Is the David Letterman extortionist really just like Rachel Uchitel from the Tiger Woods predicament? Did he commit a crime or not?

I think that they are alike in some aspects but, she easily surpasses him in the 'I did it for the money' category.

(I believe) Rachel went into the situation knowing that she was going to yell her story as soon as the time was right. She collected information, proof of the relationship, incriminating evidence every-time she was with Tiger.

(I believe) Robert 'Joe' Halderman, on the other hand, was thrust into the situation because his girlfriend and roommate chose to begin an affair with the Late Night Talk Show King. When he decided to steal her personal property and blackmail everyone involved, he put himself into a very negative (spot)light and he broke the law. He (probably) decided to commit the crime because of his wounded pride and his hurt feelings.

But, hurt feeling or not, if you break the law, you have to pay the consequences

.

I don't understand how the two are the same. Extortion is when you say - if you don't do something for me based on this information I have on you - then I'm going to tell. So the the guy says this to David Letterman and Letterman proceeds to tell his lawyer and the world about it before the guy can.

Thus, he is outted as an extortionist and now must suffer the legal consequences. Did Rachel tell Woods - I have all this information and if you don't give me money I'm going to tell the world OR did she just go ahead and tell the world? There is a difference.

She may have planned to make money by telling her story all along. Last time I checked, an autobiography was not a crime (unless you are O.J. Simpson telling the world how you would have killed your wife. ) She planned to make money off of it but not from Woods to keep her secret.

The two are not related and the lawyer for the extortion guy is grasping at straws.

Funny I never thought of it that way until I read this question, but yeah it would seem it's basically the same thing. They were both trying to profit from being skanky. This of course is coming from someone who has never slept with anyone remotely significant, nor have I known anyone that has, so I don't know call it jealousy.

The main difference in the two, from what I can tell, is that one threatened to tell if they weren't paid and one just told and got paid. Why shouldn't the people in the David Letterman ordeal be able to profit as well?

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.