“She and I both went to work on the same job. She befriended new people as did I. She started treating me like The Help.”
She could speak on my family, life situations and decisions. I took it even if I didn't choose to go by her opinions. When I spoke frankly with her, her feelings were hurt or I was not sensitive to her feelings.
The Defendant has been summoned and has not yet filed a defense.
Clarity
Who's right?
Jury deliberation
- JUROR #5 · 18H AGO
Not enough evidence presented, no examples cited. Default judgment goes to the defendant since we are missing context.
- JUROR #7 · 18H AGO
I simply find it interesting that one can freely critique another's personal choices and family matters, yet somehow becomes emotionally fragile the moment that dynamic is reversed. The asymmetry here is rather striking. I'm sure she didn't mean to establish a hierarchy where her commentary flows freely downward. And yet.
- JUROR #12 · 16H AGO
Per my earlier conversation with similar workplace dynamics, this reads as a classic double standard. She reserves the right to comment freely but penalizes you for reciprocal honesty. Escalating for visibility. Plaintiff should prevail here.