And as any woman of my disposition, she made sure that she was not silenced.

this sentence doesn't make sense to me...

i'm going to give my two pence and then i'm going to take a break from SM.

If true, which is, frankly, likely, i think this is an instance of impunity. tying this to the frat boy thread, its the same impunity. given that this was a desi-diaspora space, this impunity would extend to the desi dudes in that space. impunity and priviledge run together.

however, as a desi guy, the only thing i would caveat is to say that, for the most part desi men in the diaspora do not have priviledge in most spaces. To attack patriarchy in the Diaspora by acting Desi Male patriarchy is not the same thing as attacking Western Patriarchy in total. I don't think you can get there from here.

Other than that, I fully have no qualms as a Desi guy saying that the impunity suggested by this incident is reprehensible.

I am Audi A6 (for those who will claim this is another wtf statement, Audi A6 is a play on the cheesy Audi 5000 from "back in the day")

I am Audi A6

u r burning up, right?

u r burning up, right?

:-) I have no idea what you mean Manju, but its all good

Audi 5000 was a way people said good bye back in the 80's. the Audi A6 is a car brand out nowdays. So I wanted to say, goodbye. hence, Audi A6.

Hope this clears it up

"And as any woman of my disposition, she made sure that she was not silenced."

this sentence doesn't make sense to me...

Squash that paneer.

But seriously, it's this statement that befuddles me:

With police brutality and now this incident, the desi community of Edison has their work cut out for them.

Is the desi community somehow culpable for alleged police brutality inflicted on them, and the actions of limo drivers or whoever picked up this Bollywood actress? I'm not so sure what you mean by work?

oh yeah. the audi used to suddenly leap forward or something, maybe that's where the phrase came from. i was thinking it used to spontaneously combust.

yup Manju. I didn't know about the combustion part though.

HMF,

She (taz) means that they have battle to fight on two fronts: a) the police brutality charge and its ramifications, and b) sexual harassment of a celebrity by one of them. I think persons charged for b) are one of the organizers of the meet.

It is quite possible that Bhayias from Edison got little too excited in the company of Biapasha alone in the taxi.

And as any woman of my disposition, she made sure that she was not silenced.

this sentence doesn't make sense to me...

since i'm (badly) decipering cryptic phrases on this thread, i think she means: "we (hot) desi women don't take no crap lying down anymore."

btw, that video on you tube is galling. the organizers don't seem to want to hear what Basu is saying and they were giving her patronizing applause

did the two guys who attacked her - were they indian? not that it matters but no one has clearly stated if they were in fact indian - reason is because the IBA has non - indians and non - desis in it

That is amazing. I can't believe something like that would happen.

senaX:
yes they were indian. as she was giving her speech about how she was MENTALLY harrassed. the organiseers(iba) tried to shut heer up. I was thereand very dissapointed.i dont remember the part about the bruises and i think that the bruises were fake.

bipasha....she AGONY boy, wha!! Disya grindsMAN here, ear me, naa? Madam sexy! 8=)

I heard the mental harrassment was the guys making a hilarious joke about the fact that this chick is in a movie called "Jism." Come on, ya'll, she was asking for it.

Come on, ya'll, she was asking for it

O.N.Y.D., RIP

My comment got deleted? *sniff* What did I do wrrrroooong?

*running off to weep demurely in corner*

"Jism."

hmm. how ... eurocentric. i suppose i should have chuckled each time someone referred to the trunk as the "dickie" this summer. boy, was she asking for it.

"Jism."

oddy term man. whad is it meanin?

bipasha....she AGONY boy, wha!! Disya grindsMAN here, ear me, naa? Madam sexy! 8=)

I didn't understand a single word. Agony, indeed.

I didn't understand a single word. Agony, indeed.

Eyyyy, Ease up boy!!! you a Man? are you a MAN? ya cyann read naa? wha fi doo...

Eyyyy, Ease up boy!!! you a Man? are you a MAN? ya cyann read naa? wha fi doo...

