of defamatory language in general Under California law, court can, as matter of [16] law, find statement is not actionable, but when Libel and Slander allegedly defamatory statement can reasonably Imputation of falsehood, dishonesty, or fraud be interpreted as either stating or implying false fact or articulating opinion, court should put Male celebrity’s statement that alleged victim’s issue before jury. accusation that he had sexually assaulted her was “10-year-old, discredited accusation that proved to be nothing at the time, and is still Cases that cite this headnote nothing” could be understood as having defamatory meaning under California law; statement suggested that plaintiff intentionally lied about being sexually assaulted because [14] plaintiff’s allegations detailed a specific set of Libel and Slander events that either occurred substantially as Construction of language used © 2016 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 3  Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 26-1 Filed 01/08/16 Page 5 of 26 Green v. Cosby, --- F.Supp.3d ---- (2015) alleged or were fabricated, leaving no room for [20] an honest mistake. Libel and Slander Imputation of falsehood, dishonesty, or fraud Cases that cite this headnote Under Florida law, press release issued by one of defendant’s agents, which described plaintiff’s allegation that defendant had sexually assaulted her after offering her drugs as [17] “fabricated or unsubstantiated stories,” Libel and Slander “ridiculous claims,” and “an absurd fabrication,” Actionable Words in General and related details of plaintiff’s later, unrelated, criminal history, could reasonably be interpreted Under Florida law, to be actionable, defamatory as communicating fact that plaintiff’s allegations publication must convey to reasonable reader were lies, and thus could form basis of viable impression that it describes actual facts about defamation claim. plaintiff or activities in which she participated. Cases that cite this headnote Cases that cite this headnote [21] [18] Libel and Slander Libel and Slander Actionable Words in General Construction of defamatory language in general Under Florida law, expressions of opinions are non-actionable if speaker states facts on which Under Florida law, court must decide, as matter he bases his opinion, and those facts are not of law, whether statement expresses pure false or inaccurately presented. opinion or “mixed opinion” from which unstated facts are likely to be inferred, but where statement could be understood in more than one Cases that cite this headnote way, question should be submitted to trier of fact. Cases that cite this headnote [22] Libel and Slander Actionable Words in General Under Florida law, statement is non-actionable [19] pure opinion, as matter of law, when it is based Libel and Slander on facts that are otherwise known or available to Construction of language used the reader or listener. Under Florida law, courts determining whether allegedly defamatory statement is protected Cases that cite this headnote expression of opinion must construe allegedly defamatory statement in its totality, examining not merely particular phrase or sentence, but all words used in publication. [23] Libel and Slander Construction of language used Cases that cite this headnote Under Florida law, in determining whether any portions of statement are defamatory, court must consider statement in context of publication, © 2016 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 4  Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 26-1 Filed 01/08/16 Page 6 of 26 Green v. Cosby, --- F.Supp.3d ---- (2015) including audience, means by which it was subject to respondeat superior liability, form of delivered, and other circumstances surrounding vicarious liability, if agent was acting within statement. scope of work performed for principal and principal controlled or had right to control manner of agent’s work. Cases that cite this headnote Cases that cite this headnote [24] Libel and Slander Imputation of falsehood, dishonesty, or fraud [27] Principal and Agent Under Florida defamation law, press release in Rights and liabilities of principal which male celebrity criticized women who had publicly accused him of sexually assaulting Under California and Florida law, plaintiffs’ them and media for their various roles in recent allegation that defendant hired professional dissemination of sexual assault