Waukegan radio station WXLC is being sued after having women compete to go on a date with a “great guy” Travis Harvey, 46. The radio station did not mention that Harvey had been convicted of violating an order for protection. He has now pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting the “winner” in the contest, a 24-year-old who went on the date in February 2007.
The rape victim is charging that the Delaware-based NextMedia, the parent company of WXLC, should have done a background check on the man they were promoting as a “great guy. Had they done so, they would have learned that Harvey was convicted in March 2006 of misdemeanor and felony charges for violating a domestic battery order of protection.
The liability for such contests has been well-established. In Weirum v. RKO, the court held that the Real Don Steele and RKO Corp. were liable for a contest where teenagers would speed to find the Real Don at various locations. When a third party was injured by speeding teens, the court allowed recovery.
This case should be easier on a legal level. This is a straight negligence claim — not a vicarious liability claim as in Weirum. The promotion of a man “as a great guy” adds to the liability base. The fact that he is a felon might not be negligent in itself if the crime was for taxes or some other non-violent offense. However, the fact that it was a protection order is obviously relevant and should have disqualified him from the promotion. It will be interesting to see if the radio program even inquired as to the person’s history. This should be an interesting case to watch develop.
For the full story, click here.
FFLEO,
Thanks for responding. There was a criminal case against Mr. Gurnee which ended in below:
“In Lake County Court, Harvey, 46, of Gurnee, pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting the 24-year-old Fox Lake woman while they were on a date in February 2007. He was sentenced to two years probation and 12 months periodic imprisonment.”
There is currently a civil case, with a great deal of information attached that has yet to be sorted out. Because the rules of evidence are less strict for civil trials we should be able to get the information eventually. For example, there are reports that Mr. Gurnee initiated the “contest” by calling the station saying he was having trouble finding dates. If a stranger calls a radio station to propose this type of thing I don’t think it is unreasonable to expect the radio station to check the person out before going forward with the “contest”.
I would like to address the underlying assumptions in your response. One of these is that women should just expect violence from men and it is the woman’s fault that she was attacked because she, “put herself at some risk with a stranger”. Going over to someone’s house isn’t an invitation to be raped or abused in any way. The only person responsible for the assult was Mr. Gurnee, who in fact plead guilty to the offense.
Another assumption is that when a woman is raped she should be able to immediately report the rape to authorities. This just doesn’t square with reality. Rape is a physical, psychological and spiritual violation of one person by another. Some people (men and women) report their rape years later. For example, men and women raped by priests have only come forward with their stories years or decades later due to shame and guilt they feel over having been raped. The idea that women “ask for it” or are somehow to blame is quite current in this society. It is still a difficult climate to report being raped. Five days to pull your shit together and report having been raped doesn’t seem very long to me and would certainly fall under the idea of “as soon as possible”.
Finally whether you understand why anyone would go to a dating service or contest to find a date isn’t relevant to what happened here. It doesn’t erase the reality of the woman’s rape and the immense harm that was done to this woman.
Okay Jill and CEJ,
“Lake County Assistant State’s Attorney Ken LaRue said there is no physical evidence the woman was drugged; he said she did not report the incident to police until five days after the date when tests would no longer be valid”
Any person who is a victim of a crime such as sexual assault (still called rape in some jurisdictions) has a moral obligation to report the crime as soon as possible. I do not know what the legal ramifications of this are, if any, in such cases, but I know a citizen has an obligation to report any crime. In this case, the woman waited 5 days to report the abuse and the abuser only admitted to fondling her (according to the reports). That late reporting is most likely why he received some probation. Without prompt reporting, these cases become he said/ she said instances. The evidence, other than relevant to this specific class of sexual assault, which is a broad term, is just not there for a more severe charge and sentence, which might have been appropriate in this instance.
The guy was, of course, the only criminally guilty party, but the assault happened on the “second” unsupervised date and the woman deviated from the established protocol of meeting at a concert that the radio station had arranged. The woman is responsible for deciding to change plans to go the person’s house and put herself at some risk with a stranger. Therefore, given the woman’s change in the agreed upon ‘dating plan’, the station seems less legally culpable in any responsibility of what transpired in the guy’s home.
Finally, I must admit, I just do not understand anyone who needs to go to an online dating service or play a dating contest to get a date.
Jill,
I liked the Johnny Cash reference. I cannot understand how the station is not liable for setting this woman up with such a “nice guy”. Legally or morally. I don’t remember ever going on a blind date, but my Mom had one when we were young. Of course, he was blind and we kept referring to him as her blind date. On second thought, I guess you had to be there for that joke.
FFLEO,
You are trying to squirm out of this with a pseudoresponse. Man up and tell CEJ and me how it came to pass that this woman is legally and or morally rsponsible for being drugged and raped by this man. Should she be put in jail for her crimes or say confession for her sin? Answer my other questions.
If gender will help in getting a response I am a man called Jill (per Johnny Cash)!
Jill & CEJ,
I am, uh, er, busy right now, so in the interim, perhaps a bright legal mind, one of those who frequent this forum or the guy who runs this blog, will try to explain what I mean.
CEJ, are you a male, because I quality control my comments and segregate my best answers according to the respondents’ gender…Just Kidding!!
FFLEO,
I echo CEJ’s question and I asked you mine first, so answer up!!!
F F LEO
Will you please expound on this: “Obviously, the woman was likely in no way legally culpable in this situation; however what about morally?”
I don’t understand the implication. Thank-you.