I am NOT a man and I can read when apprehensible words are utilized. Learn some.

uff yaar. how harrowing. and the comments - how harrowinger.

I am NOT a man and I can read when apprehensible words are utilized. Learn some.

Eyy madam..Ease UP. tryin fi be smartee here, ehh? don take no nerve wit me gal! Ease up 8=)

Though the IBA said they were going to do an investigation, they are also doing what every good American does. Sueing her.

That investigation involves people who participated in the parade and some biased IBA members. Some of those dudes and duddettes have loyalty towards those two men in the car that were with Bipasha. So ...it's not going to most fair or neutral investigation. AVS interviewed some IBA members about but they never got a clear response. How are they supposed to some fair and unbiased outcome out of this investigation is what I want to know.

ignore the typos, it's late

That investigation involves people who participated in the parade and some biased IBA members. Some of those dudes and duddettes have loyalty towards those two men in the car that were with Bipasha. So ...it's not going to most fair or neutral investigation. AVS interviewed some IBA members about but they never got a clear response. How are they supposed to some fair and unbiased outcome out of this investigation is what I want to know.

That was some suprisingly hard-hitting (tabloid) journalism by AVS. Pretty impressive.... The "investigation" seems like such a sham -- and the IBA has already announced that they are going to sue Bipasha even though that "investigation" hasn't been completed yet. I think the fix is in....

Just watched the YouTube bit. It is infuriating that she has to be almost apologetic for being upset about being harassed.

# 16 Achat,

This:

I heard the mental harrassment was the guys making a hilarious joke about the fact that this chick is in a movie called "Jism."

made me teeth-grindingly mad.

And this:

Come on, ya'll, she was asking for it.

has me putting a contract on you.

C'mon, Achat, you were asking for it.

The whole incident is disgusting.
Can she sue them here? The whole idea of sueing a person to shut them up is even more disgusting. (And yes, very common.)

uff yaar. how harrowing. and the comments - how harrowinger.

Yes. My brain hurts.

Tarana, I'm pretty sure she can sue them here, but if I were her, I wouldn't bother.

What she could do is write out a detailed description of what happened to her, and release it to an Indian newspaper. I think most sane people are on her side, and carefully rendered specifics would only add credibility to what she already said. The people responsible for this may still make noises of denial, but their reputation in the community would suffer a lot.

And oh yeah, you won't see any Bollywood celebrities at functions in Edison again anytime soon.

Edison is a mess these days!

I'm pretty sure she can sue them here,

She can certainly file a counter-claim in this instance.

but if I were her, I wouldn't bother.

I'm not sure I agree with you on this one. If I were her attorney, I would advise a lawsuit. First, 'tis the american way. Second, it might get the IBA folks to ease up on their lawsuit. If she decides to bring a civil suit, there is total discovery. That means you can depose both the people in the car, and those depositions become public records. I'm pretty sure that the IBA dudes won't want to be too embarrassed. Third, it focuses some amount of public attention on an important problem (less than stellar treatment of women) within the desi community. Lastly, because, she's a well known actress, I'm assuming she's not hurting for cash So, I think the sister should go ahead and avail herself of the U.S. justice system.

Can she sue them here?

Against the abusers:-

On the civil side: Yes. She will have to give credible explanations to a few issues though:

Why did she never file a complaint with the police? Why didnt she try to stop the car to escape? Maybe she did try to stop the car to escape and then we get into the territory of false imprisonement etc.
Why did she actually go to the IBA event itself after allegedly getting molested by the IBA peeps. Is that consistent with people who get molested at a level where there are actual bruises? I am not sure from taz's article on whether there was sexual abuse. In most sexual abuse cases you dont have bruises. Only in more serious sexual abuse cases do you end up with the victim being bruised.

On the criminal side: The prosecutor gets to decide (with NJ grand jury laws) on whether to indict the alleged perpetrators or not.

Against IBA:-

On the criminal side: It will be hard to indict anyone but the people who allegedly committed the abuse. From the facts of the case it seems to me that there was no conspiracy etc.

