“I think it’s an uphill battle for Khloe under the circumstances and because of the fact that she’s a public figure and there’s no real indication — at least so far from what we’ve seen — that these documents from Destiney were factually inaccurate,” Attorney and Adjunct Professor at Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism Michael Overing told TooFab.
“It looks like there’s a pretty good chance that there might be some truth behind it, particularly if the executive assistant was the one who was making the purchases,” he said.
As an expert in censorship, First Amendment issues, defamation, legal communication and internet law, Overing said: “The First Amendment in the United States is very strong, and you don’t really want to be in a place where you’re on the wrong end of that, so defamation lawsuits, traditionally, you only want to file in the clearest of instances.”
“Maybe Khloe’s clean, but right now, based upon what we see, it looks like Destiney’s got some evidence to support that this actually happened,” Overing said.
Earlier this month, Bleu accused Kardashian’s fashion line Good American of copying her designs and passing them off as her own. In response to Bleu’s allegations which she posted on Twitter, Kardashian’s team sent a cease and desist letter, threatening to file a defamation suit against Bleu if she didn’t stop publicly accusing Good American of stealing her designs.
Bleu’s attorney Stephen McArthur fired back at Kardashian’s cease and desist letter — which claimed the reality TV star “never heard [Destiney’s] name” and “never saw [her] samples” — with a scathing legal response.
In the documents obtained exclusively by TooFab on Friday, Bleu’s attorney provided evidence that disputed the accuracy of Kardashian’s claims, including alleged correspondences between herself, Khloe’s assistant and then-stylist Monica Rose. Bleu also attached invoices showing that Kardashian’s people requested and paid for items that were “eventually copied by Khloe.”
“It sure looks like the attachment to Destiney’s lawyer’s letter shows some purchasing going on here, and it looks like these things were being bought by somebody,” Overing said. “I mean, it’s hard to imagine if you’ve got these documents that show that there was back and forth and it included the very items that you’re saying Khloé actually took and copied, I mean, its hard to say that she didn’t have access to them.”
“If I represented Khloe, first of all, I would have to go through all of these factual items that we just talked about in the exhibit to the McArthur Law Firm letter and see what her response was to each one of those,” he said. “I would want them to really understand what they’re getting into.”
“The other thing Khloe can say is that the documents never got to her,” he added. “Let’s be honest, an assistant to an assistant to an assistant can be 10 times removed from Khloe Kardashian, which could be an argument. The argument would be, ‘I don’t have any knowledge of this and it was not me, it was my assistant.’ But it wouldn’t go any place because the assistant would be Khloe’s agent for all purposes, and the knowledge of an agent would be imputed to the principal.”
In the United States, truth is also a defense to defamation, so Overing thinks “Khloé is going to end up being on the losing end of this thing” if Bleu is being honest.
“You have to show that you have suffered damage to your reputation, that somebody has actually shunned you and that they don’t like you as a consequence of whatever it is that is being said about you,” Overing said. “The defendant in that lawsuit would get to ask questions to your second grade teacher about your reputation, from your sisters, from your mother, father. You would get to get into her underwear drawer and go through it piece by piece, so most celebrities are well advised to stay away from defamation lawsuits.”
“It’s going to be a very uncomfortable lawsuit and one that the press is going to eat up every which way.”