Dating in the real world is hard—you know, you have to try to look half-decent and then there’s the conversation bit—trying to sound both interesting and intelligent with a dose of humor thrown in. Not easy. Particularly if the chemistry just ain’t there. Enter online dating. It’s just easier, right? Stick a profile out there—write it up when you’re at your wittiest, have some friends edit it, find some pics and photoshop them, and you’re good to go. Be the best date prospect you can be because it’s all, well, massaged—the way an ad campaign is.
But here’s the thing. If you can do it—in essence, perpetrate a bit of ‘online fraud’—guess who else can put their best self forward on online dating sites? Sex offenders. And you thought canceled or inactive subscribers was bad!
That’s hopefully about to change. Thanks to attorney Mark Webb and California state attorney general, Kamala Harris, three of the larger online dating sites have agreed to provide online safety tools for daters including: checking subscribers against the national sex offender registries; providing an abuse reporting system for site members; providing proactive education about safe online dating practices; and providing tips on how to safely meet someone offline–as, after all, that’s the goal of an online meetup.
According to a release from the attorney general’s office, “In 2011, 40 million Americans used an online dating service and spent more than $1 billion on online dating website memberships. Of couples married in the last three years, one in six met through an online dating service and one in five people have dated someone they met through an online dating site.”
Given those numbers, it’s no surprise that online dating sites are a natural lure for those seeking a mate. Apparently, that’s what the woman at the root of these changes thought when she became a rape victim while on a date that began as a Match.com meetup.
The victim, known only as Jane Doe from Los Angeles, was on the Match.com-arranged date when she was raped. She found out later that her date was a convicted serial sex offender. Amazingly, in her subsequent Match.com lawsuit (Jane Doe vs. Match.com, Los Angeles Superior Court Case #BC458927) she only sought for Match.com to screen out sex offenders and she waived her right to compensatory damages. She just wanted to spare others from what she’d been through.
Of note as well, her attorney, Mark Webb took on her case pro bono.
In addition to Match.com, the online dating sites who agreed to the above terms include eHarmony.com and Spark Networks (which operates online dating sites including JDate and ChristianMingle).
Memorable, thought-provoking, grounded in principle—and one that capped off an emotional trial in New Orleans and marked a victory long overdue—the following are some quotes from attorneys we interviewed in 2009…(in no particular order)…
“The ultimate objective of every member of the plaintiff’s aviation bar that I know who regularly handles aviation cases, is to reveal the dangers in aircraft and in the aviation system to enhance the safety of aviation,” Goldman says. “That’s our major objective. It’s not just about getting an award for the plaintiffs, it’s about making aviation safer.”
“I always tell my clients, just tell it like it is,” says Levine. “I have told my clients two and a half million times that there is no substitute for the truth. The truth never hurts you.”
On stockbrokers who pilfer money from their clients…when it comes to arguing his case to recover money, Stoltmann says he goes down his four-letter checklist (aka “SCUM”):
S – was the investment suitable for the client given their age and risk tolerance
C – was the investor’s account churned or repeatedly rolled over in order to earn fees for the broker
U – were the trades and changes in the account unauthorized
M – were the risks and type of investment misrepresented to the client
On the stockbrokers themselves: “How can they sleep at night?” says Stoltmann. “They sleep very nicely in their mansions.”
On the federal court ruling that the Army Corp of Engineers which built the canal linking New Orleans to the Gulf of Mexico, was to blame for the catastrophic flooding that followed Hurricane Katrina…
“The people of New Orleans are vindicated,” said Bruno before a throng of media representatives. “They (the Army Corps of Engineers) can no longer hide behind an immunity. It is time for the people of this city to be compensated.”
On the high percentage of Match.com profiles that were allegedly still shown as “reachable” even though the profiles did not belong to active subscribers…
“A simple analogy is—I sell you a six pack of ginger ale and two of the cans are empty,” says Hart. “If I sold you six cans and you believe that all six are the same, but they are not. Four of them are what you are looking for and two of them are empty—now how do you feel about that?”