Julie Swetnick: ‘She’s Not Credible At All’

Swetnick Was Sued For Defamation By An Oregon Company And A Woman For ‘Unwelcome, Sexually Offensive Conduct’ And For ‘Ma[king] False And Retaliatory Allegations’

“Julie Swetnick, one of the women accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, faced allegations of her own misconduct during a short stint at a Portland tech company 18 years ago.” (“Julie Swetnick, A Brett Kavanaugh Accuser, Faced Misconduct Allegations At Portland Company,” The Oregonian, 9/29/2018)

Swetnick was sued for defamation in 2000 by Webtrends Corporation in Oregon and a woman named Margie Huetter who appears to have been their HR Director. (Webtrends Corporation vs. Julie Swetnick, Oregon Judicial Department, Case Number 001112165, 11/27/2000)

• “The suit also alleges Swetnick ‘engaged in unwelcome, sexually offensive conduct’ while at Webtrends and ‘made false and retaliatory allegations that other co-workers had engaged in inappropriate conduct toward her.’  The suit alleges Swetnick ‘engaged in unwelcome sexual innuendo and inappropriate conduct’ directed at two male employees during a business lunch, with Webtrends customers present. Swetnick claimed two other employees had sexually harassed her, according to the suit.  Webtrends' suit said it determined Swetnick had engaged in misconduct but could not find evidence to support her allegations against her colleagues. Later, the company alleged, Swetnick took medical leave and simultaneously claimed unemployment benefits in the District of Columbia.”  (“Julie Swetnick, A Brett Kavanaugh Accuser, Faced Misconduct Allegations At Portland Company,” The Oregonian, 9/29/2018)

“Company officials later determined, the suit said, that Swetnick had provided false information on her employment application. The suit alleged that she had misrepresented the length of time she worked at a previous employer and falsely claimed that she’d earned an undergraduate degree in biology and chemistry from Johns Hopkins University.” (“3rd Kavanaugh Accuser Has History Of Legal Disputes,” The Associated Press, 9/30/2018)

• “In the suit, Webtrends alleged Swetnick claimed to have graduated from Johns Hopkins University but the company said it subsequently learned the school had no record of her attendance. Webtrends said she also ‘falsely described her work experience’ at a prior employer.” (“Julie Swetnick, A Brett Kavanaugh Accuser, Faced Misconduct Allegations At Portland Company,” The Oregonian, 9/29/2018)

Swetnick’s Ex-Boyfriend Filed A Restraining Order Against Her: ‘She’s Not Credible At All. Not At All’

Swetnick’s Ex-Boyfriend: ‘I Have A Lot Of Facts, Evidence, That What She’s Saying Is Not True At All’

“Julie Swetnick … had a restraining order filed against her years later in Miami by her former boyfriend. A Miami-Dade County court docket shows a petition for injunction against Swetnick was filed March 1, 2001, by her former boyfriend, Richard Vinneccy, who told POLITICO Wednesday the two had dated for four years before they broke up.” (“Ex-boyfriend Filed Restraining Order Against Third Kavanaugh Accuser,” Politico, 9/26/2018)

• “According to Vinneccy, Swetnick threatened him after they broke up and even after he got married to his current wife and had a child. ‘Right after I broke up with her, she was threatening my family, threatening my wife and threatening to do harm to my baby at that time,’ Vinneccy said in a telephone interview with POLITICO. ‘I know a lot about her.’ ‘She’s not credible at all,’ he said. ‘Not at all.’” (“Ex-boyfriend Filed Restraining Order Against Third Kavanaugh Accuser,” Politico, 9/26/2018)

• “Vinneccy, 63, is a registered Democrat, according to Miami-Dade County voting records.” (“Ex-boyfriend Filed Restraining Order Against Third Kavanaugh Accuser,” Politico, 9/26/2018)

“Vinneccy made clear that he did not believe her story. ‘I have a lot of facts, evidence, that what she’s saying is not true at all,’ he said. ‘I would rather speak to my attorney first before saying more.’” (“Ex-boyfriend Filed Restraining Order Against Third Kavanaugh Accuser,” Politico, 9/26/2018)

Swetnick Filed A Personal Injury Lawsuit In Maryland Against The Washington Metro (WMATA) Claiming ‘She Lost More Than $420,000 In Earnings After She Hurt Her Nose In A Fall On A Train In 1992.’

“Swetnick was on the other side of a civil case in 1994, as a plaintiff, when she filed a personal injury lawsuit in Maryland against the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. She claimed she lost more than $420,000 in earnings after she hurt her nose in a fall on a train in 1992. Swetnick, who described herself in court records as a model and actor, claimed she had “numerous modeling commitments” with several companies at the time of the accident but missed out them because of her injuries.” (“3rd Kavanaugh Accuser Has History Of Legal Disputes,” The Associated Press, 9/30/2018)

• “To support her claim for lost wages, Swetnick named ‘Konam Studios’ as one of the companies promising to employ her. A court filing identified Nam Ko, a representative of ‘Kunam Studios,’ as a possible plaintiff’s witness for her case.  Ko, however, told AP on Friday that he was just a friend of Swetnick’s and that he had never owned a company with a name spelled either way and had never agreed to pay her money for any work before she injured her nose. He said he first met Swetnick at a bar more than a year after her alleged accident. (“3rd Kavanaugh Accuser Has History Of Legal Disputes,” The Associated Press, 9/30/2018)

• “‘I didn’t have any money back then. I (was) broke as can be,’ Ko said.  Ko said he has a hazy memory of Swetnick asking to use him as a ‘character reference’ but doesn’t recall hearing about her lawsuit. ‘I thought it was for a job application,’ he said.” (“3rd Kavanaugh Accuser Has History Of Legal Disputes,” The Associated Press, 9/30/2018)

Swetnick Filed A Sexual-Harassment Complaint A Decade Ago In Which She Was Represented By Debra Katz’s Law Firm

“Roughly a decade ago, Ms. Swetnick was involved in a dispute with her former employer, New York Life Insurance Co., over a sexual-harassment complaint she filed, according to people familiar with the matter. Representing her in the complaint was the firm run by Debra Katz, the lawyer currently representing Dr. Ford.” (“Third Woman, Julie Swetnick, Makes Allegations Against Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/26/2018)

• “The company ultimately reached a financial settlement with Ms. Swetnick, the people said. A spokesman for New York Life confirmed that Ms. Swetnick worked there as an agent for less than two years, from 2006 to 2008.” (“Third Woman, Julie Swetnick, Makes Allegations Against Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/26/2018)

Swetnick Had Two Tax Liens Filed Against Her For A Total of Over $100,000

THE WASHINGTON POST: “Swetnick has repeatedly encountered trouble paying her taxes over the last decade.” (“Who Is Julie Swetnick, The Third Kavanaugh Accuser?,” The Washington Post, 9/26/2018)

• “In 2015, the state of Maryland filed an interstate lien against her property in the District. The bill included over $32,000 in unpaid taxes from 2008, and another $27,000 in interest on the seven-year-old debt. Court records reflect the full amount due of nearly $63,000 was satisfied 15 months later, in December 2016. It is not clear from court records if the bill was paid or if the lien was released because of a decision that the bill was unwarranted.” (“Who Is Julie Swetnick, The Third Kavanaugh Accuser?,” The Washington Post, 9/26/2018)

• “Similarly, the IRS in 2016 assessed Swetnick a bill of over $40,000 in unpaid taxes from 2014. The federal government filed a lien on her property for the amount in 2017. The debt was listed as satisfied and lien was released in March of this year.” (“Who Is Julie Swetnick, The Third Kavanaugh Accuser?,” The Washington Post, 9/26/2018)

Swetnick Has Been Involved In Three OTHER Court Cases In Maryland

Suburban Hospital, Inc, in Bethesda, MD, named Swetnick as a defendant in a civil case in 2005 over an amount of $1788. The complaint was dismissed by the Montgomery County District Court. (Montgomery County District Court – Civil System, Case Number 060100238082005, 11/18/2005)

2 cases against a couple in 1993 (one for each person) whom she accused of repeated abusive telephone calls that were not prosecuted. (Montgomery County District Court – Criminal System, Case Number 00703394D6,7/01/1993; Montgomery County District Court – Criminal System, Case Number 00703393D5, 7/01/1993)