allegations made spokespersons to issue defamatory statements against him was not a non-actionable statement about them to media on his behalf was sufficient of fact on which defendant based an opinion; to plead plausible claim that defendant was statement could reasonably be interpreted as personally liable for alleged defamation under communicating fact that alleged victims’ respondeat superior theory. allegations were false and entirely without merit, even though press release contained accurate statements regarding length of time between Cases that cite this headnote when incidents allegedly occurred and date on which any particular allegation became public, and did not single out any individual by name. [28] Principal and Agent Cases that cite this headnote Rights and liabilities of principal Under California and Florida law, if principal purposefully directs agent to perform action, and that agent performs action, then principal is [25] Libel and Slander directly responsible for consequences of that Criticism and Comment on Public Matters; action. Public Figures To establish defamation claim if plaintiff is Cases that cite this headnote public figure, then such plaintiff must show that defendant, or defendant’s agent acting within scope of agency, acted with actual malice in uttering defamatory remark. [29] Libel and Slander Form and requisites in general Cases that cite this headnote Under California and Florida law, plaintiffs’ allegations that defendant acted “by and through” professional spokespersons he hired to issue defamatory statements about them to [26] Principal and Agent media on his behalf, that spokespersons gave Rights and liabilities of principal statements at defendant’s direction, and that defendant knew claimed defamatory statements Under California and Florida law, when third were false at time they were published were party is harmed by agent’s conduct, principal is sufficient to plead plausible claim that defendant © 2016 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 5  Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 26-1 Filed 01/08/16 Page 7 of 26 Green v. Cosby, --- F.Supp.3d ---- (2015) was directly liable for alleged defamation. self-defense privilege. Cases that cite this headnote Cases that cite this headnote [30] [34] Libel and Slander Libel and Slander Self-defense Injury from Defamation Libel and Slander Under California law, there is no privilege to Nominal or substantial damages defame in self-defense. Under “libel-proof plaintiff” doctrine, when plaintiff’s reputation is so diminished at time of Cases that cite this headnote publication of allegedly defamatory material that only nominal damages at most could be awarded because person’s reputation was not capable of sustaining further harm, plaintiff is deemed to be [31] libel-proof as matter of law and is not permitted Libel and Slander to burden defendant with trial. Self-defense Under Florida law, as predicted by the district Cases that cite this headnote court, there is no privilege to defame in self-defense. Cases that cite this headnote [35] Libel and Slander Injury from Defamation Florida has not adopted libel-proof plaintiff [32] doctrine. Libel and Slander Self-defense Cases that cite this headnote Self-defense privilege permits speaker to call accuser liar, but she or he may not include in reply defamatory matter that is irrelevant or that speaker knows or believes to be false. [36] Libel and Slander Injury from Defamation Cases that cite this headnote “Incremental harm doctrine” measures harm inflicted by allegedly defamatory statements beyond harm imposed by rest of publication, [33] and if that harm is determined to be nominal or Federal Civil Procedure nonexistent, statements are dismissed as not Fact issues actionable. Issue of whether defendant’s public responses to plaintiffs’ accusations that he had sexually Cases that cite this headnote assaulted them were knowingly false presented fact question precluding dismissal of plaintiffs’ defamation claims against defendant on basis of © 2016 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 6  Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 26-1 Filed 01/08/16 Page 8 of 26 Green v. Cosby, --- F.Supp.3d ---- (2015) [37] Libel and Slander amended complaint and, on April 16, 2015, the court Injury from Defamation granted Plaintiffs’ request. Green v. Cosby, 99 F.Supp.3d 223, –––– – ––––, 2015 WL 1736487, at *2–3 Under Florida