• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

WIOQ Sued For Alleged Sex Shows

B

bigoldbooty

Guest
From DCRTV.COM's Philly section:

WIOQ Sued For Alleged Sex Shows - 2/6 - The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that Clear Channel's contemporary WIOQ (102.1 FM) and two of its personalities are accused of staging sex shows during promotional events at the Woodbine Inn in Pennsauken two years ago, and a lawsuit contends that resulting citations helped put the South Jersey nightspot out of business. According to a civil suit that the Woodbine's former owners filed last month in state Superior Court in Camden County, defendants Rocco Cima and Richard Rizzo asked single women to come to the stage and then "directed certain females to go behind an almost see-through, portable screen on the stage; remove their bras and underwear; and hang them over the top of the screen." The suit says Cima, known as Rocco, and Rizzo, known as DJ Richie Rich, instructed the women to perform lewd acts "in plain sight" of other patrons in the early hours of January 28 and February 5, 2006.....

In the Philly.com article, "told of the allegations, Manuel Rodriguez, regional market manager for Q102 owner Clear Channel Communications, replied in an e-mail: "Ridiculous."


All I can say is that it doesn't suprise me. Richie Rich has been known to harass women CONSTANTLY. I am however shocked by ManRod's reply.

Thoughts?
 
DToTheJ said:
bigoldbooty said:
In the Philly.com article, "told of the allegations, Manuel Rodriguez, regional market manager for Q102 owner Clear Channel Communications, replied in an e-mail: "Ridiculous."
Click to expand...

Here's the link to said Philly.com article:
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20080205_Suit_alleges_Woodbine_sex_shows.html

The other DJ in question is "Rocco" - who if I'm not mistaken used to be a radio "janitor"... Talk about a gutter job...
Click to expand...

no that was rocco from wired 96.5 aka ben maxwell
 
All I can say is that it doesn't suprise me. Richie Rich has been known to harass women CONSTANTLY.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? The article says "certain women" were directed to go behind the screen and perform such acts. Did these "certain women" have a gun to their heads? Were they forced to strip or were they willing participants? This isn't harassment. Illegal maybe, but not harassment.

Are you sure these girls weren't shadow dancing? If so, there is nothing illegal about that... (unless of course the curtain falls over)
 
bigoldbooty said:
From DCRTV.COM's Philly section:

WIOQ Sued For Alleged Sex Shows - 2/6 - The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that Clear Channel's contemporary WIOQ (102.1 FM) and two of its personalities are accused of staging sex shows during promotional events at the Woodbine Inn in Pennsauken two years ago, and a lawsuit contends that resulting citations helped put the South Jersey nightspot out of business. According to a civil suit that the Woodbine's former owners filed last month in state Superior Court in Camden County, defendants Rocco Cima and Richard Rizzo asked single women to come to the stage and then "directed certain females to go behind an almost see-through, portable screen on the stage; remove their bras and underwear; and hang them over the top of the screen." The suit says Cima, known as Rocco, and Rizzo, known as DJ Richie Rich, instructed the women to perform lewd acts "in plain sight" of other patrons in the early hours of January 28 and February 5, 2006.....

In the Philly.com article, "told of the allegations, Manuel Rodriguez, regional market manager for Q102 owner Clear Channel Communications, replied in an e-mail: "Ridiculous."


All I can say is that it doesn't suprise me. Richie Rich has been known to harass women CONSTANTLY. I am however shocked by ManRod's reply.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

if this happened 2 years ago, WHY is Q102 being sued now?
 
if this happened 2 years ago, WHY is Q102 being sued now?
Click to expand...

That's easy to answer. The United States has so many ambulance-chasing, greedy, big-nosed, blood-sucking lawyers with so many frivilous lawsuits keeping the court systems tied up that it takes years to have a simple case heard sometimes.

It's all part of the plan to exploit the people and screw us out of our life savings at one time or another just so that a certain few people who already own and control most of the world can become even richer than they already are.

It's a disgrace.
 
Mike said:
DToTheJ said:
bigoldbooty said:
In the Philly.com article, "told of the allegations, Manuel Rodriguez, regional market manager for Q102 owner Clear Channel Communications, replied in an e-mail: "Ridiculous."
Click to expand...

Here's the link to said Philly.com article:
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20080205_Suit_alleges_Woodbine_sex_shows.html

The other DJ in question is "Rocco" - who if I'm not mistaken used to be a radio "janitor"... Talk about a gutter job...
Click to expand...
not the same rocco.

no that was rocco from wired 96.5 aka ben maxwell
Click to expand...
 
Those RRRRs said:
if this happened 2 years ago, WHY is Q102 being sued now?
Click to expand...