On the civil side: It might be possible to rope in IBA itself but they will have to prove as to why the IBA is responsible as organizations are usually not responsible for intentional civil wrongs by their employees (exceptions which Basu can use: The abuser was so high up in the organization that the abuser was the de facto organization himself/herself or the organization was negligent in hiring people who ended up abusing Basu as they should have known at the time of hiring or later that the abusers were likely to molest someone etc.)

but if I were her, I wouldn't bother.

I'm not sure I agree with you on this one. If I were her attorney, I would advise a lawsuit.

I agree w/Sriram that she should at least consider it seriously. ESPECIALLY since the IBA has fired the first shot by threatening suit themselves -- suing the IBA will raise the costs for them to go after her.

Giving her own detailed description of what happened in a letter-to-the-editor is all well and good. But I doubt it will touch the reputations or well-being of the IBA people one iota.

On the other hand, submitting them to some risk of monetary damages award, imposing upon them the costs of defending a lawsuit, and grilling the IBA people (and their "independent" investigators) in an on-the-record, under oath proceeding would be real impositions. And especially since this episode is almost entirely one side's word versus the other's, litigation and adversarial proceedings probably give the best opportunity to really test each side's credibility.

While AMfD seems correct to me that the merits of her potential claims are far from slam dunks, the claims aren't frivolous, and even with a less then certain probability of ultimate success and victory there can be strategic value in pursuing litigation.

(Not to be predictable or anything.)

If I were her attorney, I would advise a lawsuit. First, 'tis the american way. Second, it might get the IBA folks to ease up on their lawsuit. If she decides to bring a civil suit, there is total discovery. That means you can depose both the people in the car, and those depositions become public records. I'm pretty sure that the IBA dudes won't want to be too embarrassed.

Be careful with the second reason. It violates the disciplinary rules in most states. As you are a fresh grad, a friendly piece of advice: When you first start taking clients, there is always that urge to let in the client on the trial strategy. A lot of trial strategy hinges on murky grounds ethically speaking (suing with the intent to embarass, suing with the intent to flood the other party with paper work, suing with the intent to just plain harass: all of course with the goal of other party settling) None of these motives should ever be disclosed to the client though you can let the client know about what will happen in the process and what is likely to happen. Clients get pissed off when they dont win and they love filing complaints with the Bar. Of course you should never sue anyone for embarassment, public humiliation anyway because it is clearly unethical.

Of course you should never sue anyone for embarassment, public humiliation anyway because it is clearly unethical.

Of course. But there's a difference between suing someone for embarassment or humiliation, on the one hand, and availing oneself of legal process in a non-frivolous lawsuit in order to create a public record upon which wrongdoers can be held legally accountable. And if their reputation suffers as a result of that, then so be it....

But there's a difference between suing someone for embarassment or humiliation, on the one hand, and availing oneself of legal process in a non-frivolous lawsuit in order to create a public record upon which wrongdoers can be held legally accountable

True.

ESPECIALLY since the IBA has fired the first shot by threatening suit themselves -- suing the IBA will raise the costs for them to go after her.

and just to be clear about this one, much of the notion here is that because she's been dragged into court anyway, it's appropriate for her to hit back and have the court determine the extent to which the IBA is at fault, and not just the extent to which she's at fault. they might do that to some extent anyway, depending on NJ laws on comparative fault, but if she thinks they're more than 50 percent at fault a counterclaim would make sense. i am of course *not* advising anyone to sue the IBA just to raise their litigation costs.

[and of course, i am not advising anyone at all. none of my comments here constitute legal advice, Ms. Basu and the IBA and everyone else should of course consult their own lawyers, &c &c.]

;)

How did she violate the contract if she actually showed up at the parade?

i think she didn't actually march in the parade or participate to the full extent contemplated.

comparative fault, but if she thinks they're more than 50 percent at fault a counterclaim would make sense.