law, incremental harm doctrine is (D.Mass.2015). Plaintiffs’ second amended complaint not defense to defamation claim. (“SAC”) supplemented factual allegations with respect to an allegedly defamatory statement directed at Green.1 (Dkt. No. 48, SAC.) The court held a hearing on the Cases that cite this headnote matter and considered the written filings. II. JURISDICTION Attorneys and Law Firms The SAC contains three defamation counts brought Joseph Cammarata, Matthew W. Tievsky, Cchaikin, pursuant to state law. Defamation is not actionable under Sherman, Cammarata & Siegel, P.C., Washington, DC, federal law. Federal courts have jurisdiction over suits Andrew M. Abraham, Abraham & Associates, P.C., brought pursuant to state law where there is complete Boston, MA, for Plaintiffs. diversity of citizenship between the adversaries and the amount in controversy exceeds a threshold amount of Christopher Tayback, Marshall M. Searcy, III, Quinn $75,000. 28 U.S.C. § 1332; Arbaugh v. Y&H Corp., 546 Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, LLP, Los Angeles, U.S. 500, 513, 126 S.Ct. 1235, 163 L.Ed.2d 1097 (2006). CA, Francis D. Dibble, Jr., Elizabeth S. Zuckerman, Based on the content of the complaint, which Defendant Jeffrey E. Poindexter, Bulkley, Richardson & Gelinas, has not disputed, the court finds Defendant is a citizen of John J. Egan, Egan, Flanagan & Cohen, PC, Springfield, Massachusetts and Plaintiffs are citizens of either MA, Robert P. Lobue, Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler, California or Florida. (SAC ¶¶ 2, 4-6.) Plaintiffs each LLP, New York, NY, for Defendant. assert they are entitled to damages in excess of the statutory threshold amount. In the absence of any challenge from Defendant, the court finds it has jurisdiction in this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT III. MOTION TO DISMISS STANDARD MASTROIANNI, United States District Judge When considering a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court must accept all well-pleaded facts as true and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d I. INTRODUCTION 868 (2009); see also San Gerónimo Caribe Project, Inc. v. Acevedo–Vilá, 687 F.3d 465, 471 (1st Cir.2012). The *1 On December 10, 2014, Tamara Green filed a burden is on the moving party to demonstrate that even complaint alleging that William H. Cosby, Jr. when viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, (“Defendant”) publicly defamed her in statements made the complaint lacks “sufficient factual matter” to state an by individuals operating at his direction and/or within the actionable claim for relief that is “ ‘plausible on its face.’ scope of their employment. (Dkt. No. 1, Compl.) The ” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937 (quoting Bell Atl. complaint was subsequently amended to include similar Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955, claims by two additional plaintiffs, Therese Serignese and 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007)). “A claim has facial plausibility Linda Traitz (collectively, the three are referred to as when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the “Plaintiffs”). (Dkt. No. 13, Am. Compl.) Defendant filed court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant motions to dismiss Plaintiffs’ amended complaint in its is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. When evaluating entirety (Dkt. Nos. 21, 22, 23), which Plaintiffs opposed. the sufficiency of the factual allegations contained in the (Dkt. No. 31.) Plaintiffs then sought leave to file a second complaint, the court must be careful both to credit the © 2016 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 7  Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 26-1 Filed 01/08/16 Page 9 of 26 Green v. Cosby, --- F.Supp.3d ---- (2015) factual assertions made by the plaintiff and to disregard ¶¶ 47-48.) Like Plaintiff Green, Plaintiff Serignese was “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, physically unable to defend herself. (Id. ¶ 49.) supported by mere conclusory statements.” Id. “Determining whether a complaint states a plausible Many years later, in February of 2005, the Philadelphia claim for relief” is a “context-specific task that requires Daily News published an interview with Plaintiff Green in the reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience and which she publicly disclosed the sexual assault that had common sense.” Id. at 679, 129 S.Ct. 1937. A complaint occurred in the 1970s. (Id. ¶ 24.) Plaintiff Green also must survive a motion to dismiss if the facts alleged are disclosed the allegations during appearances on television sufficient as to each element to “raise a right to relief shows around the same time. (Id.) Nine years later, on or above the speculative level.