If Corey's upward motion can in ANY WAY be credited to Paula's interference, then failed competitors are going to be LINING UP to sue (and rightly so).

These failed competitors will very easily be able to argue that if it weren't for Paula's consistently favourable televised reviews of Corey's performances, he would never have got as far into the competition as he did, thereby unfairly depriving some other contestant of his or her chance to win the big prize.

Sure they can argue it. But can they prove it by a preponderance of the evidence? (You don't need beyond reasonable doubt in civil cases, just preponderance- more likely than not)

Like I said, the only person who would have gotten Corey's spot in the finals is Patrick Fortsen, who someone mentioned (perhaps in a different thread?) was the #3 contestant the night Corey got into the finals. Anyone else who got fewer votes that night than Corey OR Patrick Fortsen would have a helluva time proven that if Corey wasn't specially coached, they would more than likely have gotten the 2nd spot.

Patrick might be able make his case, but it's not a slam dunk by any stretch. Corey is arguably better looking that Patrick, and they are both marginally talented. What's to say the audience wouldn't have picked Corey anyway?

A better argument would be that Corey should be automatically disqualified (due to "cheating") and Patrick awarded the spot. I guess he could in that case be entitled to whatever money the Top 12 or 10 or whatever it was received. I assume they got something each. But as far as "losing his shot at fame?" Seriously, can any of you remember most of AI2 finals contestants besides Clay, Ruben & Kim? I had completely wiped Corey from my mind until this whole thing came up.

All and still, despite the somewhat bad taste the whole issue has left in my mouth, I can't see there being a whole ton of legal recourse here.