Most civil suits against big-name brands directly focus on the company and its products. That’s been the case in recent suits against Costco, Poppi, and Google. But sometimes, a company can get dragged into the limelight simply because of a viral video being captured on its premises. That’s the kind of occurrence that has led to the Victoria’s Secret Karen lawsuit.
You may have heard about this so-called Victoria’s Secret Karen back when the video of her in the Victoria’s Secret at The Mall at Short Hills, New Jersey went viral in July 2021.
Indeed, though it’s easy to assume the story has long since faded away, it has recently been thrust back into the spotlight thanks to a civil lawsuit brought forward by Ijeoma Ukenta, the black woman who originally posted the video of the incident involving her and Abigail Elphick, the Victoria’s Secret Karen herself.
Here are the latest developments in the ongoing Victoria’s Secret Karen saga:
Background of the Controversy
First and foremost, there’s a chance you may not know just what “The Victoria’s Secret Karen Incident” even refers to. We suggest checking out the original viral video so you can get a glimpse of the incident (or at least the portion that happened after Ukenta began recording), as both parties have very different accounts of what occurred before and after.
Here’s a rough overview of each party’s claims:
Ijeoma Ukenta’s Perspective
Ijeoma Ukenta was in the store with the intent to use a coupon for a free pair of Victoria’s Secret underwear. The women’s fashion brand has a long history of offering these types of deals.
While browsing the store’s products, Ukenta encountered Abigail Elphick, who allegedly got very close to Ukenta, violating her personal space and making her feel uncomfortable. Ukenta asked Elphick to back away from her, only for Elphick to take offense to that request and report Ukenta to the store’s manager.
Ukenta began recording Elphick as she was standing at the store’s front desk. Elphick asks Ukenta to stop recording before rushing her. Ukenta can then be heard insinuating that Ephick tried to hit her.
Elphick then backed away, fell to the ground, and began screaming and crying. Ukenta summoned security officers, and Elphick called the police. The widely-circulated version of the video ends around that point.
Abigail Elphick’s Actions
Elphick’s behavior became increasingly erratic as the video progressed. She threw herself to the floor, cried, hyperventilated, and simply made a scene. Many who saw the footage quickly labeled her a “Karen” after witnessing her seemingly unprovoked actions. But only the two people involved, aside from maybe a few others in the store at the time, know what truly happened. All we can do is hope for more details about the incident to come out as the case progresses.
The Viral Video
Ukenta’s video was posted to social media, where it went viral almost immediately. The “Karen” label stuck and the video blew up, partially because “Karens” were an especially popular meme at the time. Internet personalities, news outlets, and everyday users took to the comments section to give their views on the incident. Many were quick to condemn Elphick as an entitled white woman who weaponized victimhood.
The footage also raised questions about race and social justice. Initial public reaction largely favored Ukenta. Commenters referred to her as “brave” for standing her ground and filming the incident, and her subscriber count on YouTube has surged to more than 26,000 since then. Ukenta has also raised over $100,000 in a GoFundMe campaign that she set up to help “defend” herself.
However, that significant financial gain has made some wonder if Ukenta is exploiting the incident to make money. And others wonder what facts, if any, were left out of her video.
COVID-Era Social Distancing
No matter how you feel after watching the video, it’s important to remember that the altercation took place during the COVID-19 pandemic. Tensions were high over social distancing, and both parties claimed that the ongoing pandemic partially influenced their behavior.
If Elphick truly did violate Ukenta’s personal space, it’s understandable that Ukenta would be upset about a stranger failing to maintain a proper social distance. The volatile and aggressive behavior that Elphick exhibited in the video certainly supports some of Ukenta’s claims.
On the other hand, Elphick has stated that she has a long history of psychological problems. Everyone has experienced at least some heightened level of stress during the pandemic. And if Elphick contends with mental health challenges, it’s reasonable to think that her conditions may have been made worse during the initial heights of COVID.
How the Viral Incident Got Even Messier
Sometimes, virality can be a godsend, rocketing content creators to great success. Unfortunately for both parties, this particular viral incident didn’t translate into a profitable meme. Instead, it’s become an ugly legal battle that’s been dragging both women through the mud.
Elphick has framed herself as the victim, highlighting her long history of medical and psychological conditions. She also lives with a disability that reportedly complicates her daily interactions and adds another layer of complexity to her response. It’s these details that have prompted some to rethink their initial judgments.
Nevertheless, Ukenta has also spoken out to provide context to the situation and her experiences. She felt that her side of the story might not be believed because she is a black woman, but explained that the fear of being misrepresented or facing blame for the altercation was what led her to start recording in the first place. Ukenta also used the recording as a means of asserting her rights to hold Elphick accountable.
