Mariah Yeater has reportedly withdrawn her lawsuit against Justin Bieber. Her lawyer, Jeffrey Leving, explains that he has withdrawn the lawsuit in hopes of forcing an out-of-court settlement — what may appear to be a conflict strategy.
Leving says that he and his client reevaluated their earlier strategy after receiving death threats — a response that one would have thought was predictable in this celebrity-driven society.
Leving explained “[i]n light of death threats directed toward my client, strategies have been reviewed. The San Diego case has been withdrawn, and we’re trying to settle out of court with Bieber’s counsel. We’re working out a DNA test confidentially.”
In defense of Leving, since Bieber, 17, has reportedly agreed to a DNA test, there may be no need for a filing at this point. Bieber has reportedly decided to take such a test . . . and may sue Yeater if it turns out false. We previously discussed such a defamation threat. The question is whether, if the DNA test is negative, it was defamation for her to make the allegation. As a celebrity, Bieber falls under New York Times v. Sullivan and the higher standard of proof. He would have to show knowing falsehood or reckless disregard. Absent of a DNA test, Yeater could argue that she did not actually know who the father was. This, however, would only work as an argument if she could prove that she had sex with Bieber — something that he denies. If she could show she had sex after the concert (with the support of body guards or other witnesses), there would remain the problem of her having multiple sex partners during this period since, if the test is negative, the real father had to be someone else. Is it reckless disregard if she believed that he was the only partner who fell within the relevant time period?
Bieber’s lawyers wisely laid the foundation for such an action, stating “It’s sad that someone would fabricate malicious, defamatory and demonstrably false claims. We’ll vigorously pursue all available legal remedies to protect Justin and to hold those involved with bringing this suit accountable for their actions.”
I previously wrote a column on the case and the remarkable admission by Yeater that, if true, her alleged tryst was a case of statutory rape. Of course, if she denies the statutory rape charge now, she would be laying the foundation to be charged with defamation. She may wish she went to a Jonas Brothers concert instead.
Source: NY Daily News
Catullus:
are looks all that matter you? Maybe Bieber was intellectually stimulated by her banter.
pete:
“if bieber’s been hittin that i’d say he’s got mommy issues”
Nobody looks at the mantelpiece when they’re pokin the fire.
if bieber’s been hittin that i’d say he’s got mommy issues
Bieber is a devout christian so cannot have sex before marriage. Since he’s just a good none rebelious type he’s probably given Selina Gomez anything more than a peck on the cheek. Poor girl. 🙂
Every time I see this story or one like it I recall a line from the movie “Almost Famous about a 15 year old aspiring music reviewer traveling with a band and its coterie of hanger’s on and groupies. At one point the groupies (for whom screwing musicians is a semi-spiritual occupation as well as) are talking about how life on the road has changed and one of them, talking about the new crop of groupies says “they don’t even use birth control!”. This was evidence that the noobs didn’t take their mission seriously, or have the proper respect for their musicians. Groupies, real groupies, had standards.
Bieber needs a better class of groupie.
(any of you old-timers rememer The Plaster Casters? LOL, good times.)
Gene,
I ear you…..
If it turns out it was basically completely impossible for them to have had sex, for instance, she wasn’t at the concert, she was never invited backstage, Bieber can show he was never alone, she can find no corroborating evidence,
What actions should be taken against her lawyer and former lawyers for going public so quickly?
“Your honor, where do I go to get my reputation back?”
What was the necessity of going public with the accusation so quickly or so loudly?
Why shouldn’t the lawyers themselves be charged with defamation?
So if Beiber wins a defamation suit, we he then be entitled to the $20 in her bank account??
I doubt that it defamed him … probably generated more record sales. No?
I think, assuming she has an IQ close to room temp, that she can deflect fraud charges by claiming they did have sex & she assumed it was his baby. There would be no way to disprove her claim.
Question, is she really dumb enough to make such an accusation if she did not have sex with Bieber?
Did she seek advise from the law firm before making the accusations? If so surely they would have done some due diligence to prevent doing something incredibly dumb like making totally unfounded accusations.
Apparently someone else has come forward to say she accused him of being the father. Is it possible she did it by a process of elimination?
No one in Bieber’s camp is going to support her story even if it is true.
Or perhaps classical music. It’s my understanding Beethoven hasn’t knocked anybody up in quite some time.
“She may wish she went to a Jonas Brothers concert instead.”
Melissa Etheridge or k.d.lang would have been the safest by far.