I think you might be mixing up issues here. Comparative fault only applies in negligence claims, correct? And, at least in Maryland (I'm not sure about NJ), counter-claims don't have to be related in any way to the original claim (cross-claims, however, do need to arise out of the same basic set of facts). So if IBA is suing on a breach of contract claim, Ms. Basu can still bring a claim for assault/harrassment and the ultimate decision has nothing to do with who is more at fault...I think. And as to the ethical concerns you raised earlier, your point is well taken, and thanks for the tip. My thinking was more along the lines stated in comment #37.

I am not sure from taz's article on whether there was sexual abuse. In most sexual abuse cases you dont have bruises. Only in more serious sexual abuse cases do you end up with the victim being bruised.

Tell me about it- I spent half a day swimming through the poor journalism of Indian media. There are lots of holes in the story, as far as what news is out there. I don't think she was "sexually" abused because somewhere in those links she said, "I wasn't molested." But than she has bruises, and she took pictures of the bruises, which makes me wonder how she got the bruises. Also, on stage she said "I was mentally abused on the ride over" - I didn't catch a physical in there- but then, she did talk in Hindi later (which I don't understand) so it could have been in there. Finally she was abused by the organizers, and then returned to her hotel room. After that she decided she wouldn't 'take it lying down' and returned to the parade. Which is why she was 2 hours late.

Please don't make me read more TOI.

I think you might be mixing up issues here.

Well, I was leaving open the possibility of some sort of tort claim by the IBA, however unlikely, since their theories aren't clear and they seem to be complaining about her speaking out in addition to not showing up. But you're closer to the law school experience and probably are more steeped in the finer points of these issues than I am.

Regardless, my more important point was that there may be sound reasons for her to hit back separate from increasing the IBA's litigation costs -- namely, if she's been sued and accused of wrongoing, she can legitimately hit back if she thinks the IBA people are more to blame (at an intuitive, wholistic, lay person level, not in any strict, technical sense concerning comparative fault, though that could get at the same thing to some extent). Would make sure that everything is put on the table.

And an even more important point -- that AMfD should not complain about me to the bar authorities. ;)

"There are lots of holes in the story, as far as what news is out there. I
don't think she was "sexually" abused because somewhere in those links she said, "I wasn't molested."

Hi taz, thanks for the update. But I am beginning to think, SM is becoming a trigger happy place to elevate rumors and bad journalism as serious issues. Given, this is a blog and not a journal or magazine, I still think cross checking with other newspapers will go a long way.

"Please don't make me read more TOI"

For the love of god, why would you even read those newspaers? I do not know if you have known this, but here is a secret, TOI sells their editorials for a price!. Speak of poor ethics!

I still think cross checking with other newspapers will go a long way.

I linked 4 different press sources and one video the in story, and surfed through at least 20 other newssites yesterday- the quotes I pulled were simply the most reliable since everyone seems to be using the same rediff piece and quoting it off of that. And well, Bipasha's not returning my e-mails, so you know.

Considering the SM format of pulling quotes from other press for the entries, and what exists out there in Bipasha news, I did the best I could do. After all, it's not like this scandal is going to be covered by the Washington Post, or even TMZ or Gawker.com. (I checked)

Hi Taz,

I fully understand the homework you have done. I am probably wrong to have said things that bluntly. I owe you an apology. I am sorry!

I have to say in Taz's defense that y'all are lucky if I link to TWO other articles when I post. Using four is above and beyond, as far as I'm concerned. ;) This is a blog, not the NYT...maybe if it were the latter, Bips would answer Taz's email, until then, I think she's done here (and done well). :D

Aw, I'm saddened to see that Taz has completely rewritten her original sentence "And as any woman of my disposition, she made sure that she was not silenced." Surely you could have used "And as any woman with my disposition would," ?

I think you might be mixing up issues here. Comparative fault only applies in negligence claims, correct?

Correct. Comparative negligence has nothing to do with lawsuit by IBA against Ms Basu as IBA has sued for breach of contract and not under the negligence theory. If Ms Basu raises the issue of harassment, it would only be a defense as to the non-performance of the contract.
Neither can IBA raise the issue of comparative negligence if sued by Ms Basu for physical/mental harassment.