The one blind date I had in my life was more than forty years ago. A double date set up by a “friend,” who drove. The girl was the spitting image of Nikita Kruschev’s wife, not good if you’re not old enough to remember, and was stupid to the extremes. However, I was trapped and so treated her kindly for the entire evening. no, for those of you of foul mind I didn’t have sex with despite the rage of my teenage hormones. I never went out on another blind date, though.
In general, beyond my personal experience, most people I know have had bad blind date experiences. This is commonly known I think. Nevertheless, the human heart craves companionship and in all of us hope springs eternal(cliche, I know but it makes the point)and it no doubt did in this woman. Many women today find the dating arena barren, not because men are generally cads, but many men have been too influenced by the false propaganda of the macho beer and football commercialism that affects their interaction with women. A radio station, even with a morning zoo, is generally considered a responsible public institution. She relied on their statement that he was a “great guy” and her reliance was reasonable to the extent that a sexual assault shouldn’t have been part of the equation. I think the station should be liable for the injury she suffered.
For FFLeo’s benefit, while I only made it through 2 & 1/2 years at St. John’s Law School (night), I did get a B in Torts and slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
2L, MN,
Those parts of my comments were tongue-in-cheek. I do not possess the legal standing to be condescending regarding such matters. I think you noticed that I aimed my flippant, jocular jab both high and low. Welcome to the blog, if you are new.
Jill,
Men = Mars; Women = Venus?
Men and women must all be responsible for their actions and decisions. Obviously, the woman was likely in no way legally culpable in this situation; however, what about morally?
Patty C.
Thanks, I think!
Jill, my condescending statement was to FFLEO not you. You posted as I was writing.
Jill: I don’t in any way think that this is a “she asked for it” situation. But you’re suggesting that the on-air assertion that he’s a great guy is a legal warranty that he won’t be a creep or commit a violent act. How much control does the radio station have over the Defendant after the initial meeting?
Well, there goes that theory, FFLEO!
But your point is still well taken. Personally, I have never been set up on a ‘blind date’ much less ever considered entering a dating contest or answering a personal ad.
I know a few women who have and were smart enough to meet for coffee or lunch at a busy, familiar, place during the day and even had a friend call on their cell to check in.
The radio station is negligent. There representation was ‘misleading’ at best.
2L,
I wasn’t being condescending and I think you know that. Based on what you wrote earlier I was asking you your honest asessment of this situation. I cannot answer the legal question, although I think the original post does touch on that. As to the rest of it I will leave intact my original question based on your original post.
Ouch. Somebody’s a little condescending…
Let me rephrase my post since I don’t think I was stating what I wrote as legal fact or even conclusive. I was actually attempting to inquire whether or not the radio station’s assertion that he’s a great guy could be considered a reliable claim worthy of a basis in a negligence case. Do reasonable people consider what a radio station says about a stranger to be accurate? Would they believe that someone on the show has been screened or at least asked if they had previous felonies? I’ll have to find the citation, but I know that dating sites have been cleared of liability in cases such as this. I’m just looking for what is legally different between the radio station and what a dating service might offer.
Harvey’s attorney, Greg Nikitas has said that the station’s morning show was attempting to find a date for Harvey because he was a single father and too busy for the dating scene. He was promoted on the air and on the station’s Web site as being “kind” and a “great guy.”
According to the suits, Harvey drugged the victim before raping her.
_____________________________________________________________________
Here’s the report. A busy dad who was kind and a great guy. How does one reasonably go from that description to, this guy will drug and rape me and he has a record of violence. Why is the onus being put on the woman here? This is sounding a lot like “she asked for it” when instead the real story is, “this man raped this woman”.
Do you guys really think the woman should have had an expectation of violence in this situation? I just don’t get that. There’s a difference between believing the man’s going to absolutely fantastic (not realistic) and thinking that he will be violent. This was supposed to be a ridiculous meet up. Ridiculous doesn’t include violent. Why do you think she should have had the expectation of violence just because it was a morning radio show? I’m asking this seriously.
2L, MN:
Well Sir, that might simply be because you are *just* a 2L–from MN, no less–and not a legal scholar, nor no high-falutin’ tenured academician. However, by reading this blog, you are most likely to gain the KSAs to gain acceptance to–and become entrenched in–one or both of those coveted Ivory Tower positions, someday maybe.
Of course, and from my post, I completely agree with your 2L ‘legal’ assessment.
Do you really believe that the radio station’s declaration that he was “a great guy” is really relevant? Would a reasonable person consider what is said on a morning show to be credible or even reliable? As much as I think this radio show dropped the ball, I don’t think they are any more liable than a match.com or a speed dating program.
Flattery will get you nowhere!:) Any person, male or female might have considered doing this for fun. The woman only agreed to go on a date with a man she was assured was a “great guy”. If she would have agreed to go out with someone who “beat up his last girlfriend” you could have an argument, but there would be no reason for her to believe this man would harm her. It is a reasonable expectation that a radio station would have looked into whether this man really was a “great guy” before entering him into the contest as such. The fact that he was being promoted by a radio station makes him less of a stranger than answering a personal ad- which people do that all the time. I just don’t see how a woman should have expected any violence from engaging in this contest. The worse that should have happened is they didn’t like each other and they ended the date early.
Given that the women who regularly post on this blog far exceed the ‘national average feminine cognitive skills quotient’, what character of woman would participate in such a radio (read: aural not visual) “dating game”?
Isn’t the woman partially responsible for her actions through agreeing to the “game”? To be sure, I am not saying she was asking for anything; however, she went out with a complete stranger. I simply do not understand why any straight thinking (no pun) woman would put herself in such a risky situation based on other strangers’ statements that he was a “great guy.”
“From now on, all of my friends are gonna’ be strangers…” is a decent honky-tonk song, although not the best means of finding a decent date.