That's easy to answer. The United States has so many ambulance-chasing, greedy, big-nosed, blood-sucking lawyers with so many frivilous lawsuits keeping the court systems tied up that it takes years to have a simple case heard sometimes.

It's all part of the plan to exploit the people and screw us out of our life savings at one time or another just so that a certain few people who already own and control most of the world can become even richer than they already are.

It's a disgrace.
Click to expand...

Yes, this and there is usually a two-year deadline on filing most civil suits like this one.
 
Those RRRRs said:
if this happened 2 years ago, WHY is Q102 being sued now?
Click to expand...

That's easy to answer. The United States has so many ambulance-chasing, greedy, big-nosed, blood-sucking lawyers with so many frivilous (sic) lawsuits keeping the court systems tied up that it takes years to have a simple case heard sometimes.

It's all part of the plan to exploit the people and screw us out of our life savings at one time or another just so that a certain few people who already own and control most of the world can become even richer than they already are.

It's a disgrace.
Click to expand...

What does the size of the nose have to do with it?

I cannot wait for your answer...
 
raydofan said:
Those RRRRs said:
if this happened 2 years ago, WHY is Q102 being sued now?
Click to expand...

That's easy to answer. The United States has so many ambulance-chasing, greedy, big-nosed, blood-sucking lawyers with so many frivilous (sic) lawsuits keeping the court systems tied up that it takes years to have a simple case heard sometimes.

It's all part of the plan to exploit the people and screw us out of our life savings at one time or another just so that a certain few people who already own and control most of the world can become even richer than they already are.

It's a disgrace.
Click to expand...

What does the size of the nose have to do with it?

I cannot wait for your answer...
Click to expand...

haha, I didn't even catch that.

Damn, I hate this board some days.
 
What does the size of the nose have to do with it?
Click to expand...

Actually, that was a typo. I meant to write "big-mouthed."

For example, a big-mouthed person may be someone who accuses somebody of saying one thing but actually meaning something different, when in reality such person has no proof of said accusation actually being based in fact. (Except of course what he perceives to be the truth in his/her twisted little head)

**Also Mr. Raydo, I haven't forgotten about our discussion about MLK...been busy the last couple of days...the last post wasn't bad on your part...but I'll see if I have time to get to you this evening.
 
Yeah, I highly doubt you meant big MOUTHED.
Click to expand...

Well that's the difference. You doubt, and I know. Therefore who has the stronger argument?

Besides, mouth, nose, I don't have any idea where either of you are going with this or what any of it means. Many lawyers I've meant have big mouths and don't know when to shut up. What's so hard to understand about that?

Also booty, you haven't addressed the fact that these women were willing participants, not victims.
 
a) [EDIT]

b) While these girls may have been willing to do these things, my point isnt about the sex show. Hell, I love a good sex show! The point I am making is that this is not the first time that Richie Rich has done things like this. I have many MANY stories over the years about some of the shit he pulls and gets away with it. Why he gets away with it is beyond me because he isn't anything special. He mixing crappy music together, whoop-dee-freakn'-doo! It is a simple case of "what goes around comes around" and I wouldn't be shocked if more women came out and stated some of things he did/does. By the way, does anyone know if Richie is still MARRIED with KIDS?


[EDIT-inflammatory]
 
[EDIT]
Click to expand...

Well that's news to me, but thanks for the kudos! Perhaps I made a freudian slip! I still don't understand the significance of the mouth/nose thing, but maybe we should just let it go before it upsets someone. I apologize for that mistake.



[EDIT-reference to deleted material]
 
No worries RRRRs...Yeah, this topic isnt about lawyers, noses, or mouths LOL

We totally should stick to the original posting I put up
 
Those RRRRs said:
What does the size of the nose have to do with it?
Click to expand...

Actually, that was a typo. I meant to write "big-mouthed."

For example, a big-mouthed person may be someone who accuses somebody of saying one thing but actually meaning something different, when in reality such person has no proof of said accusation actually being based in fact. (Except of course what he perceives to be the truth in his/her twisted little head)

**Also Mr. Raydo, I haven't forgotten about our discussion about MLK...been busy the last couple of days...the last post wasn't bad on your part...but I'll see if I have time to get to you this evening.
Click to expand...

That's a curious rebuttal for someone who follows 'big-nosed' with 'blood sucker'.
 
bigoldbooty said:
No worries RRRRs...Yeah, this topic isnt about lawyers, noses, or mouths LOL

We totally should stick to the original posting I put up
Click to expand...

Like totally. Why follow one tangential remark with another, calling into question one's prejudices or-at the very least-word choice>? That might make this a discussion board.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom