The Vince McMahon scandal has progressed to the next stage.
On January 25th, Vince McMahon was accused of sexual assault and sex trafficking by former WWE employee Janel Grant. The lawsuit, which contains deeply disturbing details, was made public after McMahon broke the terms of the NDA, which agreed that he would pay Grant $3 million. McMahon stopped making additional payments after paying the first $1 million.
The news was first reported by The Wall Street Journal, who have since provided a follow-up. On February 2nd the publication stated that federal authorities have gotten involved and have launched an investigation over the alleged charges. Additionally, multiple women have been contacted by New York authorities, who have also accused McMahon of sexual misconduct.
Reactions to the news have been summarised by Fightful Select, who notes that WWE employees would not be surprised if the federal authorities find more information, especially due to access to McMahon’s phone. Additionally, a further employee noted that they believe that the worst is yet to come as McMahon has made previous hush money payments, with one valued at more than $3 million.
In regards to John Laurinaitis, who is named in the lawsuit and has since claimed that he is a victim in the allegations, the former Head of Talent Relations has been in contact with many names in the industry to try and find an ally moving forward.
Vince McMahon NDAs May Have Complications
VICE News has analysed the situation and the nature of NDAs and how enforceable they are, In reference to the document, the article states the following:
An NDA cannot be used as a shield to prevent a victim from bringing criminal charges or speaking to investigators. If these women or others desire to speak out in public or bring civil suits, though, it’s not clear that an agreement like the one Grant signed would prevent that.
The article also contains comments from Carrie Goldberg, who represented victims in the Harvey Weinstein case. Goldberg describes the documents as “poorly drafted” and that the NDA was not signed by McMahon either personally or on behalf of the company. Goldberg describes the language as broad and agrees with Grant’s lawyer’s analysis, who argues that the NDA should be voided:
“The NDA makes references to confidentiality, but there’s no definition of what to be confidential about,” said Goldberg. “It’s very vague. Usually there’s super-specific information about what to be confidential about.”
Goldberg also noted the fact that McMahon never signed the contract given to Grant, but would later sign it both personally and on behalf of WWE:
Goldberg noted other issues with the NDA, among them that the copy Grant filed in federal court in Connecticut wasn’t actually signed by McMahon in either his personal capacity or role as then-chair of WWE; normally, all parties would receive an executed copy of the contract. According to a source familiar with the matter, though, the contract was in fact executed, with McMahon secretly signing on both his behalf and that of WWE after seeking counsel from his longtime attorney, Jerry McDevitt, a seeming conflict of interest Goldberg called “bizarre.”
If this is the case with the other NDAs signed, there is a possibility that they will also be null and void and all victims of McMahon would be able to freely tell their stories.
Featured image: WWE
