The story so far:
Back on July 5th, Tina Sherman decided to take some sexually-explicit photos of herself which she then e-mailed to her husband Phillip's phone. OK, that's weird but not really too bad. I mean, lots of guys would be happy to have a kinky wife, especially if she's good looking. (Note: as of this writing, I have been unable to find the pictures. But I made a diligent try for just you all, because that's the kind of news blogger that I am.)
Well Phillip left his phone in a local McDonalds (OK, all together now..."MORON!") and after realizing what he'd done, he called the restaurant and in an undoubtedly frantic voice made the employees there promise to turn it off and refrain from looking at any pictures in it until he could get back there.
Now had he not mentioned the pictures or made a big deal of asking them to turn the phone off and not look through it, I'm betting that the phone would have just been put on a shelf. But when you put the idea in people's heads, especially the type that McDonalds' employment attracts... well let's just say that Phillip Sherman and Tina were probably the only two people in the world who were actually surprised when those photos wound up on the internet.
Now the Shermans are suing McDonalds and demanding three million dollars. Because she was slutty and he was careless, and that's somehow McDonalds' fault. Riiiight.
The suit seeks no less than $1 million for outrage; no less than $1 million for public disclosure of private facts; and, no less than $1 million for casting the Shermans in a false light.And the Shermans are relying on the alleged promise made by the McDonalds manager to the effect that neither he now anyone else would look at the pictures.
The suit seeks damages to be determined by a jury for negligence and negligent supervision.
The suit contends the couple and their family suffered severe mental and emotional distress, physical injury, pain and suffering, embarrassment, damage to their reputations and fear. They also allege loss of earnings and are seeking the cost for having to move to a new residence.
Now if I recall my Contract Law classes from back in the day, (Yeah, I went to law school once. Big mistake. But that's for another post.) a promise given without consideration--that is, one made in return for nothing--isn't enforceable, nor, I suspect, do we even have proof that such a promise was given. But that aside, none of this would have happened if the Shermans hadn't been oversexed and careless. This is a completely foreseeable possibility for people who decide to carry porn pictures of their wife around on their cell phone, especially people prone to setting such phones down in restaurants and walking off without them. Geez, if I was just a little more cynical, I might suspect that they deliberately planted the phone there and called back to tell people not to look at the pictures. For all we know, they uploaded the pics to the internet themselves as part of yet another attempt to shake down a restaurant known for paying out settlement checks.
But that would be very cynical of me indeed, and we all know that I'm hardly a cynic.
And did I mention the fact that the Shermans' decision to file this lawsuit (and their related decision to issue the press release that made this into a national story) has now generated more publicity and alleged embarrassment than any photos stuck on some obscure website could possibly have caused?
But the part that I like the best is that they also want enough money to cover the costs of moving to a new residence.
"Costs to move to a new residence"? Come on now. They live in Arkansas. How much could it possibly cost to tow a trailer to a new trailer park?