The Lawsuit
In 2023, Ukenta filed a civil suit against Elphick. Ukenta’s lawyer, Tracey C. Hinson, is a New Jersey Supreme Court-certified Civil Trial Attorney who focuses on cases involving personal injury and civil rights.
Ukenta and Hinson also named Victoria’s Secret, the mall, and the security company in the suit, claiming that the staff and security personnel were dismissive of her concerns and failed to act appropriately when Elphick’s behavior became erratic. She alleged that the store and mall were negligent in their duty to protect her from the incident.
Elphick filed a counterclaim that accused Ukenta of violating her privacy by filming the incident and posting it online. Her lawsuit claims that Ukenta intentionally recorded her during a vulnerable moment and used the video for financial gain. Furthermore, Elphick argues that the viral nature of the video caused her significant emotional distress and led to her suffering harassment and threats from the public.
Implications of the Case
The Victoria’s Secret Karen case could have serious implications for everyone involved. Ukenta’s claim addresses the actions of an individual and several businesses, as well as underlying issues of race and discrimination. Should she win, it could set a precedent for how similar cases are handled in the future.
Victoria’s Secret and the mall have a lot at stake in the case, too. The public will undoubtedly scrutinize their handling of the incident, and both entities could face financial consequences if a judge rules against them.
It is Elphick, however, who may face the highest stakes. She has already been exposed to immense public scrutiny. A loss in court could further damage her reputation and have financial repercussions as well.
Public and Corporate Responses
The viral nature of the Victoria’s Secret Karen incident prompted several parties to weigh in on the event, including the following companies:
Victoria’s Secret
Victoria’s Secret itself quickly issued a public statement after the video originally went viral. Company leaders expressed concern over the incident and assured the public that they would investigate what happened. Despite their prompt response, though, the lawsuit and allegations against Victoria’s Secret diminished its brand equity, even though the case is centered on Ukenta and Elphick.
The Mall at Short Hills
The Mall at Short Hills has remained relatively quiet about the incident. Since the New Jersey shopping mall is on the smaller side, it may have opted to stay silent in hopes that Victoria’s Secret would draw the media’s attention.
Bergen County’s United Way
Tom Toronto, president of Bergen County’s United Way, which administers the complex Elphick lives in, also weighed in on the incident, saying, “She has a disorder.” He further elaborated, saying, “She had a meltdown. Then the world we live in took over, and it became something entirely different than what it actually was.”
Other Major Lawsuits
Here’s a look at four other big cases we’ve recently covered that involved some of the world’s most recognizable brands:
Amazon Prime Video Class Action Lawsuit
The Amazon Prime class action suit is relatively new. It involves individuals who renewed their Prime subscriptions for 2024 before learning about the introduction of ads. They were understandably angry about the surprise move, as they expected to continue enjoying their favorite streaming content without encountering ads.
If you are a Prime subscriber, you may be able to join the suit. However, the case is still very early on, and it’s unclear whether it will progress into settlement negotiations.
Verizon Lawsuits
The $100 million Verizon lawsuit centered around administrative fees that the carrier charged to thousands of users over a multi-year period. As part of the settlement, Verizon issued cash payments to eligible parties who filed a claim within the deadline.
Beyond that, Verizon was also sued by thousands of its employees for failing to immediately disclose a data breach that exposed their personal information. The company waited roughly three months to inform its workers about the breach.
$4.4 Million Chick-fil-A Settlement
The Chick-fil-A settlement stemmed from a class action lawsuit over the chicken purveyor’s shady delivery pricing practices and misleading claims about offering affordable delivery options during the initial heights of the pandemic.
Chick-fil-A told consumers that it would offer delivery fees of $2.99 or $3.99 (depending on the service area) if they ordered through the app or company website. However, Chick-fil-A failed to notify customers that it would be increasing menu items for delivery orders. Some delivery items were priced 20-30% higher than the in-store prices.
Customers caught on and filed a class action lawsuit. Affected individuals who lived in one of the five states named in the settlement were eligible for a cash payment.
$300 Million JUUL Settlement
E-cigarette manufacturer JUUL has been put through the civil court wringer over the last few years. The company drew the ire of consumers and attorneys for its questionable advertising practices that allegedly targeted minors. One of the bigger controversies in the case focused on its misleading marketing campaigns that made JUUL products seem like a safer alternative to cigarettes.
The company ultimately reached a $300 million settlement, but that wasn’t the end of its legal battles. It also faced a product ban, though it has since been lifted. Despite being allowed to continue selling its products, JUUL faces a steep road back to profitability.
The Balance Between Privacy Rights and Public Documentation
The Victoria’s Secret Karen saga might just sound like a bunch of juicy gossip. However, the outcome of the case could have serious implications all parties involved, not to mention anyone who attempts to record a public incident. The court will likely tackle questions about someone’s privacy rights, the limitations of those rights, and how they intersect with someone’s ability to publicly record others.