Aside from the dangers of men hanging out in strip clubs and, perhaps, stirring the ire of their wives at home, who are caring for the kids, while they are out gallivanting or single guys with roving eyes and without commitments - whose women in the wings may not like it but have no bona fide claim to complain - it might be hard to fathom how dangerous a strip club could be. One only has to ask Charles Privett, a 35-year-old patron of the Booby Trap in Pompano Beach, Florida.
According to the club's website, it has raised the bar for Florida entertainment and offers full friction dancing and total nudity. Mr. Privett apparently went there looking for some titillating entertainment one night and made sure he got a front row seat near the stage to ensure he didn't miss a moment of tantalizing pleasure. With a mirrored ceiling and a close-up view, Mr. Privett obviously must have experienced some ecstatic moments.
It would be a decent guess that he doled out a fair amount of cash throughout the course of the evening, both in drinks and tips, to enhance his enjoyment. In all likelihood, Mr. Privett probably never imagined that his anticipated night of thrills would be so abruptly disrupted by one stripper's stiletto shoe somehow flying off her foot during her pole dancing performance to allegedly go airborne, hit the ceiling, break the glass, and make a purported beeline for Mr. Privette. Now, as a result, he is labeling himself a "victim," and he is claiming that the strip club "breached its duty" because the dancer "failed to perform her 'pole dance' routine in a reasonable manner."
Consequently, he has filed a lawsuit against P.T.G. Entertainment, Inc. d/b/a Booby Trap, and is suing for $15,000.00. Mr. George Gettinger, the general manager of the Booby Trap, acknowledges that paramedics were called but stated Mr. Privette's injuries were minor. Mr. Privette's attorney claims his client had a small cut to his eyebrow, headaches, and nose bleeds since the incident occurred in January 2008. Item #12 of the lawsuit states, "...Charles Privette suffered bodily injury and resulting pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life and expense of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment."
Does item #12 really make one pause to think that Mr. Privette has lost his capacity for enjoyment of life or that he is so traumatized by the impact of the flying stiletto that he can no longer take the risk to return to a strip club because it is just that risky? Or, on the other hand, does it mean that he has lost all capacity to enjoy life in any realm or aspect? Or, could it possibly mean that Mr. Privette has made a mountain out of a mole hill and is trying to up the ante to ensure he gets some cold hard cash to facilitate his patronage of strip clubs in the future or for whatever else he cares to use his acquired stash of cash for?
Whatever his real motive, Mr. Privette is obviously blowing the event out of proportion, coining himself a convenient "victim," and enhancing the self prescribed "victim impact" to his benefit. What he has tragically done is add to the criticism and controversy that always gets called into question every time a lawsuit is filed and he has, in his own selfish way, detracted from the cause and legitimacy of genuine victims.