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555, about February 7, 2014, Newsweek published an interview 127 S.Ct. 1955; see also Lister v. Bank of Am., N.A., 790 with Plaintiff Green in which she repeated her description F.3d 20, 23 (1st Cir.2015) (“Dismissal for failure to state of being sexually assaulted by Defendant in the 1970s. a claim is appropriate if the complaint does not set forth (Id. ¶ 27.) factual allegations, either direct or inferential, respecting each material element necessary to sustain recovery under On November 18, 2014, Plaintiff Traitz made an entry on some actionable legal theory.” (internal quotation marks her personal Facebook page publicly disclosing that omitted)). Defendant had sexually assaulted her. (Id. ¶ 64.) The following day, Plaintiff Serignese publicly disclosed that she had been sexually assaulted by Defendant.3 (Id. ¶ 50.) Several days later, on November 22, 2014, details of Plaintiff Green’s sexual assault were published by the IV. FACTS AS ALLEGED BY PLAINTIFFS2 Washington Post. (Id. ¶ 31.) *2 During the 1970s, Defendant, “an internationally Plaintiffs allege that Defendant, acting through his known actor and comedian,” met each Plaintiff and agents,4 issued statements to the media in response to the subsequently sexually assaulted her. (SAC ¶¶ 3, 7, 18-21, public disclosures made by Plaintiffs. (Id. ¶¶ 25-26, 39, 47-48, 57, 63.) With respect to Plaintiff Green, “[o]n a 28-29, 30, 32-35, 37-38, 51-53, 55-56, 65-68, 70-71.) certain date in the early 1970s,” Defendant offered her Defendant knew each statement was false at the time it two pills, telling her they were over-the-counter cold was made. (Id. ¶¶ 36, 54, 69, 79, 90, 101.) Despite medicine. (Id. ¶¶ 10, 12.) She took the pills and became knowing the statements were false, Defendant directed the weak and dizzy. (Id. ¶¶ 13-14.) Defendant then drove statements be made. (Id. ¶¶ 37, 55, 70.) Each of the Plaintiff Green to her apartment, where he subjected her statements was widely read by many people, including to sexual contact against her will and despite her repeated Plaintiffs’ families, friends, and neighbors, and Plaintiffs demands to stop. (Id. ¶¶ 17-21.) Plaintiff Green was suffered damages, including to their reputations, as a unable to defend herself during the sexual assault because result of the publication of the statements. (Id. ¶¶ 38, 56, she remained weak and vulnerable. (Id. ¶ 22.) 71, 80-82, 91-93, 102-104.) The statements were made as follows: In 1970, Plaintiff Traitz met Defendant while working as a waitress. (Id. ¶ 57.) On one occasion she accepted a ride home from Defendant, but he instead drove her to a beach. (Id. ¶¶ 58-59.) He parked his car and then opened a A. Newsweek Statement—February 7, 2014 briefcase containing pills and urged Plaintiff Traitz to take *3 Prior to the publication of Newsweek’s interview with some pills “to relax.” (Id. ¶ 60.) When Plaintiff Traitz Plaintiff Green in February of 2014, Defendant, acting declined the pills, Defendant groped her, pushed her through a publicist, believed by Plaintiffs to be David down, and attempted to lie on top of her, despite her Brokaw (“Brokaw”), made a statement to Newsweek. (Id. resistance. (Id. ¶¶ 62-63.) ¶¶ 28-30.) The publicist provided the statement to Newsweek while acting as Defendant’s authorized agent, Plaintiff Serignese met Defendant in Las Vegas in 1976 employee, or authorized representative and he knew or and attended his show. (Id. ¶¶ 39, 42-43.) Afterwards, she should have known the statement was false when it was was invited to a room backstage where Defendant gave made. (Id. ¶¶ 29, 77-78) The statement was appended to her two pills and instructed her to take them. (Id. ¶¶ the end of the story and read, in its entirety: 43-44.) Plaintiff Serignese complied and the pills caused her to be in an altered state of consciousness. (Id. ¶¶ This is a 10-year-old, discredited 44-45.) While she was in this altered state, Defendant accusation that proved to be subjected her to sexual contact without her consent. (Id. nothing at the time, and is still © 2016 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 8  Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 26-1 Filed 01/08/16 Page 10 of 26 Green v. Cosby, --- F.Supp.3d ---- (2015) nothing. media outlets. (SAC ¶¶ 51, 67.) Singer gave the statement while acting as Defendant’s authorized agent, employee, (Dkt. No. 25, Decl. re: Mem. Supp. Mot. to Dismiss or authorized representative and he knew or should have (“Decl. re: Mot. to Dismiss”), Ex. A at 3, hereinafter known the statement was false when it was made. (Id. ¶¶ “Newsweek Statement.”) 