So if IBA is suing on a breach of contract claim, Ms. Basu can still bring a claim for assault/harrassment and the ultimate decision has nothing to do with who is more at fault

Thats not correct. A claim of harassment by Ms Basu can constitute a defense to the non-performance of the contract. If IBA was indeed at fault, Ms. Basu will claim that the harassment/abuse by IBA henchmen discharged her obligations under the contract.

wicked article taz. good on Bipasha, i'll be watching this story.

clarification: good on Bipasha for making a rukus and not going quietly. props + solidarity.

To continue further on what I said earlier:

Thats not correct. A claim of harassment by Ms Basu can constitute a defense to the non-performance of the contract. If IBA was indeed at fault, Ms. Basu will claim that the harassment/abuse by IBA henchmen discharged her obligations under the contract.

The issue would then be of whether harassment by IBA henchmen amounts to breach of a necessarry condition of the contract which allowed Ms Basu to repudiate the contract and consider the contract to be discharged. This would then become a delicious factual conflict! Of course the IBA would then argue that apart from the fact that the abuse by henchmen never took place, even if it did take place the abuse did not constitute a violation of a condition precedent . IBA would also argue that Ms Basu did not really repudiate the contract as she did show up and that they are suing for part non-performance of the contract. So the logic would be that if a condition precedent was violated, then Ms Basu should have never started the performance and the start of the performance either constituted a waiver of the violation of the condition precedent or it goes to show that she never was in fact abused as she started to perform.
Ms Basu could also claim that because she was abused, it would not be equitable to hold her responsible for non part-performance.

Officials said the IBA, which instituted an inquiry into the allegations, will sue Basu for an undisclosed amount for violating the contract and making such an allegation.

suing her for "making such an allegation" suggests, to me, an intentional tort such as defamation, not breach of contract. it may be that there is still no comparative fault involved -- though i think that in some jurisdictions, comparative fault does indeed apply to intentional torts in some respects. (especially if it becomes a three-ring circus involving the iba, ms. basu, and the henchmen, it is at least theoretically possible that comparative fault would be relevant.)

but again, the technical details of comparative fault weren't my main point. (and again, i'm far removed from really being immersed in the details of these rules.) what i was trying to get at was more along the lines of "as long as they are suing her, let's get it all on the legal table and sort all of it out, all at once." (which also encompasses AMfD's point about a potential defense to the breach of contract claim.)

This case could constitute a tort/contract law 1L question on the exam!

And an even more important point -- that AMfD should not complain about me to the bar authorities. ;)

:)

it may be that there is still no comparative fault involved -- though i think that in some jurisdictions, comparative fault does indeed apply to intentional torts in some respects. (especially if it becomes a three-ring circus involving the iba, ms. basu, and the henchmen, it is at least theoretically possible that comparative fault would be relevant.)

So the question now is that if IBA sues for intentional or negligent defamation by Ms Basu, can Ms Basu assert the principles of comparative fault?

I am not sure how comparative fault could be attributed to IBA by Ms Basu unless the IBA somehow led Ms Basu to publish the defamation. The reason (cause) which led to the publishing of that defamation would constitute an absolute defence if the reason/cause did in fact exist (truth). I guess what I am saying is that the henchmen either did harass her or not. If they did, there would be no defamation as Ms Basu only published the truth. If they only partially harassed and Ms Basu exagerrated she still cant use comparative fault as she would be 100% liable for the publishing of the exagerrated portion of the abuse. So the only place where IBA could be at comparative fault is that if the IBA actually was negligent or bore responsibility in Ms Basu publishing the information. I am not sure how that could happen.

Wow. A lot of comments since I posed my question.
Amardeep, Sriram, AMFD, Pied Piper - thanks for the legal scenarios and explanations. It's eye-opening and fascinating to see/hear how the legal system works (or can work, depending on one's point of view).

::thinking out aloud::
I wonder if Basu has a new film being released. Call me cynical, but whenever there's an actor/ess in the news, I always wonder about publicity. On the other hand, Edison's papers aren't really going to provide her with the amount of publicity she would need. So, I'll take that concern back.
::done with thinking aloud::

oh.. and sorry about the spellings. :(

*sigh* I don't know what to think. Sure, there's the whole legal issue, who can sue whom for what. What irks me is who did the molesting...

