Betsy was kind enough to launch the issue of the newest in the continuing adventures of Zachary Randolph, basketball player and oft ne’er-do-well.

I thought I’d offer my different and, perhaps surprising, perspective on the newest chapter in his more-or-less crappy life story.

Now, the Zach Randolph pay-for-sex-act-then-bugger-the-performer story is not new. It’s several months old, in fact.

I’ve discussed that part of the story already. You can find my initial response here, where I said, in pertinent part(s), “where there’s smoke, there’s fire,” and “Zach is a frustration of monumental proportions. So much talent. So much waste,” and “Query: when will we give him the Qyntel treatment and admit that, depite his flashes on the floor, we can’t afford to keep him anymore?” and “Note to the Blazers: the fans are watching. And waiting. Here’s to hoping you won’t let us down (again).”

So, as you can see, early on I have been clear that I think that something went down that night. Certainly enough to raise the hackles of fans and to push the team to move Zach.

Later, I waxed philosophic when the DA decided not only not to press charges in this case, but not even to present it to the Grand Jury, which would’ve been the most appropriate action in this sort of case. In the end analysis, my position at that point was that, while Randolph’s attorney was indicating that the decision not to prosecute by the DA was a vindication of all of Randolph’s behavior that night, the reasoning offered by the DA didn’t really support that assertion. I also indicated that I believed the DA was misapplying the law in order to avoid the prosecution.

The first post was amost three months ago. The second was nearly two months ago. Like I said, this is old news.

The only new aspect to it is that the alleged victim has decided to sue Zach Randoph for a ton of cash.

My reaction? This isn’t really worth too much attention. Why? Well, I think it was implied in the DA memo that a civil case was looming in the background. And, even if it wasn’t, it was clear that some attorney was going to see this as a chance at a huge paycheck.

My thoughts on the actual complaint? After reading it, it’s an obvious hit-piece designed to shock and shame Randolph into paying out a settlement by promising anyone who reads it some glorious mud-slinging in court. From a purely legal standpoint, it’s poorly written and goes waaaaay overboard in terms of doing what a complaint is supposed to do, which is to allege facts supporting a claim for damages.

What do I mean by that?

Well, the crux of the case appears to be (and this is found by looking at the claims for relief and the prayer at the end) that Randolph sexually battered the victim, that Randolph intentionally inflicted emotional distress, and that based on that, the victim should be paid for the effect that had on her. Now, looking at the claiim, let’s sort through the many statements made and whether they were necessary or unnecessary to lay a foundation for the claim at the end. We’ll do it by allegation number.

…
1) Necessary to plead who the plaintiff is (Jane Doe). Not necessary to state that she’s a victim of sexual assault.

2) Necessary to plead who the defendant is (Z-Bo). Not necessary to discuss whether he identifies himself as a gangster or a basketball player. In fact, as the Blazers are not part of the claim, it is unclear why the allegation adds “Randolph ‘considers himself a gangster’ and that he says on occasion ”l’m a gangster not a Blazer.’ Notwithstanding Randolph’s own description of his position, Randolph is, in fact, employed by the Portland Trail Blazers to play basketball and to represent the Trail Blazers in the community.” This language seems designed to belittle Randolph and to incite anger towards him.

3) Necessary and appropriate throughout.

4) Not necessary at all. Works to paint Randolph in a displeasing and distasteful light. I don’t really have a problem with noting that there was the initial agreement for a sex act to be performed; there is a certain need to explain the basis for future interaction, but at the same time those issues are to be raised in testimony and the underlying reason for their interaction does not really do anything to support the claims asserted.

5) Not really necessary. While it is helpful, I suppose, to ID all of the players in a case, this paragraph mostly sets up the idea that Randolph has a stable of women and that he was on his way to inappropriate behavior with unsavory people.

6) Not necessary. Works to minimize the plaintiff/victim’s involvement and set her up as a nice person.

7) Unnecessary. Designed to show that Randolph is a jerk who smokes weed.

8) I don’t see how this is necessary to show that Randolph sexually battered the woman (that’s involved later) or that he intentionally inflicted distress on her. Up to now, we have her (for whatever reason) freely agreeing to perform a sex act for $500. Discussing whether or not Randolph liked how the act was performed or how close or far he was to observe it are not, as far as I can see, reasonably related to lay out the factual foundation for the later claims.

9) Necessary and, for the most part, appropriate to support both claims.

10) Necessary and, for the most part, appropriate to support both claims.

11) Necessary to point out that he penetrated her vaginally without consent and despite her protestations. Since it’s asserted that she passed out, the claim about the condoms on the floor is helpful and appropriate to show that the assault was prolonged and was well beyond the scope of any agreement that may have been entered into. The bed breaking and so on is just embellishment.

12) The fact that Randolph pays another party for sex normally is entirely unnecessary. The fact that he didn’t pay for the agreed-upon performance is probably a valid underlying fact for the emotional distress claim, so I don’t have an issue with it. It also tends to support an assertion that, if defendant insists there was a contract (of sorts) for sexual favors in exchange for money, that assertion would be uncredible based on the fact that no money changed hands.

13) Not necessary to support either claim. Aimed at the press, who will raise issues related to the late report and the fact that everyone knows the alleged victim began angling for money early on.

14) Probably the only necessary component for this is that Randolph admitted the sex act took place.

15) Not necessary, except that it explains a lack of physical evidence.

16) Necessary and proper.
…

So, we have a civil complaint that doubles, I think, as a threat that if Randolph goes to trial, the plaintiff will drag as many people and as much information into court as possible to not only prove her claim, but paint Randolph as a misogynistic, ignorant, gang-banging, whoring, philandering, doped-out and cheap rapist. It’s a complaint that paints all facts in the light most favorable to the claimant and which, therefore, makes Randolph look like crap.

Say what you will about rape victims and the need to protect them through the courts and such. I agree, in general. But in this case, the plaintiff’s attorney throws a gigantic turd at Randolph while not needing to name his client. And, in Oregon at least, the best way to answer a complaint is to just file a response that says the defendant (Randolph) denies all of the allegations. Hardly compelling reading in response, and such a response unfortunately will do nothing to counteract the damage done by this complaint.

In the final analysis, I guess, here’s what I think:

1) This is old news, redux. In the perfect world, we wouldn’t get too distracted by it because the facts underlying the claim have already been played out in the press.

2) I still think “where there’s smoke, there’s fire.” I don’t know if Randolph sexually assaulted this person. I do tend to believe that he paid for a sex act to be performed, I believe he should have been prosecuted, and I believe that he has terrible judgment. Those are all the same beliefs I’ve had all along.

3) This will be a distraction to Randolph and his team, as the mess gets dragged through the press and the courts.

4) I hope Randolph can fight through the distraction and play well, for two reasons:
(a) it benefits my fantasy basketball team, where I’ve picked him due to the fact that he’s our entire offense.
(b) the sooner he regains his former monumental glory, the sooner we can trade him for somone decent.

5) Darius Miles is a piece of crap.

Okay, that last one doesn’t have anything to do with anything else in this post, but he is. So deal with it.

Your thoughts?