Wednesday, August 18, 2010

In the news: Aussie tart sues for millions in harassment claim

It isn't often I comment on something in the news (apart from all the other times) but after reading about how Kristy Fraser-Kirk is suing Australian retail giant David Jones for AUD$37million I thought this was worth a post.

Incidentally, Australian PI of some renown (or infamy, depending on your point of view), Frank Monte, also weighs in and you can read all about it here.


Seriously, Kristy, you need to stop watching Ally McBeal or Boston Legal or whatever it was where you got the idea that suing for around 900 times your annual earnings was a good idea.

I mean, yes, you were harassed and I feel for you. It must have been terrible to have someone touch your bra strap and repeatedly invite you back to their home - the kind of torment that only can only be eased with the liberal application of cash. An obscene amount, perhaps to nullify those alleged obscene overtures?

You know that it would cost McInnes and David Jones a fraction of that $37million to have the no-doubt euphemistically entitled 'Fraser-Kirk problem' eliminated? I'm not one to speculate but I'm sure there's some hard-up and totally anonymous investig individual out there who would consider, say, a donation of only $1million (in used, non-sequential bills) to, say, make things happen.* 

Mark, call me. About that, um, thing.

* This does not constitute an actual offer of elimination, murder-for-hire, or contract killing. Maybe.


  1. When I saw the PI hit the news headlines on this one I had a feeling you'd have something to say about it. I always thought PIs were meant to have a relatively low profile - though clearly this guy is out and about trying to promote himself as an agent well suited for large corporates.

    Though given that most large corporate would likely prefer to undertake this sort of investigation on the quiet side, I suspect that he'll likely find his workflow from big business is going to dry up now.

    As for her claim for $37m, it's definitely a sign of local lawyers trying to emulate the American court system - whereby litigation with a big figure is simply another step in the negotiation process. Get headlines, put pressure on the company, and then finally it's settled out of court.

    Of course sexual harassment is something that is completely unacceptable, but I don't think it's $37m unacceptable. The former CEO has had his professional and personal reputation rightfully torn to shreds by this, and the publicist of course can't realistically resume her job at the company, so deserves some sort of settlement and compensation, but it would be nowhere near that astronomical figure.

  2. I feel that Monte openly stating that he is investigating Fraser-Kirk is either:

    A) an outright lie and shameless bid for self-promotion on part of Monte; or

    B) the truth but poorly-judged shameless bid for self-promotion on part of Monte; or

    C) the truth and part of a campaign orchestrated by opposing counsel to pressure Fraser-Kirk.

    The latter is dangerously skirting the edges of harassment, I would have thought.

  3. Try 'c'.Be very careful about who you people call a liar , I am sick of the Versace bullshit [ she being a confessed coke addict]and am taking scalps. Of course I am employed by elements in the Dj's camp, it is unlawful to just go out and follow people or say so. Harrassment ? Why I can follow her all day and night. The Magnificent illustrious... Frank Monte

  4. Hey hey hey, if it isn't the magnificent and illustrious Mr Frank Monte himself.

    Well, as you may note I have not called you a liar, Sir. I said you *might* be lying and then gave two alternatives where you might be telling the truth.

    That aside, if Fraser-Kirk feels 'threatened' by such open surveillance on her movements - she may very well have grounds to lay a complaint. Compare the other article regarding the PI in Colorado (yes, different laws apply) who I believe is now jailed on his felony stalking charges for conducting *covert* surveillance.

    If she did make a complaint, it would certainly make for interesting case law and affect the wider investigative and surveillance community in Australia.

    A case of watch this space, I think.