I know there are pervy uncles (and aunties) everywhere. But somehow Ms. Basu's image in the whole explosion of "skin" and more in Bollywood these days I think is happening too much too fast for people to handle... it's like the 60s and 70s are happening in India right now.

A commentor or two before has already said what's a more commonplace belief than we all think - she was "asking" for it.

I mean really, are the perpetrators of the abuse really just a bunch of weirdos? I hate to say it, but I think a lot of not-so-obvious pervy uncles might try something similar... heck, even some guys born and brought up today would try something similar, just be more slick about it.

But somehow Ms. Basu's image in the whole explosion of "skin" and more in Bollywood these days I think is happening too much too fast for people to handle... it's like the 60s and 70s are happening in India right now.

before you americans educate the dolts back in india who can't handle the "fast changes", remember this happened in the US, not india.

i agree with bytewords

Accidental Enlightenment (#59):

A commentor or two before has already said what's a more commonplace belief than we all think - she was "asking" for it.

You may have this impression that it's a commonplace belief, and maybe it's true and maybe it's not, but what exactly are we supposed to do with it? Just because more people think she was asking for it than we might want to admit doesn't mean she was asking for it.

heck, even some guys born and brought up today would try something similar, just be more slick about it.

It doesn't matter how "racy" Bipasha's on-screen persona may be -- absolutely nothing she says or does would ever justify physical and/or sexual harassment.

There is no such thing as "asking for it".

This attitude of "blaming the victim", which is unfortunately still prevalent in some South Asian quarters, needs to be buried once and for all.

And yes, the fact that this incident allegedly happened in the US means there is even less of an excuse for the "molesters" to justify their actions.

sorry, forgot the " " around "asking for it." Those are important.

What if she was ugly, or fat, or really ugly and fat? Would anyone even care if she was sexually harrassed and 'bruised'?

Maybe we all need to read some Atwood instead of Ms. Basu's comments, or at least alongside them.

What if she was ugly, or fat, or really ugly and fat? Would anyone even care if she was sexually harrassed and 'bruised'?

What?

Maybe we all need to read some Atwood instead of Ms. Basu's comments, or at least alongside them.

**Is "physical abuse" codeword for sexual assault in the desi community? Alot of people here are assuming that she is molested - and that may be a correct assumption - just wonderin' if it's a norm to soften the blow with the word "physical abuse" instead of outright SEXUAL ABUSE. Hmmm.... **

Regardless, it's no doubt that she needed some time to recover - I'm surprised that she still went out on stage - she must be a very strong woman. It's sad that she may have felt obliged to the contract, even after the assault.

I also doubt it was a publicity stunt. Even here in North America, unfortunately, it's still difficult to admit to being sexually abused or assaulted, much less the subcontinet. It's not like a "publicigty stunt stolen sex tape" or something of the sort. I have to give her props for coming out, even if the details are vague. Something happened - that's for sure.

They should sue for showing up looking like something other then that hot girl on screen. I guess not having your personal makeup artist putting 10 pounds of makeup on you makes you look like a normal human being.

I know this is a topic about sexual harassment, but when I see a movie star I just look at them and I dont really care about the words coming out of thier mouth.

love the atwood... remember the one in which the protagonist takes her hairy ball of a tumor/aborted fetus - slices it up into small niblets - rolls it up in expensive chocolate - packs it pretty and sends the box to her ex's wedding as a gift.

Yes! Hairball. I've just got my hot (although not as hot as Ms. Basu's and therefore less marketable) lil brown hands on the Penelopiad, her version of The Odyssey and The Tent, her new collection of mini essays...

AMFD: I did have a bitter disclaimer preceding my name...would need to read Lady Oracle to understand.

Am I the only one who thinks the woman in the video is NOT Bipasha. Look closely at the facial structure. This whole thing could turn out to be a farce.