Three days after releasing e-mail messages described as the “tip of the investigative iceberg” and publicly demanding that the woman suing Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger abandon her case immediately, Roethlisberger has filed a motion to dismiss the claims against him, support by a 43-page legal brief and 29 exhibits.
We’ve obtained a copy of everything that has been filed. (And, consequently, the hard drive on the official PFT Commodore 64 is now full.)
Put simply, the attack against the plaintiff is among the most aggressive I’ve seen in nearly 18 years of practicing law.
“Plaintiff is a disturbed and calculating woman,” Roethlisberger’s memorandum states at the outset of the “Introduction” section, “who, together with counsel, fabricated a claim of sexual assault against a two-time Super Bowl winning quarterback to save her job and extort a large monetary payoff.”
Roethlisberger also alleged that the plaintiff and her counsel hinted that criminal charges would be filed absent a settlement. Roethlisberger, in turn, accuses the plaintiff and her lawyer of committing a felony under Nevada law: “A person who, with the intent to . . . gain any money . . . threatens directly or indirectly to accuse any person of a crime . . . is guilty of a category B felony . . . .”
Roethlisberger also claims that the plaintiff obtained her U.S. Naturalization through false statements, falsely received disability benefits to cover a leave of absence from work, and has “defiled the sanctity of this Court with unsubstantiated and salacious allegations of sexual assault.”
The memorandum attaches various affidavits that, in Roethlisberger’s view, support the contention that the plaintiff is “an admitted sex addict,” that she was “excited about the prospect of having sex with” Roethlisberger, and that she told one of her co-workers that she was interested in having sex with him.
Though the memo contains no express admission by Roethlisberger that a sexual encounter occurred between Roethlisberger and the plaintiff, he never denies it — and the text of the memorandum strongly implies it: “Plaintiff boasted that her sex encounter with Mr. Roethlisberger as the ‘best ever’ and that she did not care if it ever happened again because the sex was ‘soooo good.'”
Roethlisberger requests that the plaintiff be required to submit to an “immediate medical examination,” alleging that “there is no question that Plaintiff is unstable mentally.”
So, regardless of the merits of the case (and, frankly, it doesn’t look good at this point for the plaintiff), Roethlisberger’s lawyers are using the “nuts and sluts” defense by calling the plaintiff both a nut and a slut.
That said, it’s their prerogative to attempt to approve either or both things, if they so choose. There’s a chance it will backfire, however.
But there’s also a chance that the approach will cause her to give up, especially if the contention that her charges have been fabricated is true.