There but for the grace of dog go I

Fountain Lady, Imma let you be upset and all in a minute, but right now I’ve got to say that there is not a single one of the 37 million people who watched you fall in the water ‘cuz you were texting and not watching where you were going who has not at some time or another in their life ran into a light pole or stepped off a curb they didn’t see or something similar. The only difference between you and the rest of us is that your misstep matched a modern meme … misadventure due to texting … and it got totally YouTubed. Rather than being upset, you should do what that homeless guy did and get a job as a TV game show host or whatever.

Oh, and it could have been worse. You could have been driving a school bus down by the river or something.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn

15 thoughts on “There but for the grace of dog go I

  1. As silly as she is, falling into clearly visible water with a wall around it and being so dedicated to texting not to mention being a thief and this throwing her entire shtick into question, I still feel marginally sorry for her.
    Imagine how confusing it must be inside her skull.
    She probably never had a dog as a real friend.

  2. How could anyone possibly have recognized her from that grainy video? (My guess is that she told people about the incident, and they later told her it had been caught on film and was on YouTube.) Now, of course, thans to this televized interview, people really will recognize her on the street.

    And a general question here. Do people really just hang around malls with cameras on waiting to catch something like this? Or, as I thought when I saw it, could it have been a set up?

  3. @Gerry L
    It was a security camera. Actually two of them showing different angles. What got to Youtube is actually a cell phone shot of the security monitor, which made it just that much more grainy.

  4. Yeah, she actually has a case … I’m pretty sure rent a cops are not supposed to put random bits of what their security cameras pick up on the interenet.

    Well, she may not have a case for damages, but for being annoyed, probably.

  5. I don’t think she has a case for damages. First she would actually have to have damages.

    The Mall is a public space, there is no expectation of privacy when walking in the mall. She violated the mall’s rules against playing in the fountain.

    The mall would be justified in displaying this as a public service, to encourage people to watch where they are walking.

  6. She’s a scam artist. Turns out Fountain Lady was charged in 2009 with stealing a co-worker’s credit card and making thousands of dollars worth of purchases at stores like Target and Zales.

    It’s true. I read it on the internet!

  7. Even she started to chuckle about it in the interview. What next? Will all those drivers filmed sliding down that icy hill and crashing into cars after the recent storm start suing?

  8. The Mall is a public space, there is no expectation of privacy when walking in the mall. -daedalus2u

    That rather depends on what one means by ‘public space’. Malls are privately owned, and one can be charged and convicted of trespass under certain circumstances, such as failing to leave after being requested to do so. So, it’s not public in the sense that a street or a park might be considered public. A mall is perhaps better thought of as being private open space (as distinct from private closed space, like a dwelling) rather than public space.

    Expectations of privacy are a matter of degree. The purpose of security cameras in a mall is primarily one of, well, security. Notices informing people entering the mall of such are usually placed somewhere in the mall. Such notices (Conditions of Entry) usually don’t include a ‘lampooning’ clause. In that regard, one does have a reasonable expectation of some level of privacy: one consents to one’s image being recorded only for the purpose of maintaining effective security. Any use of security camera footage beyond that could be a violation of privacy.

  9. I think she probably has a case because I think no one thinks security camera footage counts as public domain or fair use. Ill bet a fair amount that there are specific rules regarding the use of the footage that the high school dumbasses turned mall security ignored.

    However, she is completely disingenuous. She says (at least in one interview) how she was embarrassed and wanted to get out of there as quickly as possible (that would be my response as well) but then later gets all weepy that no one came to her aid. Who did she expect to come to her aid? She laments that mall security didn’t show up before she left, but how did she expect them to find her? or why did she think they should show up? For all we know no one was watching the tape when it happened and security only found out about it after the fact, like from the store employee she told.

  10. Greg @4:

    “Well, she may not have a case for damages, but for being annoyed, probably.”

    When do we get to sue the entire right wing?

    I suppose if her face had been clearly visible, it would be something – but without her coming forward and blubbering at the camera, I’d’ve never had a chance of recognizing her.

  11. Sounds like maybe the Mall and/or the security contractor has a case against the dimwits who “stole” the video and posted it on YouTube.
    And if Ms Ima Victim was embarrassed by the incident, maybe she should NOT have identified herself on TV.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.