53, 88-89, 99-100.) The statement responded to allegations by Plaintiffs Traitz, Serignese, and other individuals who are not parties to this suit, without directly identifying any individuals by name, and read, in B. November 20, 2014 Statement its entirety, as follows: Two days after Plaintiff Traitz wrote on her personal Facebook page about Defendant sexually assaulting her in The new, never-before-heard claims from women who the 1970s, Defendant, acting through Martin D. Singer have come forward in the past two weeks with (“Singer”), released a responsive statement to numerous unsubstantiated, fantastical stories about things they media outlets. (SAC ¶ 65.) Singer gave the statement say occurred 30, 40, or even 50 years ago have while acting as Defendant’s authorized agent, employee, escalated far past the point of absurdity. or authorized representative and he knew or should have known the statement was false when it was made. (Id. ¶¶ These brand new claims about alleged decades-old 53, 99-100.) The statement read, in its entirety, as events are becoming increasingly ridiculous, and it is follows: completely illogical that so many people would have said nothing, done nothing, and made no reports to law Ms. Traitz is the latest example of people coming out enforcement or asserted civil claims if they thought of the woodwork with fabricated or unsubstantiated they had been assaulted over a span of so many years. stories about my client. *4 Lawsuits are filed against people in the public eye Linda Joy Traitz is making ridiculous claims and every day. There has never been a shortage of lawyers suddenly seems to have a lot to say about a fleeting willing to represent people with claims against rich, incident she says happened with my client more than powerful men, so it makes no sense that not one of 40 years ago, but she hasn’t mentioned either her 3 ½ these new women who just came forward for the first year incarceration or her extensive criminal record with time now ever asserted a legal claim back at the time charges spanning from the 1980’s through 2008. they allege they had been sexually assaulted. For the first time, she is claiming that in approximately This situation is an unprecedented example of the 1970, my client supposedly drove her to the beach and media’s breakneck rush to run stories without any had a briefcase filled with drugs and offered her pills to corroboration or adherence to traditional journalistic relax, which she says she turned down and demanded standards. Over and over again, we have refuted these to be taken home after Mr. Cosby came on to her. new unsubstantiated stories with documentary There was no briefcase of drugs, and this is an absurd evidence, only to have a new uncorroborated story crop fabrication. up out of the woodwork. When will it end? Ms. Traitz’s long criminal record for numerous It is long past time for this media vilification of Mr. offenses including charges for criminal fraud, Cosby to stop. possession of Oxycodone, cocaine possession, marijuana possession, and possession of drug (Decl. re: Mot. to Dismiss, Ex. D at 1, hereinafter paraphernalia, speaks for itself. “November 21, 2014 Statement.”) As the old saying goes, “consider the source.” (Decl. re: Mot. to Dismiss, Ex. F at 1, hereinafter D. Washington Post Statement, November 22, 2014 “November 20, 2014 Statement.”) On November 22, 2014, the Washington Post published its interview with Plaintiff Green, along with a responsive statement from Defendant. (SAC ¶¶ 31-33.) Defendant, acting through Walter M. Phillips Jr. (“Phillips”), either C. November 21, 2014 Statement “gave” the statement to the Washington Post in 2014, or On November 21, 2014, Defendant, again acting through “originally published” the statement in 2005 with the Singer, released a responsive statement to numerous expectation and intent that the statement be republished if