But there's a difference between the character and the actor. Didn't he just do a tour where he told fans to "get a life" and they still showed up? If so, then that says something about the actor to me, even though the character was great. But then, that may also prove your point...
Well, one would hope you would pay more attention to detail if you were on the jury. It would be nice if people actually read the article (or at least some of the other posts) before trotting out this line. Their lawsuit has nothing to do with their twenty years of working for Shatner.
But the 20 years has everything to do with his. When you go to work for Shatner, you have to realize that you're donning the red shirt. Most people under him don't survive the first 15 minutes of the episode, much less keep drawing a paycheck for twenty years. If I was on the jury I'd have to suspect that the employee must be a member of the Q Continuum or they'd be long dead, and then realize that Shatner isn't on trial, all of humanity is. I'm sure explaining all this during jury selection would get me released from duty.
Not necessarily (unless you talk to the press). http://articles.cnn.com/1996-03-23/...trial-alternate-juror-jim-guy-tucker?_s=PM:US http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?p=6951388#post6951388
I am i bit confused here.........if they did not want to sign the agreement why did Shatner not just let them go and get another gardner/house cleaner?
I assume it would be because Shatner thought firing them would probably make them more likely to sue for damages, not less likely (although they did anyway).
I'm fairly certain that firing someone for not signing a contract to let them off the hook for something like that is pretty illegal, too.
Even if they'd signed the contract, I imagine that it would fall foul of the Unfair Contract Terms Act or would simply be declared void for illegality.