You are hereSan Diego City Beat: Hannah Giles throws James O'Keefe under the bus
San Diego City Beat: Hannah Giles throws James O'Keefe under the bus
Anti-ACORN faux hooker says she's innocent because her faux pimp held the hidden camera
February 22, 2011- Hannah Giles had no problem bragging to FOX News how she posed as a hooker to catch ACORN workers in incriminating conversations on hidden video. Over and over and over and over....
But now that she's facing a $75,000 lawsuit, she says she's not culpable because it was her fake pimp partner, James O'Keefe, who held the video camera.
Former National City ACORN worker Juan Carlos Vera is suing O'Keefe and Giles in US District Court in San Diego, alleging that the pair violated the California Privacy Act, which require all parties to consent before a confidential conversation may be recorded. Vera lost his job after O'Keefe and Giles went public with secret footage that ostensibly showed the two, posing as pimp and ho, asking for and receiving advice from Vera on how to smuggle underage prostitutes into the US.
A California Department of Justice investigation later determined the video had been intentionally edited to be misleading and found that Vera had called law enforcement after the meeting.
In a motion for judgment, Giles' attorneys argue:
"Section 632 has limited scope: it unambiguously imposes liability only on persons who carry out the recording of a confidential communication with the consent of all parties to the communication, and precludes liability for persons who merely assist the recording or participate in the communication. Here, the Complaint itself makes clear that only O'Keefe, not Giles, actually carried out the recording of the communication. Allegations that Giles was present during, or agreed to, the recording are legally insufficient to bring her within the scope 632."
So, even though Giles says, on her legal appeal website, DefendHannah.com, "In an undercover expose, Hannah Giles captured ACORN employees offering advice on prostitution and money-laundering," she's still innocent because she wasn't holding the camera. In other words, she deserves the glory, but not the liability; that's all O'Keefe.