The Sam Redman character recently visited LCF to lecture us on why the Class Action Lawsuit against Kimmer is without merit. Among a lot of other verbiage, he said in a post:
“There must have been an intent to deceive. But, it could be well argued that she used the creative photos and testimonials… not to deceive, but to convey the truth.
If her “intent” (a very important distinction) was instead of misrepresenting the benefits of her program, but instead to provide prospective dieters with a true picture of the results that such a program can accomplish then there was no “intent to deceive.”.
Here we are really talking about what was in Heidi’s mind… did she believe that what she was offering was honestly a way that enabled a good weight loss program?
Her historical postings show that she really was a “believer” in what she was describing and because of that ingenuousness, then the legal concept of “scienter” comes in to play.
It’s a legal distinction called “guilty knowledge,” which often has to be proven convincingly before a judgement (or conviction) can be obtained. I think this is where Diaz is on very strong footing legally.”
Sam Redman might be surprised. Anipomini provided a link today to a very similar case where criminal charges for fraud were filed:
This case involved the sales of products rather than “lifetime memberships” but otherwise they are eerily similar.