A Flight Attendant Takes On Oprah Winfrey In Court
Posted by: Kate Torgovnick
Filed in:
celebs
2:15PM, Monday October 12th 2009
Here’s a doozy of a celebrity lawsuit for you. Corrine Gehrls was a flight attendant on Oprah’s private jet, until she was fired in June. Apparently, a second flight attendant and Oprah’s goddaughter told the Big O that Corrine had sex with pilot Terry Pansing during a flight, and Oprah was not amused. Now, Gehrls is suing for $75,000, saying that the accusations are totally false and that she’s been defamed. The crux of her case are polygraph tests from both her and this pilot saying that they never bumped pelvises on duty. Oprah has a grand tradition of beating every lawsuit that comes her way—lord knows she can afford the lawyer bills—so do you think Gehrls has a chance on this? [Reuters]
TheFrisky.com is part of the Turner Sports and Entertainment Digital Network
Pinky
wrote on October 12 2009 @ 01:27 pm: [report]
Honestly…she is the biggest sanctimonious, guilt-ridden, elitist snob to ever epitomize liberal guilt. She makes her enormous success due to her vacuous existence on daytime television stroking the emotions of scores of pathetic women who would do better reading books or expanding their mind over watching the daily chit-chat about the most superficial tripe our pop culture can pass from its bowels. Oprah…just be thankful you pull down more than the GNP of most small nations in the world each year, and please just shut your dang yap!
Every time I see her doe-eyed, rapt, child-like attention on the latest trend of spiritualistic nonsense she pedantically dissects as some form of new enlightenment she is bestowing upon her dumbass lemming masses everywhere, I desperately want to skewer my eyeballs like martini olives, and guzzle them down with some gin.
bethlynn00
wrote on October 12 2009 @ 01:53 pm: [report]
@ Pinky: Chillax a little bit there. We get it, you’re not a big Oprah fan…
Anyways, no I don’t think she has a chance. Lie detectors test are not really reliable sources and probably won’t hold up against two witness statements. Besides like you said, the big O has a way of beating these things every time.
lea322
wrote on October 12 2009 @ 04:14 pm: [report]
There aren’t two witnesses. There are two people who claim it happened. No where in the article does it say that anyone actually SAW them having sex.
retro chic
wrote on October 12 2009 @ 04:38 pm: [report]
@lea322: true. But apparently the jet and Harpo are the sovereign domain of Oprah and the laws don’t apply up there in the stratosphere where she lives.
Sure, she’ll beat it, but I think she’ll pay off (a la hush money) voluntarily. Plus the gag order – you’d have to know the tell-all would be coming – there are a lot more stories where that came from.
Technically, so-called witness statements can be considered somewhat less reliable than lie detector tests – they’re just not admissible as evidence. But go a long way toward credibility in the he-said/she-said game, esp if the accusers are not/willing to take said tests too.
Also, this does not rise to the same level of the beef cattle story; less at stake.
crap :sigh: bad unavoidable pun :/
melissaann
wrote on October 12 2009 @ 05:59 pm: [report]
Well, just because they didn’t have sex while flying, doesn’t mean they weren’t screwing around or doing something else naughty while flying. I just wonder if there was any truth to the rumor or how it started. But there are two sides to every story.
cadyms
wrote on October 12 2009 @ 07:05 pm: [report]
Unless the flight attendant was part of a union, Oprah could have fired her because she thought her shoes weren’t sufficiently shined or because she found her laugh irritating. An employer doesn’t need a reason to fire someone unless there is a contractual agreement that says otherwise, or unless they are being targeted due to a legally protected status (e.g. race, disability).
cadyms
wrote on October 12 2009 @ 07:20 pm: [report]
Back to the defamation issue, however: the attendant has to show that she suffered real damages (i.e. not just to her reputation) as a result of Oprah’s belief that the attendant had sex on the plane (losing the job with Oprah doesn’t count, see above).
Probably the only way this would fly is if the attendant could prove she was turned down for another job because Oprah told the potential employer that the attendant had sex on her plane.
cadyms
wrote on October 12 2009 @ 07:26 pm: [report]
My attorney bf says it would also be relevant if Oprah had good reason to believe the information was true. (Signing out now!)
retro chic
wrote on October 12 2009 @ 09:02 pm: [report]
@cadyms (when/if you return): Exactly, most Terms and Conditions of employment these days anyway are “At Will.” or, “at won’t,” as it were, I now see the flaw with my first statement, ¶1; that’s where I was going with mine, but got caught up in my lofty sarcasm, haha, oh well.
But, in addition to the unethical disclosure to future employers causing her to not get hired you cited, I still think Oprah will pay off, whatever the meager amount, OoC.