Imagine a scenario that is not quite as egregious as the one referenced. Instead, imagine that a female assistant manager performed the same cavity search of the 18-year-old female employee because she thought the employee had stolen some money from the register. The assistant manager was alerted by a co-worker that the female employee in question had just walked from the front of the store (where the registers are located) immediately to the employee bathroom with some paper-like object balled up in her hands. The female employee was humiliated by the search and felt sexually assaulted by the assault and helpless because she was held there for three hours despite her objections. In this changed scenario, do you believe McDonald's would have faced a similar judgment from the courts ($6 million award and guilty of negligence, sexual harassment, and false imprisonment)? Why, or why not? What defense(s) would the employer likely raise in order to try and justify the actions taken? Do you think these defenses would be persuasive? Why, or why not?