A 4-part interview — The Jen Royle lawsuit (Part 4)

January 12, 2012 | Drew Forrester


RL — You don’t think the money was important?

DF — I’m sure it was, it was $800,000, that’s a lot of money to anyone.  She found an attorney who told her she had a chance at damages and she probably figured, “What the hell, what’s the worst that can happen?  If nothing else, I stand up for the females and get my name in the paper.  At best, I get a check for $800,000 minus what I pay the lawyers.  It’s a great country either way.”

RL — But ultimately?

DF — Ultimately it was just a way to take the radio station in town who had offended her to court.  Or try to, anyway.

RL — You mentioned something about sponsors of the station speaking out against the station?

DF — Not speaking out, but dropping us.  We had a sponsor the following week who said, “We read the stuff in the newspaper and we’re not happy.”  We replied, “But wait, the stuff you’re reading, those are just claims.  The case doesn’t really have any legs.” Their response was “Oh, we think it does have legs.  We believe it.”  So we lost that sponsor.

RL — Was it a surprise that she filed the lawsuit in the first place?

DF — I guess.  I don’t know, like I said earlier, that’s what people do these days.  You’re driving through the mall parking lot, you get distracted, and run into someone going 15 miles an hour.  The first thing the person you hit is thinking is, “What can I get out of the insurance company for this?”  People get fired all the time.  The first thing they think isn’t “Holy hell, how am I going to support my family now?”, they say to themselves, “I wonder if there’s grounds for an improper termination lawsuit?”  So, I wasn’t surprised by the lawsuit because it’s just what people in our country do these days, in my opinion.

RL — What evidence in the case was outrageous on her part?

DF — Those were claims…not evidence, remember?  I don’t need to discuss the actual case anymore.  That’s not meant to be a no comment.  I don’t like the term “no comment” even though sometimes, legally, it’s all you can say. There’s just no need to discuss the actual case itself, because it never happened.  It took five months for it to all come out in the wash, but it turned out that there wasn’t really a case to discuss.  So we don’t need to.

RL — Why was she the target of your jokes and jabs?

DF — I already said why.  She showed up here, didn’t really know much about Baltimore sports, then decided to take swipes at people from just about day one.  And she bragged about growing up in Boston and working in New York and I just found it to be off-putting.  To me, anyway.  And we’re competing for the same people, essentially.  She talks sports for a living and so do I.  And to me, it was laughable that I was competing with this person for listeners and readers when I knew that I had more much experience living and breathing Baltimore sports than she did.  It was competition to me, because we were both going for the same general audience. Last January, both Glenn and I tore into a male reporter from The Sun who wrote what we both thought was an unfair comment about Joe Flacco.  And we took him on for one reason — he grew up a Steelers fan, and Glenn and I both thought he was sharing his anti-Flacco opinion because, in fact, he was rooting for the Steelers and not giving Flacco a fair chance because he played for the Ravens.  So we beat him up pretty good on the air for a day or two and it caused a stir.  It had nothing to do with him being male.  It had everything to do with the guy being from Pittsburgh.  Period. (Please see next page)